21:03:53 #startmeeting project 21:03:54 Meeting started Tue Jun 3 21:03:53 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:03:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:03:58 The meeting name has been set to 'project' 21:03:59 Agenda @ 21:04:33 #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting 21:04:39 Due to travel we couldn't have 1:1s today, so if you have news you can shout them now 21:04:47 notmyname: how is the storage policies merging going so far ? 21:05:34 ttx: really well. in fact I'm sitting in a room with a bunch of devs after having just done a 2-hour overview with the code on the screen. still probably a week or so left to get it merged, but great progress so far 21:05:50 (and really cool development today, swift will probably have two-dimentional time!) 21:06:13 notmyname: ?!? 21:06:25 ? 21:06:38 I definitely want to hear more about that :D 21:06:48 heh. ask me later. just a cool way to represent progress in the system without changing what the client sees as timestamps :-) 21:06:56 notmyname: ok, teasing I see 21:06:58 not really important for this meeting :-) 21:07:01 ttx, [sahara] I think we're going to start -specs pilot for selected bps at the end of week 21:07:01 two dimensional time? I'm intrigued :) 21:07:02 I'm still struggling with the linear flow of time I experience day to day 21:07:19 mikal: in 2 dimensional time, you can go around meetings 21:07:20 #info [sahara] to start -specs pilot for selected bps at the end of week 21:07:30 dhellmann: omg, that would be awesome 21:07:40 * ttx uses 3D time. With glasses 21:07:43 mikal: I know! 21:08:06 notmyname: looks like a blogpost is in order 21:08:09 ttx: nova is chasing juno-1, and de-ephasising specs approvals to focus reviewers on juno-1. We're also having a bug day today or tomorrow depending on your timezone. 21:08:25 ok, that brings us to... 21:08:27 #topic Juno-1 plans 21:08:33 I looked up the juno-1 plans for all the projects tagging the milestone next week 21:08:38 ceilometer, keystone, neutron, nova, sahara, trove plans all look good 21:08:42 ttx: also, johnthetubaguy has done a really good job of shunting stuff to juno-2 that wont make it into juno-1 21:08:45 heat, oslo, horizon may need a bit of polish/cleanup 21:08:52 but overall plans look good 21:08:59 I'll be in touch with you all over next week 21:09:02 ttx: do you have advice on producing release notes? 21:09:06 as we refine the juno-1 plans (tag due next week) 21:09:09 ttx: should I be writing them progressively over the release? 21:09:27 mikal: people usually do them at the very end, but i can only encourage frontloading 21:09:28 ttx: i.e. should they be part of the juno-1 milestone? 21:09:29 relnotes are only for the final 2014.2 tag right? 21:09:39 ... i.e. not per-milestone, or? 21:09:49 eglynn: yes, final only 21:09:49 eglynn: sure, but how to you remember 6 months of work? 21:09:56 s/to/do/ 21:10:05 mikal: fair point :) 21:10:10 ttx: I did some tidying earlier today, not sure if you looked since then 21:10:21 zaneb: depends on your definition of earlier 21:10:34 I forget what time 21:10:41 there were a few undefined/nuassigned last time I looked 21:10:42 mikal: let LP remember for you ... no, actually, scratch that thought ;) 21:10:58 I'll also reach out to decide if we are ready to enable the auto-kick-unprioritized-bps script 21:10:59 * dhellman_ may be the victim of a netsplit 21:11:00 eglynn: I just don't want to have to read 2,500 commit messages in a big rush later 21:11:01 ttx: I think there are maybe 2 undefined ones left 21:11:04 So any advice welcome 21:11:26 (for the projects using -specs) 21:12:12 #topic Other program news 21:12:16 Infra, QA, Docs... anything you'd like to mention ? 21:12:31 I have a couple of things for oslo 21:12:33 well I forgot to mention we pushed the first tag for branchless tempest last week 21:12:54 not that special though 21:12:59 dhellman_: sure, you cane #info them yourself 21:13:15 #info branchless tempest is now a thing 21:13:44 #info Please remember as you set your priorities that the rpc code in the incubator will be removed at the end of this cycle, so reviews for work on oslo.messaging adoption should get some love. :-) 21:13:49 I think only heat, neutron, and trove are left. 21:13:58 also, I'm not seeing the participation I was hoping for from Oslo liaisons. Please remind your liaisons to attend the weekly oslo meeting https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Oslo 21:14:02 It's not like I'm calling roll, but I'm not hearing from many of them. 21:14:04 ttx: heh, well it was already a thing because we didn't make an icehouse branch at the release 21:14:22 dhellman_: also, log message hinting needs to not be forgotten, right? 21:14:29 mtreinish: guidance on the policy around skipping selected Juno tests against stable/icehouse would be welcome 21:14:45 mikal: yes, I have a todo to write up some instructions as part of the oslo.i18n release 21:14:49 mikal: about release notes - ideally we would autogenerate most of them from a specs blurb or some commit message parts -- but it's non-trivial to fetch those back 21:14:59 dhellman_: Thanks for the heads up. Will follow up on it. 21:15:03 mikal: assuming you mean translation? 