21:01:39 <ttx> #startmeeting project
21:01:40 <vishy> hi
21:01:41 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Feb 19 21:01:39 2013 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:01:42 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:01:44 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'project'
21:01:46 <ttx> Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting
21:01:49 <ttx> #topic General announcements
21:01:51 <vishy> ttx: i have a cross-project gating concern to bring up
21:02:02 <ttx> sure, just a sec
21:02:02 <vishy> can you add it to the agenda?
21:02:15 <ttx> we'll do it at the end of general discussion
21:02:20 <ttx> If we don't change anything, you have until the end of the day (i.e. tomorrow morning in Europe) to merge features for Grizzly...
21:02:35 <ttx> But given that the gate was not exactly in stellar condition today, looks like some /could/ benefit from pushing back one day
21:03:00 <ttx> does anyone thinnk that would make things better ? There is a lot left on the table right now
21:03:02 <vishy> ttx: my concern relates specifically to that
21:03:17 <ttx> vishy: ok, then go ahead :)
21:03:21 <danwent> ttx: i'd rather just see more things get a 1-day extension
21:03:37 <danwent> ttx: if we leave the door wide open, i'm not sure the gating will be any better tomorrow.
21:03:38 <ttx> At the very minimum one day would help to get all approved stuff processed.
21:03:38 <vishy> ttx: i think we should add a day and temporarily turn off the full tempest run on the gate
21:03:45 <bcwaldon> it won't affect much from Glance's point of view, but I see it being super-helpful to Nova
21:03:47 <vishy> it is making the merge cycle too slow
21:04:26 <heckj> I'd be good with that for the last bit here - it's really been grinding quite a bit
21:04:30 <russellb> it's been a bit problematic since it was enabled, but amplified this week
21:04:32 <ttx> vishy: the trick is... are you sure you can reenable it afterwards ? i.e. how to be sure you dodn't break anything ?
21:04:53 <ttx> jeblair, mordred: ping
21:04:57 <vishy> ttx: we leave it in the check so we will see failures pretty quickly
21:05:04 <markmc> the gate does seem to be getting really backed up
21:05:10 <markmc> even aside from the pypi issues
21:05:28 <Vek> *nod* indeed
21:05:34 <ttx> sdague: thoughts ?
21:06:03 <sdague> well, my thoughts are a lot of people showed up out of the woodwork in the last 72 hours to try to get code merged :)
21:06:24 <ttx> sdague: indeed. Important stuff shoudl have been merged ages ago
21:06:25 <sdague> I generally think it's not a great idea, but I also understand the concern to get stuff merged
21:06:27 <vishy> we need a longer term solution for improving the gate time, but I'm thinking a temporary fix to get the current backlog cleared would be helpful.
21:06:27 <Vek> sdague: I think that happens for deadlines :)
21:06:33 <russellb> sdague: but others were saying that it has taken 8 hours to a couple days to get stuff merged even before the last days
21:06:41 <russellb> it hasn't *only* been a problem this week
21:06:54 <jgriffith> russellb: +1
21:06:59 <sdague> russellb: we've been on a big run up the last 2 weeks
21:07:09 <sdague> it would be good to pull some stats at some point on that
21:07:21 <ttx> vishy: did you run the idea to the CI folks ? i.e. how doable is it ?
21:07:40 <vishy> clarkb said it would be pretty easy to temporarily disable / post-run it
21:07:43 <soren> Is this because a single Tempest run occasionally takes 8 hours to run or is it because of sequencing of patches or something entirely different?
21:07:49 <ttx> personally I'd much prefer to postpone stuff to H and reduce the number of things that we ahve to process
21:07:55 <sdague> overall I don't like the idea, because I feel like it turns off an important net. But I do get we need to balance it with stuff that needs to get merge.
21:07:58 <ttx> rather thah turning off checks and praying
21:08:00 <vishy> soren it is the serialization of patches + 1.5 hours per run
21:08:10 <russellb> soren: single run doesn't take that long, but a single failure causes everything behind it to have to run again
21:08:42 <markmc> if we leave folks feeling their code didn't get merged in grizzly because of the gate ...
