22:00:17 <mtreinish> #startmeeting qa
22:00:18 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Oct 16 22:00:17 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mtreinish. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:00:19 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:00:22 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'qa'
22:00:36 <mtreinish> hi, who's here today?
22:00:42 <andreaf> o/
22:00:46 <masayukig> o/
22:00:59 <dmorita> o/
22:01:12 <mtreinish> today's meeting is dedicate to discussing proposed session topics
22:01:27 <mtreinish> #topic Summit Topic Discussion
22:01:29 <mtreinish> the brainstorming etherpad is located here:
22:01:32 <mtreinish> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-qa-summit-topics
22:02:25 <gmann> hi
22:02:45 <mtreinish> so just a summary, we have 7 40min session slots
22:03:09 <mtreinish> and then a 1 day shared room with infra and rel-mgt for a contributor meetup
22:03:47 <mtreinish> I have an etherpad link for topics in that room
22:03:52 <mtreinish> one sec let me pull it up
22:04:23 <mtreinish> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-infrastructure-summit-topics
22:05:06 <mtreinish> the rule of thumb is that we can use that meetup day for any topics which we'd like to discuss or collaborate on in person, but we don't think warrants a dedicated 40min block
22:05:39 <mtreinish> also we should really be using the session slots for topics where we think it'll be good to get people from outside to participate in
22:05:47 <jgrimm> o/
22:05:49 <mtreinish> because that probably won't be the case with the meetup day
22:06:31 <mtreinish> so before we dive into the topics on the etherpad are there any questions or comments about the format for summit?
22:06:54 <dkranz> mtreinish: for the day-long, are we sharing topics with infra or just the room?
22:07:36 <mtreinish> dkranz: well we're sharing the room with infra, we can also share topics but we don't have to
22:07:43 <dkranz> k
22:08:16 <mtreinish> I imagine if there are any topics with overlap and it doesn't really require outside discussion using the meetup would be better
22:08:56 <mtreinish> for everyone who was at the midcycle in Darmstadt the meetup day will probably be similar to that
22:08:57 <dmorita> I agree. Some topics have overlapping part.
22:10:21 <mtreinish> ok, if there aren't any other questions about the summit format then let's start going through the etherpad
22:10:37 <mtreinish> how about we start from the bottom
22:10:47 <mtreinish> so, Gap analysis for using Tempest in production (not DevStack) environments
22:11:25 <mtreinish> masayukig: so I think this is a great topic, it's similar to what I was trying to address with the ux one
22:11:39 <mtreinish> but I feel it's a distinct issue which we should dedicate time to
22:11:48 <andreaf> +1
22:11:59 <mtreinish> did you have a feeling for the format you wanted?
22:12:28 <mtreinish> for example did you think it would be better as a dedicated session or a more informal thing as part of the meetup?
22:12:47 <andreaf> perhaps a session would be good here
22:12:52 <mtreinish> because I'd be fine with either, although I think the need for external comments probably means this makes more sense as a session
22:12:55 <mtreinish> andreaf: +1
22:13:04 <andreaf> because it's really a topic where we could get input from people
22:13:12 <dkranz> mtreinish: Unless we go into the room with some concrete ideas to discuss, a session may be too short
22:13:26 <dmorita> I have one question. What is the difference from above topics like Web-GUI or Tempest UX?
22:13:31 <masayukig> mtreinish, andreaf: Yeah, we should discuss that in ML too.
22:13:37 <dkranz> andreaf: but yes, we could gather data, and then discuss on Friday
22:13:44 <mtreinish> dkranz: yeah that is a concern
22:14:19 <andreaf> dkranz: sounds like a plan :)
22:14:47 <dkranz> andreaf: I think there is potentially a lot of overlap with the other make-tempest-friendly-for-users items in the pad
22:15:30 <masayukig> dkranz: agree.
22:15:56 <masayukig> dmorita: I think Web-GUI and Tempest UX are one of this topic.
22:16:08 <dmorita> masayukig: ok
22:16:27 <mtreinish> masayukig: so you think we should combine those 3 topics and make that a single session?
22:16:41 <dmorita> Good! and, you can be the session leader
22:16:58 <dmorita> you -> masayukig
22:17:06 <andreaf> dkranz, masayukig: yes there's a lot of overal, but I think the last topic on the pad is really specific issues like devstack specific defaults, cannot run without admin credentials, rate limiting and so forth
22:17:06 <gmann> i think this can be a good session which can provide much input for UX, GUI topic
22:17:22 <andreaf> s/overal/overlap
22:17:50 <masayukig> mtreinish: My concern is the time. Is 40 minutes  enough for them..?
