08:04:31 <ttx> #startmeeting ptl_sync
08:04:32 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Aug  5 08:04:31 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
08:04:33 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
08:04:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ptl_sync'
08:04:46 <ttx> #info Today we'll only do Nova, which we missed last week
08:04:51 <ttx> #topic Nova
08:04:55 <ttx> mikal: ready?
08:05:05 <ttx> You're back home?
08:05:38 <ttx> johnthetubaguy: o/
08:05:58 <ttx> mikal, johnthetubaguy: how did the sprint last week go?
08:06:30 <mikal> Heya
08:06:35 <mikal> I thought the sprint went really well
08:06:44 <mikal> We got through heaps of stuff
08:06:50 * mikal finds the etherpad
08:07:02 <mikal> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-nova-mid-cycle-meetup
08:07:43 <ttx> great
08:07:48 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, had some good discussions
08:07:48 <ttx> lots of stuff covered I see
08:07:56 <ttx> OK, juno-" now
08:07:59 <ttx> juno-3
08:08:05 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/juno-3
08:08:14 <ttx> You have 72 blueprints targeted at this point
08:08:19 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, we agreed to start punting some blueprints without code
08:08:25 <mikal> So, I think there are still some spec freezae excceptions I haven't nacked
08:08:29 <johnthetubaguy> because we ain't merging 72 blueprints
08:08:31 <mikal> But I should get to those ASAP
08:08:46 <ttx> Feature proposal Freeze is August 21, so in a bit more than two weeks
08:08:58 <mikal> I agree that we're going to need to be a bit brutal
08:09:03 <ttx> Then juno-3 feature freeze is in 4 weeks
08:09:32 <ttx> The trick is really to get stuff out of the way ASAP
08:09:42 <ttx> that's the only way to avoid critical congestion
08:09:43 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, will reduce the priority of blueprints that are not started, and start making rude comments, and punting big blueprints that clearly have no code, at least thats my plan
08:09:56 <ttx> otherwise everything is "almost ready" at the end
08:10:11 <mikal> Works for me
08:10:23 <ttx> So review priority is a bit of a combination between feature priority and how close it is from completion
08:10:54 <ttx> the latter being sometimes a lot harder to determine from data
08:11:03 <mikal> We've also talked about tweaking our meetings to help here
08:11:07 <mikal> From subteam status focused
08:11:15 <mikal> To what needs review to get stuff in for juno-3
08:11:22 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I guess I have the first meeting using that format?
08:11:31 <mikal> johnthetubaguy: yes, you're the lucky winner
08:12:20 <ttx> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/multiple-if-1-net has no assignee
08:12:35 <mikal> Hmmm, an NFV one
08:13:00 <ttx> There are also 6 with "unknown" status, which you should set to "Not started" or whatever
08:13:24 <johnthetubaguy> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98488/
08:13:25 <mikal> ijw-ubuntu is the spec author of the multiple if one
08:13:32 <johnthetubaguy> it has code, buy yeah, I need to dig into all of those
08:14:30 <ttx> But yes, I think focusing meetings on getting stuff final-approved should help
08:14:39 <mikal> Yep
08:14:40 <ttx> anything that merges now won't have to merge in 4 weeks
08:14:49 <ttx> when it will be a lot less fun to go in gate
08:14:50 <mikal> I feel like we're still feeling our way with specs and how it impacts the world
08:14:53 <mikal> But getting closer
08:15:47 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, would be great to front load this, but the reality is that all the reviewers are busy getting their code up at this point
08:15:52 <ttx> At 72 blueprints you need to complete 18 per week ;)
08:15:59 <mikal> We can do it!
08:16:00 <mikal> Not
08:16:14 <johnthetubaguy> so more than juno-1 and juno-2 put together, per week
08:16:15 <johnthetubaguy> hmm
08:16:17 <ttx> so realistically you know you probably won't get a lot more than 40
08:16:22 <johnthetubaguy> right
08:16:26 <ttx> the trick being to identify which of those 72 are in the 40
08:16:43 <ttx> because identifying the 40 early really helps :)
08:17:00 <mikal> There are a lot in "needs code review"
08:17:03 <mikal> Possibly close to 40
08:17:05 <johnthetubaguy> honestly, the medium and high that are in "needs code review" are the ones I really care about at this point, but yeah, need to chase the others
08:17:08 <mikal> (I haven't counted)
08:17:43 <ttx> So this is also about calling contributors to be honest and realistic, and have them defer anything that can wait
08:17:44 <johnthetubaguy> 29, but yeah
08:18:08 <mikal> Agreed
08:18:13 <mikal> I think we're on the same page here to be honest
08:18:17 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: +1 and not making people waste time with putting up patches that we will never have time to review
08:18:23 <mikal> We just need to keep reviewers pulling in approximately the same direction
08:19:00 <ttx> yes, because if the effort spreads across the whole 72, you will likely only get a handful merged
08:19:17 <ttx> and 68 of them will be 90-99% there
08:19:20 <mikal> IIRC, we also talked about a weekly email to -core
08:19:23 <mikal> Which might help
08:19:24 <ttx> which is what we want to avoid
08:19:30 <mikal> We just need to actually do it
08:19:32 <johnthetubaguy> we are talking about having a top 10 blueprint list, so we should discuss that in the meeting
08:19:44 <mikal> Do we feel like enough cores come to the meeting?
08:19:49 <mikal> Would an email catch cores who don't?