21:08:49 <markmc> vishy's proposal makes sense to me
21:08:51 <clarkb> well its possible not necessaroly very easy. we would have to stop zuul to reload its config
21:08:53 <vishy> markmc: right that is my concern
21:09:00 <clarkb> jeblair ^
21:09:02 <soren> russellb: I know it doesn't *usually* take that long. I just wondered if it occasionally did. IOW whether this was a tempest problem.
21:09:18 <ttx> ok. let's not spend the whole meeting discussing that
21:09:19 <russellb> soren: *nod*  sorry for stating obvious :)
21:09:22 <vishy> there is stuff that has been churning back and forth and i would hate to postpone it for gate reasons
21:09:32 <Vek> going forward, perhaps that's something that should be run only on a regular basis on the tree?  i.e., nightly, we run that set of tests and log bugs for any errors that crop up?
21:09:33 <ttx> let's discuss this in #openstack-dev after this meeting
21:09:39 <ttx> in all cases we add a day ?
21:09:42 <davidkranz> There is a tempest hourly build. If folks acted like that breaking was the same as a gate failure for urgency, that could be a compromise.
21:09:44 <markmc> we could just be more open to FFEs of course
21:09:46 <ttx> Shit *will* happen on the last day, whenever that last day is.
21:09:55 <sdague> davidkranz: we turned off the hourly
21:09:59 <sdague> to save CI resources
21:10:06 <davidkranz> sdague: Heh.
21:10:06 <sdague> because we had the gate
21:10:18 <davidkranz> sdague: We could reverse that temporarily.
21:10:27 <ttx> please. Let's discuss that in 50min in #openstack-dev. We have lots of ground to cover in meeting
21:10:40 <ttx> <ttx> in all cases we add a day ?
21:11:07 <vishy> yes
21:11:08 <russellb> +1 for adding a day imo, fwiw
21:11:19 <ttx> ok
21:11:20 <gabrielhurley> +1
21:11:24 <ttx> #info Feature Freeze pushed back to EOD Wednesday, Feb 20
21:11:31 <ttx> #info Starting Thursday, only features granted a FeatureFreeze exception should be approved.
21:11:37 <ttx> In this meeting we'll review the remaining open blueprints and see if they should be granted an exception if they fail to make it tomorrow
21:11:46 <ttx> So it's time to be strong and start saying "no".
21:11:55 <markmc> noooooo
21:12:00 <ttx> markmc, mordred, annegentle, sdague/davidkranz/jaypipes: quick updates from Stable/CI/QA/Docs teams ?
21:12:24 <agentle_> Book Sprint Next Week!
21:12:35 <ttx> Discussion on opportunity to turn off some gate tests at 22:00 UTC in #openstack-dev
21:12:37 <markmc> nothing to report from me on stable, 2012.2.4 scheduled for 2013-04-11
21:12:45 <ttx> great, thx
21:13:17 <ttx> #topic Oslo status
21:13:23 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:13:36 <ttx> 2 open blueprints:
21:13:46 <ttx> cfg-move-opts-between-groups
21:13:46 <ttx> advanced-matchmaking
21:13:49 <markmc> the first will definitely make it, it's basically got 2 +2s
21:13:57 <markmc> the second I'm behind on
21:14:07 <markmc> there is a patch, some concerns about testing
21:14:08 <ttx> should the other just be deferred to H if it fails to make it in time ?
21:14:19 <markmc> it would be a fine FFE, unlikely to impact anything else
21:14:26 <markmc> and has been in the works for quite a while
21:14:35 <markmc> slow reviewers was mainly the problem (including me)
21:14:36 <ttx> I'm reluctant with FFEs in oslo libraries
21:14:50 <russellb> that one will only affect zmq rpc driver
21:14:57 <russellb> so i think it's ok for FFE
21:15:08 <markmc> now, there is the question of ...
21:15:18 <ttx> markmc: how much time do you need ?
21:15:19 <markmc> code getting into oslo-incubator doesn't mean the code is synced to projects yet
21:15:28 <russellb> true story.