22:17:53 <dkranz> I think that would be good but we should set expectations that unlike many sessions, this one is not about coming out with a decision
22:18:03 <dkranz> And then continue on Friday
22:18:12 <dkranz> With the intent of coming out of that with a plan
22:18:45 <dkranz> So the session would be more about gathering input
22:19:01 <mtreinish> masayukig: hmm, dunno. I think dkranz is right we can always spill into friday if we need extra time
22:19:13 <mtreinish> dkranz: I like that idea, we just need to make sure we advertise the session well
22:19:23 <mtreinish> and probably make it earlier in the schedule
22:19:29 <dkranz> ++
22:19:38 <gmann> dkranz: +1. Thats what i was thinking, to have this session for more on gathering input
22:20:05 <dkranz> mtreinish: It would actually be good if all projects advertised particular sessions where they were looking for outside input
22:20:15 <dkranz> maybe send to ml
22:20:26 <masayukig> mtreinish: ok.
22:21:40 <mtreinish> ok, well that sounds like a plan then
22:21:51 <mtreinish> does anyone have any other comments on this topic?
22:23:00 <mtreinish> ok then next up is:
22:23:02 <mtreinish> Localization test: how to ensure qualities of localized OpenStack with translations
22:23:20 <mtreinish> I was talking to Daisy about this earlier today
22:24:00 <mtreinish> the basic issue is that occasionally (very infrequently) the tests (both tempest and unit tests) break with a specific locale enabled
22:24:15 <mtreinish> it exposes real bugs in openstack, but we don't have a mechanism to test it
22:24:32 <mtreinish> all the tests have been run manually
22:24:43 <mtreinish> I think this is a good candidate for a periodic job
22:24:57 <mtreinish> but I'm not sure we need a full session for discussing it
22:25:25 <andreaf> mtreinish: well we run 26 (?) checks on each tempest change, we could inject a random localization in each of them
22:25:50 <andreaf> mtreinish: "random" meaning the same for each job so that it's still ok to troubleshoot
22:25:52 <mtreinish> on one hand it would be a good time for interaction between qa, infra, and i8ln
22:26:43 <mtreinish> andreaf: well aren't the log messages translated too? I'm not comfortable debugging logs from a random failure in a language I don't know :)
22:26:43 <andreaf> mtreinish: it doesn't feel like something worth a full session though
22:27:20 <andreaf> mtreinish: ah right, not tempest logs but the rest is
22:27:42 <dkranz> We could spend a little time on Friday
22:28:20 <mtreinish> yeah, I'm thinking this would be a good meetup day topic. Or maybe a split session (20min on this 20min on something else)
22:29:34 <mtreinish> well let's say it's a meetup topic for now, and depending on how the schedule looks at the end we maybe allocate a half slot for it
22:29:37 <mtreinish> any objections?
22:29:58 <dmorita> it sounds good
22:30:11 <masayukig> nope :)
22:30:27 <mtreinish> ok cool, let's move onto the next one then
22:30:36 <mtreinish> Auth interface design for testing various clusters (plus tempest-lib migration)
22:30:43 <dmorita> It is my suggestion :)
22:30:59 <mtreinish> dmorita: yep, I'm guess it's related to your spec I -2'd :)
22:31:26 <dmorita> I -2'd ?
22:31:45 <mtreinish> dmorita: the spec to add non-keystone config to tempest that you wrote
22:31:52 <mtreinish> I have a -2 sitting on it IIRC
22:32:11 <dmorita> I see. Partially related.
22:32:45 <dmorita> But main motivation is to enable Tempest "really" run tests to any OpenStack cluster.
22:33:08 <andreaf> dmorita, mtreinish: the work I've done with the multi-auth bp should help switching auth provider
22:33:16 <dmorita> Sub-motivation is migrating auth part to tempest-lib .
22:33:23 <mtreinish> andreaf: yeah that's what I was thinking
22:33:46 <mtreinish> dmorita: sure I think if we make the auth portion of tempest easy to consume and replace as part of tempest-lib that would make this easy
22:33:47 <andreaf> dmorita: so do you mean clusters not running keystone for identity?
22:34:09 <mtreinish> I still don't think we should support the swift auth mechanism in tempest, because it's swift specific
22:34:24 <mtreinish> but if we have the lib interface stable you should be able to make one easily
22:34:45 <mtreinish> and just plug it in for your use case
22:34:57 <dmorita> mtreinish: yes. But, now it is difficult to write a specific driver for Tempest's auth by their own.