21:15:16 ttx: do we only include landed bps in release notes? Not important bug fixes? 21:15:17 eglynn: guidance in what format? 21:15:18 dhellman_: We're working on the oslo.messaging port in neutron right now. 21:15:20 dhellman_: yeah 21:15:26 #oslo not seeing the participation I was hoping for from Oslo liaisons. Please remind your liaisons to attend the weekly oslo meeting https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Oslo 21:15:29 mestery: excellent 21:15:31 #info oslo not seeing the participation I was hoping for from Oslo liaisons. Please remind your liaisons to attend the weekly oslo meeting https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Oslo 21:15:45 mtreinish: just in English is fine :) 21:16:01 ohh oslo meetings almost forgot 21:16:02 mikal: my goal is to have oslo.i18n ready for J1, and to include all of the guidelines in the docs 21:16:06 mikal: we include "major features" 21:16:22 mtreinish: (... since I thought the discoverable API-driven approach was the initially agreed approach last week, but seems that config driven option has made a re-appearance?) 21:16:24 ttx: ok 21:16:25 mikal: it's that editorial part (the selection of what is major) that takes time 21:17:02 OK, I think we can safely switch to... 21:17:03 #topic Open discussion 21:17:10 Anything else, anyone ? 21:17:14 yes... 21:17:22 eglynn: it needs both. the discoverable api is for end users (and config generation and verification in tempest). But from the tempest side it still needs to be a config flag 21:17:30 regarding the auto-kick-unprioritized-bps script... that's a one time thing per project, run? 21:17:40 mikal, mestery: wanted to ask you if you didn't end up with twice as many reviews to do with the whole -specs thing 21:18:02 dolphm: it would run regularly. The current script runs every 2 hours 21:18:04 ttx: could you rephrase the question please? 21:18:15 ttx: It's true it has increased the review load, but it's helped as well because it's gotten discussions going earlier on some items. 21:18:27 ttx: And having one place to go for people to participate and see other's comments is also very nice. 21:18:33 mtreinish: k, we can take the discussion off-line for later/tmrw (... prolly not relevant to the rest of this meeting) 21:18:36 ttx: so what does it mean to kick them? mark as obsolete or something? 21:18:39 I don't see evidence that its reduced the load on nova reviewers 21:18:44 We do have a lot of specs reviews open 21:18:48 mikal: I think there is general agreement tat specs is a good thing... just want early feedback on the additional work it generates, if any 21:18:50 So people doing those are pretty busy 21:18:57 ttx: ahh, I see 21:18:58 eglynn: fair enough :). I'll write up something in the tempest developer docs for this too 21:19:00 I think its worth it 21:19:04 dolphm: I think to just unset the target release 21:19:05 I think the additional work it generates is worth it as well. 21:19:12 There's definitely code we're -2'ing until we get a spec 21:19:17 mtreinish: cool, thanks! 21:19:18 Which I think means we're landing better designed code 21:19:33 dhellman_: ah, thanks 21:19:35 We're still pretty badly behind on reviews though (around 500 open last I looked) 21:19:36 dolphm: that leans clearing the milestone target field 21:19:41 means* 21:19:58 i'd like a script that kept *code* reviews referencing un-approved blueprints/specs to be maintained as Work In Progress automatically :) 21:20:01 ttx: milestone or series? 21:20:09 dolphm: +1 21:20:18 dolphm: ++ 21:20:24 dhellman_: milestone. The series is autoadjusted to match the milestone (damn LP) 21:20:44 dolphm: I think mikal has something 21:20:49 mikal: ooh? 21:20:52 ttx: ok, I just removed a bunch of blueprints with juno as the series but without specs (I only had a few, so I did them by hand) 21:21:07 dolphm: we're doing that manually 21:21:14 mikal: same here 21:21:20 Well, I have a script, but then I do a lot of hand checking 21:21:27 mikal: link? 21:21:29 johnthetubaguy might have something better 21:21:32 dhellman_: you shouldn't care about the series -- the script maes sure it stays coherent with the milestone (since Lp doesn't) 21:21:37 makes*� 21:21:46 ttx: ok, I was using the series for planning 21:21:53 before the summit 21:22:00 dolphm: to my script? Let's talk about that in PM, its tied up in a bigger, not very general script for my personal code reviews 21:22:07 mikal: ack 21:22:09 dhellman_: the problem is it can get out of sync with the milestone 21:22:20 ttx: both are blank now, so they're in sync :-) 21:22:24 dhellman_: so we use "priority" and "milestone target" only 21:22:27 ok 21:22:40 series is autoadjusted (with the current script) 21:23:17 the new script will additionally makes sure only prioritized stuff can be listed in a milestone, effectively restricting that "blessing" task to project drivers 21:23:48 I now have a bunch of prioritized bps without milestones, so I guess I need to set those? 21:23:50 script leaves a gentle comment in the whiteboard when it kicks things out of milestones 21:24:19 dhellman_: yes, ideally. You can use the future/next things 21:24:27 ttx: ok 21:24:31 if that's not juno material 21:25:00 anything else before we close ? 21:26:14 I guess that's a no 21:26:26 Talk to you all later! 21:26:30 #endmeeting