21:15:36 <markmc> ttx, I can probably make a call on it tomorrow
21:15:46 <ttx> markmc: ^ that's what I mean by being reluctant with oslo FFEs
21:15:49 <markmc> the other oslo thing
21:15:55 <ttx> you still need to sync the code in
21:15:55 <markmc> is making projects use oslo-config
21:15:59 <markmc> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I4815aeb8a9341a31a250e920157f15ee15cfc5bc,n,z
21:16:16 <markmc> nova, glance and cinder patches all still need to be merged
21:16:27 <markmc> being bitten by gate issues and lots of conflicts
21:16:34 <markmc> should make it tomorrow
21:16:38 <ttx> markmc: ok, would be great to get them in gate tomorrow :)
21:17:12 <ttx> Looking at g3-targeted bugs, 1 bug left. Is it G3-critical, or should it be moved to the RC1 buglist ?
21:17:27 <markmc> yeah, I must ping mikal about that
21:17:27 <ttx> (or deferred ?)
21:17:32 <markmc> it's probably not all that critical
21:17:45 <heckj> BTW: making projects use oslo-config for the venv setup is a real PITA
21:17:56 <ttx> Anything else on the oslo topic ?
21:17:58 <heckj> merged that in this morning, and it promptly bit us hard
21:18:02 <markmc> heckj, how do you mean?
21:18:18 <heckj> You need oslo-config to run the process which installs the project depedencies.
21:18:24 <heckj> chicken and egg kind of issue
21:18:29 <gabrielhurley> that ^^
21:18:34 <markmc> ah
21:18:40 <markmc> yeah, that caught me by surprise
21:18:48 * markmc isn't even sure why it's using cfg
21:18:51 <markmc> will investigate
21:19:05 <heckj> markmc: I'll find the specifics and ping you separately
21:19:06 <markmc> it's not used by jenkins
21:19:09 <markmc> since everything is tox
21:19:13 <markmc> that's what I tested with too
21:19:30 <ttx> ok
21:19:41 <markmc> heckj, thanks
21:19:41 <ttx> #topic Keystone status
21:19:46 <ttx> heckj: o/
21:19:51 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:20:12 <ttx> A lot of stuff still in progress here...
21:20:14 <heckj> heyoo
21:20:16 <ttx> Given recent progress I'm not really convinced giving it a few more days will get them all merged...
21:20:28 <ttx> What do we absolutely need to have in grizzly release to make it coherent ?
21:20:53 <heckj> actually, I'm pretty confident about all but the trusts piece
21:21:11 <ttx> confident as in... merging today ?
21:21:12 <heckj> The final reviews have been chugging through nicely, and all the devs are in sync
21:21:16 <heckj> yeah, as in merging today
21:21:22 <ttx> good news
21:21:25 <heckj> trusts… well, here's the hat coming out
21:21:35 <heckj> I'd like to ask for a featurefreeze extension for trusts
21:21:42 <ttx> how much time do you need ?
21:22:10 <heckj> ayoung was asking for end of the week earlier
21:22:21 <heckj> (friday)
21:22:35 <ttx> I'm ready to grant anything... just need to be convinced that it will make it. Been promised this for "the end of the week" quite a few times alareday
21:22:46 <ttx> already
21:22:49 <heckj> ayoung - you here to speak on your coding behalf?
21:22:56 <heckj> (he was very head's down earlier today)
21:23:12 <ttx> also that's only if the rest really makes it, obviously :)
21:23:32 <heckj> yep
21:23:34 <ttx> #infor considering FFE for trusts
21:23:43 <ttx> You also have two in the grizzly series without milestone set:
21:23:52 <ttx> domain-name-spaces and domain-scoping (completed?)
21:23:56 <ttx> what about them ?
21:24:13 <Vek> ttx: s/#infor/#info/
21:24:29 <ttx> #info considering FFE for trusts
21:24:34 <ttx> Vek: thanks
21:24:40 <Vek> welcome.