22:35:10 <dkranz> ++ I think until OpenStack should decide to de-integrate keystone this is outside of our core mission
22:35:31 <mtreinish> dmorita: anyway this feels like a subtopic on tempest-lib, do you agree?
22:35:48 <dmorita> I want to show the analysis of current implementation, and to-be interface design.
22:35:59 <dmorita> IMO, auth architecture is a little complicated so it seems necessary to describe a current implementation in detail. Therefore, a dedicated session is preferred.
22:36:24 <dkranz> dmorita: A written description to the ml would make that much easier
22:36:43 <dkranz> dmorita: I don't think we use these sessions to describe things
22:37:46 <dmorita> I think we need many eyes to discuss more other use cases and interface design.
22:37:46 <mtreinish> yes I agree, if we prepare any explanatory material ahead of the sessions that will make the face-to-face time more productive
22:38:01 <dkranz> mtreinish: we are on topic 3 out of 11 with 20 min left
22:38:23 <andreaf> mtreinish: that sounds like something I should work on
22:38:38 <mtreinish> dkranz: oh great, well lets cross of some easy ones then
22:38:57 <mtreinish> tempest-lib is going to be a session I don't think anyone disagrees with that, right?
22:39:03 <dkranz> +1
22:39:05 <andreaf> +1
22:39:09 <dmorita> +1
22:39:11 <masayukig> ++
22:39:11 <mtreinish> I'll take the session leader on that, because I've been driving that effort so far
22:39:16 <gmann> +1
22:39:23 <mtreinish> then the tempest scope one also will be getting a session
22:39:39 <mtreinish> I don't think it needs to be a double session necessarily
22:39:57 <mtreinish> I plan to start a ML to prempt the session tomorrow or early next week
22:40:04 <dkranz> mtreinish: with Friday available I don't think we need double sessions for anything
22:40:37 <mtreinish> dkranz: fair point
22:40:46 <mtreinish> I was just echoing your earlier concern :)
22:40:59 <dkranz> mtreinish: right, but I did not know the format then
22:41:49 <mtreinish> ok after that we have 4 more topics
22:41:56 <mtreinish> QA and CI after merge
22:42:06 <andreaf> ++
22:42:08 <mtreinish> andreaf: what did you have in mind for talking about in this session?
22:42:32 <andreaf> what tests could be moved to post-merge, how we track and maintain them
22:42:58 <dkranz> andreaf: that is related to the in-project functional testing as it will have the same issues
22:43:07 <mtreinish> andreaf: ok, so like a dashboard view on test results
22:43:13 <andreaf> and how do we let deployers know which versions to pick to have something passing certain post merge tests
22:43:51 <mtreinish> andreaf: ok I'm fine with giving that a topic, although it does feel like a split topic with infra
22:44:02 <mtreinish> because we don't have a good story around post tests at this point
22:44:36 <andreaf> mtreinish: sure there are two aspects, one is how to make people care about post-merge tests
22:44:44 <mtreinish> does anyone have an objection to that as a topic?
22:44:56 <andreaf> mtreinish: the other one is really what can we move out of the main gate
22:45:37 <mtreinish> andreaf: well I think that's more a question of configs not necessarily individual tests
22:45:47 <andreaf> mtreinish: which is like saying something is core openstack always working, other is "class B" most of the time working, perhaps working on releases but not all the time
22:46:23 <andreaf> mtreinish: yes indeed
22:46:24 <mtreinish> andreaf: yeah that part feels more like a cross-project topic :)
22:46:42 <mtreinish> but anyway I think that's a good topic to have
22:46:45 <dmorita> I agree > cross-project
22:47:22 <masayukig> mtreinish: agree
22:47:44 <mtreinish> what I think will happen is we can work out the technical aspects there and avoid policy decisions about what is tested everywhere vs post merge
22:47:51 <mtreinish> ok I added that to the list of sessions
22:47:53 <mtreinish> let's move on
22:48:05 <mtreinish> Response objects of Tempest clients
22:48:14 <mtreinish> I agree that we can just handle that in the spec review
22:48:26 <gmann> +1
22:48:29 <mtreinish> any objections to that?
22:48:31 <andreaf> +1
22:48:34 <dmorita> +1
22:48:35 <masayukig> yeah, agree
22:49:09 <mtreinish> ok then we have
22:49:11 <mtreinish> Implications of moving functional tests to projects
22:49:24 <mtreinish> dkranz: you proposed this as a cross-project session right?