08:20:05 <johnthetubaguy> mikal: not really, as some are not in that timezone, will have to mail everyone too
08:20:13 <mikal> Yeah
08:20:16 <johnthetubaguy> I kinda want all reviews with the same focus, core or not
08:20:17 <mikal> I think I agree
08:20:19 <ttx> you could also have two cores sign up for every day between now and j3
08:20:28 <ttx> and have them work as a team to speed-approve stuff
08:20:30 <mikal> johnthetubaguy: that email could go to -dev, I'd be fine with that
08:20:46 <johnthetubaguy> mikal: yeah, thats what I was meaning
08:21:00 <mikal> Out of interest...
08:21:01 <johnthetubaguy> ttx: thats not a bad plan, we used to have that
08:21:09 <mikal> I don't think any of the specs granted a freeze exception landed
08:21:13 <ttx> doesn't work "all the time", but could work for the next 4 weeks
08:21:16 <mikal> Did we learn spec freeze exceptions are a waste of time?
08:21:25 <johnthetubaguy> mikal: we landed two I think
08:21:43 <johnthetubaguy> mikal: not 100% sure though, maybe it was one, I can't remember now
08:21:58 <mikal> Yeah, its all a jet laggy blur for me at the moment
08:22:06 <ttx> mikal: the issue is that there are tactical contributors which will ask for an exception no matter what, even if they know in their hearts there is no way that feature will be there
08:22:24 <mikal> Heh
08:22:28 <mikal> I can think of one of those
08:22:28 <ttx> if everyone was just realistic and had the project's interest in mind
08:22:36 <ttx> that would be more usefu
08:22:37 <ttx> l
08:22:46 <mikal> Well, there are also people who only care about their thing
08:22:58 <mikal> I find when I say to people that they should review other stuff to help their stuff land
08:23:03 <mikal> That they often looka t me funny
08:23:13 <mikal> Cause they really don't care about OpenStack
08:23:15 <mikal> Just landing their thing
08:23:17 <johnthetubaguy> well, we do also need to be better about "resolving conflict" on key specs earlier
08:23:32 <ttx> we did a review day for stable to unblock a month-worth of review pileup on stable/icehouse
08:23:38 <johnthetubaguy> some stuff we need, but can't agree the direction
08:23:40 <ttx> granted those are easier to review
08:23:50 <mikal> ttx: I feel like stable is a distro thing
08:23:55 <mikal> Which I think that thread agreed on
08:24:03 <ttx> but in one day we ended up doing more than in the month before
08:24:11 <ttx> just by being two of us focusedd on the same reviews
08:24:21 <mikal> Yep
08:24:24 <ttx> mikal: sure, I was just advocating for the "two core per day" thing
08:24:27 <mikal> I agree review days are a good idea
08:24:27 <johnthetubaguy> we had that with specs on the spec review day, it did work
08:24:43 <mikal> I think too many "days" tires people though
08:24:49 <mikal> So we do need to be careful
08:24:55 <ttx> yes, it's not a magic bullet
08:25:04 <johnthetubaguy> its just I don't know I can sign up to any full days of reviews right now, just pulled in too many directions at this second in time
08:25:35 <ttx> it's just that having two cores work on the same reviews at the same time is sometimes more efficient than having them work independetly
08:25:42 <johnthetubaguy> but we can try it, for sure
08:25:54 <mikal> I agree we should try it
08:26:06 <johnthetubaguy> (re)try it I supose
08:26:33 <ttx> how much do you use the channel to ask for that last +2/APRV review ?
08:26:43 <mikal> Not much in my timezone
08:26:44 <mikal> ;)
08:26:47 <ttx> heh
08:27:28 <ttx> because sometimes you push a +2 and you're pretty sure it just needs another formal +2, the thing haveing been reviewed by others
08:27:35 <ttx> and concerns addressed
08:27:47 <mikal> I have a script which surfaces those fro me
08:27:53 <johnthetubaguy> it does happen, but also, not so much till the US wakes up
08:27:59 <mikal> So when I am not travelling I feel like they get pretty good attention
08:28:06 <ttx> so signlling those (with an core email, in a meeting, with a ping on channel...) can work wonderz
08:28:33 <mikal> Its interesting to me how every problem seems to be solved with better communication
08:28:36 <mikal> So I agreee
08:28:39 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, we need better tooling here, well people have it, just not in a way to share with everyone yet
08:28:44 <mikal> A status email every couple of days is a good plan
08:28:49 <mikal> johnthetubaguy: yeah
08:28:52 <ttx> anyway, enough brainstorming
08:28:52 <ttx> we'll see how much progress is made next week
08:28:58 <johnthetubaguy> +1
08:28:59 <mikal> johnthetubaguy: I fear being gamed if my algorithm is published
08:29:26 <johnthetubaguy> mikal: right, thats another fun one, but if gaming you involves doing "good" things, then thats cool
08:29:29 <ttx> #info today at 72 blueprints, 1 implemented, 29 under final review
08:29:56 <ttx> We'll discuss nova-network vs. neutron, and migration/transition at the meeting today
08:30:01 <ttx> well, tomorrow for mikal
08:30:05 <mikal> Yep
08:30:11 <johnthetubaguy> I will try go through the list and see how that goes
08:30:11 <mikal> We did discuss that at the meetup
08:30:14 <ttx> anythign else you'd like to push to the agenda?
08:30:21 <mikal> Not that I can think of
08:30:31 <ttx> ok then, I'll free you guys up
08:30:34 <mikal> We have some ideas for specs in Kilo, but its premature and they're half baked at the moment
08:31:26 <ttx> anything you wanted to ask/mention?
08:31:41 <mikal> Not that I can think of
08:31:58 <ttx> alrighty then
08:32:00 <ttx> #endmeeting