21:24:48 <heckj> both are going in with the final bits of authn for V3
21:24:55 <heckj> which we're expecting merged this afternoon
21:25:05 <ttx> heckj: ok, I see.
21:25:26 <heckj> most of it was already there, just pending the auth side of it
21:25:26 <ttx> Looking at targeted bugs, 5 bugs on list. Should any of those be fixed in G3, or can I move them all to the RC1 buglist ?
21:25:39 <heckj> all can be safely moved to the RC1 buglist
21:25:43 <ttx> ok thx
21:25:47 <ttx> Anything more about Keystone ?
21:26:16 <heckj> that's it from me
21:26:17 <ttx> #topic Swift status
21:26:21 <ttx> notmyname: o/
21:26:23 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.8.0
21:26:31 <ttx> Let's make it quick ;) Is 1.8.0 starting to crystallize ?
21:26:47 <notmyname> ya, we're fine, AFAIK
21:27:02 <ttx> sometimes in first half of March ?
21:27:20 <notmyname> what's the final date for inclusion on grizzly?
21:27:39 <notmyname> we'll cut the release when it's ready. I'm still anticipating mid-march
21:27:44 <ttx> The first RCs are expected in first half of March
21:27:48 <notmyname> ok
21:27:51 <ttx> notmyname: Anything you wanted to mention ?
21:28:10 <notmyname> nothing omes to mind
21:28:14 <ttx> #topic Glance status
21:28:17 <ttx> notmyname: thx
21:28:20 <ttx> bcwaldon: o/
21:28:23 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:28:24 <bcwaldon> ttx: hey!
21:28:28 <rainya> lalalalala
21:28:45 <bcwaldon> rainya: you're on thin ice
21:28:49 <ttx> looks like this was trimmed down
21:28:58 <bcwaldon> ttx: yes, actively working on it
21:29:05 <ttx> 4 blueprints left
21:29:07 <bcwaldon> ttx: I want an FFE for image locations and image sharing
21:29:17 <bcwaldon> the domain logic bp has one patch left that markwash won't let me see
21:29:23 <bcwaldon> and common image properties is in review
21:29:38 <ttx> bcwaldon: how much time do you need for those two ?
21:29:45 <bcwaldon> ttx: well, that's hard to answer
21:30:01 <bcwaldon> ttx: image sharing has several reviews up, so I expect that to be early next week at the latest
21:30:10 <bcwaldon> ttx: image locations is dependent on me not being lazy tonight
21:30:23 <bcwaldon> but I would give that the same target
21:30:38 <ttx> #info FFEs for glance-api-v2-image-sharing and multiple-image-locations
21:30:52 <bcwaldon> yes
21:30:54 <ttx> all the rest will be deferred if it doesn't pass the deadline tomorrow
21:31:13 <bcwaldon> already did so for a couple of bps
21:31:20 <bcwaldon> those bugs can bump to rc1 too
21:31:21 <ttx> saw that. Thanks
21:31:31 <ttx> all bugs can bump ? ok.
21:31:47 <ttx> including bug 1102476 ?
21:31:48 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1102476 in glance "Latest json-patch draft (10) is incompatibile with Images API v2 implementation" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1102476
21:31:52 <bcwaldon> ttx: to rc1
21:32:00 <bcwaldon> or am I thinking of things incorrectly
21:32:00 <ttx> Anything more on Glance ?
21:32:10 <bcwaldon> not from me
21:32:24 <ttx> #topic Quantum status
21:32:42 <ttx> danwent: hi!
21:32:44 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:32:48 <danwent> hello
21:32:54 <danwent> do i need to remind you?
21:32:58 <ttx> no I read
21:33:05 <danwent> :)
21:33:22 <ttx> 3 High stuff
21:33:28 <ttx> lbaas-namespace-agent
21:33:28 <ttx> lbaas-haproxy-driver
21:33:28 <ttx> multiple l3 and dhcp agents
21:33:37 <ttx> which ones do you need FFEs for ?
21:33:54 <danwent> I do not expect to need an FFE for the l3/dhcp agents one
21:34:02 <danwent> we will need one for the lbaas blueprints.
21:34:06 <ttx> danwent: you mean, should make it in time ?
21:34:18 <danwent> ttx: yes, should make it by tonight
21:34:37 <ttx> I'll yell if it doesn't
21:34:42 <danwent> i'm still planning on closing gate to non-high blueprints tonight
21:34:49 <danwent> we've already had too much last minute stuff thrown in
21:34:52 <ttx> #info FFe for lbaas-namespace-agent / lbaas-haproxy-driver
21:34:56 <danwent> and I don't want to encourage it more :)
21:35:05 <ttx> yes.
21:35:14 <ttx> The remaining ones are all Medium/Low, should be deferred to H if they don't make it tomorrow.
21:35:20 <danwent> we also have an important nova blueprint that I want to highlight
21:35:30 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-quantum-security-group-proxy
21:35:45 <danwent> vishy and markmc have been giving it love though, so hopefully its in good shape
21:35:49 <ttx> 21 bugs in your g3-targeted buglist. Should any of those be fixed in G3, or can I move them all to the RC1 buglist ?
21:36:11 <ttx> We'll have a short G3 gestation period due to pushing back FF one day
21:36:12 <danwent> that's what i'm figuring out today.  will work with markmclain, our bug master on that
21:36:30 <danwent> well, quantum will have a bonus bug day then :P
21:36:49 <ttx> danwent: could you keep me posted on that ?
21:36:58 <danwent> ttx: on moving bugs out of g-3?
21:37:12 <ttx> yeah. or move them all to RC1
21:37:20 <ttx> (the milestone was created)
21:37:28 <danwent> yes sir.  will do it today.  some bugs have already been moved over.
21:37:29 <ttx> I need to know if I should block on it
21:37:38 <ttx> Anything else on Quantum ?
21:37:38 <danwent> i'm not aware of any blockers
21:37:44 <danwent> but will recheck
21:38:03 <danwent> nope
21:38:08 <ttx> #topic Cinder status
21:38:18 <ttx> danwent: thx!
21:38:21 <ttx> jgriffith: hi!
21:38:24 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:38:30 <jgriffith> hello
21:38:44 <jgriffith> Should be good
21:38:44 <ttx> let's see, 7 left
21:38:49 <jgriffith> especially with another day
21:38:58 <jgriffith> thingee will likely have the two docs ones tonight
21:39:06 <jgriffith> I'll have snap meta finished tonight as well
21:39:19 <jgriffith> The others just need to get through the gates and rebasing
21:39:20 <ttx> which ones should get an FFe if by pure lack of luck they don't make it ?
21:39:37 <jgriffith> Maybe just snapshot-meta AFAIC
21:39:41 * ttx 's best friend is called Murphy
21:39:53 <jgriffith> And the Fibre Channel
21:40:05 <jgriffith> Oh... backups
21:40:06 <jgriffith> crap
21:40:09 <Vek> best friend.  Worst enemy.  same difference...
21:40:24 <jgriffith> Ok... those three, but that's it!
21:40:43 <ttx> jgriffith: if you end up needing more than one I'll shoot the others randomly
21:40:44 <jgriffith> But I expect them all to make it in on their own
21:40:53 <jgriffith> K
21:41:23 <ttx> #info preemptive FFe for volume-backups update-snap-metadata fibre-channel-block-storage, if only one is needed
21:41:38 <jgriffith> ttx: thx
21:41:53 <ttx> #info preemptive FFe for volume-backups update-snap-metadata fibre-channel-block-storage, if only one is neededit
21:42:00 <ttx> arh
21:42:04 <Vek> heh.
21:42:19 <ttx> 1 bug in the targeted bug list
21:42:32 <jgriffith> yeah, thingee is on it
21:42:35 <jgriffith> Should be done tonight
21:42:42 <ttx> ok
21:42:48 <ttx> Anything more in Cinder ?
21:42:53 <jgriffith> Nope
21:42:55 <ttx> #topic Nova status
21:42:59 <ttx> vishy: o/
21:43:02 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:43:07 <vishy> hi
21:44:08 <ttx> OK, so which one(s) of the remaining stuff would you ask an FFe for if they fail to make it tomorrow ?
21:44:24 <vishy> ok so going down the list
21:44:47 <vishy> real unique keys I don't know if we can mark complete if the next patch merges since there are more unique keys we need
21:45:12 <vishy> the api-samples additions we should just target to rc-1
21:45:13 <ttx> no, just defer it to havana for more unique keys work
21:45:29 <russellb> vishy: seems like something we could just re-scope and call "complete", and open a new bp for what we want to get done in havana
21:45:31 <vishy> they are testing additions so they don't need feature freeze
21:45:32 <sdague> vishy: yeh, I was talking with boris, it's one of 10
21:45:37 <vishy> russellb: that is fine with me
21:45:39 <sdague> #2 and #3 are testing
21:45:40 <ttx> russellb: ++
21:45:53 <ttx> vishy: +1
21:45:58 <vishy> sdague: i notice that his tests actually failed
21:46:09 <vishy> migration testing sdague thoughts on that one?
21:46:20 <sdague> vishy: I added a new test in boris's code, we need to resolve something
21:46:34 <vishy> if we can't get https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-quantum-security-group-proxy in by tomorrow i think an ffe is reasonable
21:46:35 <sdague> vishy: I'd say we've got about 50% of the interesting cases covered
21:46:49 <ttx> powervm-compute-resize-migration is marked completed but has https://review.openstack.org/#/c/22243 open
21:46:50 <sdague> I figured the rest we could get after g-3 as it's test additions
21:46:58 <ttx> nova-quantum-security-group-proxy
21:47:04 <vishy> sdague: ok so migration testing is rc1 also
21:47:04 <ttx> #info ffe for nova-quantum-security-group-proxy
21:47:08 <russellb> i think the quantum one is FFE worthy
21:47:27 <sdague> the quantum one is big, so it should have eyes if it's getting an FFE
21:47:30 <vishy> i think this one is also worthy of an ffe if it doesn't make it: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/default-rules-for-default-security-group
21:47:41 <vishy> although that one probably will make it
21:47:51 <sdague> vishy: +1 to the last one, but I think it's just about in
21:48:02 <ttx> #info FFE for default-rules-for-default-security-group (if needed)
21:48:05 <vishy> utilization i think we decided to push
21:48:11 <ttx> vishy: anything else ?
21:48:15 <vishy> the fibre channel one will make it
21:48:25 <vishy> it just got owned by gating twice
21:48:32 <vishy> the hotplug one is close
21:48:41 <vishy> rxtx should be in
21:48:42 <ttx> owned by gating.
21:49:17 <ttx> vishy: 9 bugs in your g3-targeted buglist. Should any of those be fixed in G3, or can I move them all to the RC1 buglist ?
21:49:20 <ayoung> I'm here....and yes, I was heads down
21:49:21 <vishy> so i think we're good
21:49:25 <vishy> looking at bugs
21:49:32 <ttx> bug 1130146 is critical
21:49:34 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1130146 in nova "Unit tests broke with recent commit" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1130146
21:49:44 <russellb> the critical one has approved patches
21:49:46 <russellb> in line to merge ...
21:49:51 <ttx> ayoung: how much time do you need for trusts
21:50:06 <Vek> the ultimate bug is in testr, though, I think.
21:50:24 <russellb> Vek: ah, well workaround in line to merge at least
21:50:25 <Vek> although what's merging covers legitimate bugs.
21:50:29 <ttx> vishy: ok, so review the bugs and defer to RC1 anything not g3-critical
21:50:35 <vishy> k
21:50:50 <ttx> vishy: powervm-compute-resize-migration is marked completed but has https://review.openstack.org/#/c/22243 open
21:51:12 <russellb> looks like it is completed
21:51:13 <ayoung> ttx, We are close....It depends on how brutal dolph is in the code reviews
21:51:15 <russellb> and that is just a bug fix
21:51:35 <ttx> russellb: ok
21:51:40 * russellb approves
21:51:42 <ttx> Any question on Nova ?
21:52:10 <ttx> #info FFE for keystone/trusts, but need to be completed this week
21:52:18 <ayoung> ttx, right now, it is rebased behing the v3 api fix.  I'd like to say a day.
21:52:44 <ttx> #topic Horizon status
21:52:52 <ttx> gabrielhurley: hey
21:52:56 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:52:58 <gabrielhurley> hi
21:53:15 <ttx> Only quantum-lbaas left
21:53:26 <gabrielhurley> yep
21:53:28 <gabrielhurley> :-D
21:53:44 <ttx> would you require an FFe for that if it misses the deadline tomorrow ?
21:53:51 <gabrielhurley> probably not
21:53:56 <gabrielhurley> the code there will likely be ready in time for the deadline
21:53:57 <ttx> ok
21:54:05 <gabrielhurley> but it depends on Quantum finishing their haproxy plugin code
21:54:27 <ttx> well, they requested an FFe for that
21:54:37 <ttx> so it's a bit unlikely to make it
21:54:46 <danwent> ttx: hey...
21:55:17 <gabrielhurley> yeah, I'm not really sure what to do about it
21:55:34 <gabrielhurley> whether it's better to make the Horizon BP an FFE contingent on the Quantum FFE, or what...
21:55:37 <danwent> gabrielhurley: if its not ready, we can live with cli only for lbaas
21:55:49 <ttx> danwent: +1
21:56:18 <ttx> gabrielhurley: Still have 8 bugs targeted to grizzly-3. Can I move to RC1 any that doesn't get merged by tomorrow ? Or is there anything in particular you'd rather see fixed in grizzly-3 ?
21:56:25 <gabrielhurley> I'm not gonna merge it until I get the OK from danwent so let's discuss it again when they get their FFE request in
21:56:37 <gabrielhurley> ttx: rc1 is fine for bugs
21:56:45 <danwent> gabrielhurley: ok, i will keep you in the loop.  thursday is our next touch point on lbaas.
21:57:05 <ttx> gabrielhurley: means you need an ffe for quantum-lbaas
21:57:14 <gabrielhurley> apparently so
21:57:14 <ttx> (it won't land in g3)
21:57:20 <gabrielhurley> sorry, I'm multi-tasking horribly right now
21:57:23 <ttx> #info FFe for quantum-lbaas
21:57:35 <ttx> Anything more on Horizon ?
21:57:53 <gabrielhurley> nope. got a ton of great stuff merged lately, so that's awesome.
21:58:20 <ttx> #topic Incubated projects
21:58:34 <ttx> Anyone from heat/ceilometer ?
21:58:37 <sdake> hi
21:58:40 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/heat/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:58:48 <sdake> all green
21:58:51 <ttx> cool
21:59:12 <sdake> ~10 bugs in rc1
21:59:17 <ttx> need to figure out if the tarball generation is up to par
21:59:28 <ttx> last time I checked it was... different
21:59:30 <sdake> i merged your patch this morning
21:59:33 <ttx> ok
21:59:36 <sdake> and merged a version patch
21:59:40 <sdake> so hopefully that fixes it
21:59:44 <ttx> yeah, might have fixed it
21:59:51 <ttx> anyone from ceilo ?
21:59:55 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/ceilometer/+milestone/grizzly-3
22:00:18 <eglynn_> circa 4 bugs that will have to retarget'd at RC1 I think
22:00:31 <ttx> eglynn_: What should I do with anything that is not completed by tomorrow ?
22:00:31 <eglynn_> one BP also in danger of not making it
22:01:02 <eglynn_> ttx: the one BP just started probably won't involve any code landing
22:01:12 <eglynn_> (a pure testing task)
22:01:44 <eglynn_> the outsanding bugs will be retargeted at RC1 if they're not complete tmrw
22:01:50 <ttx> eglynn_: ok, i'll just defer to H anything that doesn't make it, unless you tell me otherwise
22:01:55 <ttx> (for blueprints)
22:02:02 <ttx> and that's all we have for time
22:02:03 <eglynn_> ttx: sounds reasonable
22:02:06 <ttx> #endmeeting