22:49:38 <dkranz> mtreinish: yes, but I don't know how/when they are chosen
22:49:42 <mtreinish> do you want to hold off on having this in qa until we see if that gets picked up?
22:49:51 <mtreinish> dkranz: it should be within the next week
22:49:55 <dkranz> mtreinish: sure
22:50:16 <mtreinish> so I'll put that as a maybe, I do think it's related to the tempest scope topic but that's fine
22:50:36 <mtreinish> then next up is
22:50:38 <mtreinish> Tempest/Rally Integration
22:51:07 <mtreinish> which is something I'm not sure warrants a separate topic, because we did this in Atl, and nothing was produced from it
22:51:19 <dkranz> mtreinish: so we have three other items that are about user-experience,ui,database,etc.
22:51:20 <mtreinish> despite having a concrete list of work items from the session
22:51:44 <dkranz> mtreinish: and we also did nothing with the other proposals either
22:51:54 <dkranz> mtreinish: perhaps it does not need a session
22:52:09 <dkranz> mtreinish: but it is really about the best way to move forward on the UX front
22:52:29 <mtreinish> dkranz: well we had masayukig's session in atl about the tempest server plan which had good discussion and a spec proposal
22:52:35 <mtreinish> which I created subunit2sql from
22:52:53 <mtreinish> the rest of the spec was blocked because of overlap concerns with jenkins
22:52:57 <dkranz> mtreinish: my only "point" is that a lot of people have started using rally
22:53:17 <dkranz> mtreinish: and we are either going to compete with that, or join forces, because I believe the end goal is the same
22:53:50 <dkranz> mtreinish: just something to think about
22:53:54 <mtreinish> dkranz: I think there is definite overlap which is something I've said many times, but the scope of projects is very different.
22:54:04 <mtreinish> I think baking it into a ux discussion is a good idea
22:54:30 <mtreinish> I really would like to see collab here, it's just something which hasn't happened so far
22:54:31 <dkranz> mtreinish: I think the current feature focus is different but I don't see any UX goals we have that rally does not also have
22:55:36 <dkranz> mtreinish: anyway, I am not asserting an answer to this, just something to think about as we move forward on UX
22:55:59 <mtreinish> dkranz: I agree, but I just don't think it warrants another slot
22:56:14 <dkranz> mtreinish: ok
22:56:27 <mtreinish> does anyone else have an opinion on this topic?
22:56:46 <mtreinish> because my opinion isn't the only one here :)
22:57:15 <mtreinish> because that also leaves us with 2 (maybe 3) unallocated slots
22:57:23 <dmorita> How is auth interface topic? It must be also helpful to just consider migration of auth module to tempest-lib.
22:57:28 <dmorita> Actually, I already started surveying the auth implementation and found some points to be improved.
22:57:33 <dmorita> Sorry, I am persistent.
22:58:23 <mtreinish> dmorita: if you have a concrete proposal for a better auth interface that we can use in tempest-lib and think it'll fill up enough time for a session I guess that's fine
22:58:40 <mtreinish> but we really don't want to spend session time going over what's there now
22:58:52 <mtreinish> and reviewing the current interface
22:59:33 <dmorita> Of course, I can prepare material before the session to explain current architecture quickly.
22:59:38 <andreaf> dmorita: feel free to share any proposal for improvement - the multi-auth bp is not finished anyways
23:00:24 <mtreinish> does anyone object to having a session on the future of the tempest auth interface?
23:00:34 <mtreinish> also we're at time, but I don't think there is a meeting after us
23:00:38 <mtreinish> so we can go over a bit :)
23:01:14 <dmorita> andreaf: your effort is good.
23:01:28 <masayukig> mtreinish: oh.. :)
23:01:34 <mtreinish> is anyone in favor of a session like that?
23:01:38 <dmorita> But, i think it is a little different from migration  to tempest-lib.
23:02:45 <mtreinish> dmorita: well considering we have at least 1 free slot I guess we'll make this a session
23:03:13 <mtreinish> ping me if you've got some concerns on how we should be framing the discussion
23:03:20 <mtreinish> andreaf: is that ok?
23:03:44 <andreaf> sure, ok
23:03:52 <dmorita> ok
23:04:13 <mtreinish> ok well I think that's it for the topics unless I missed one
23:04:23 <dkranz> Got to run now
23:04:29 <mtreinish> dkranz: ok
23:04:49 <andreaf> I also should go, it's past midnight
23:05:04 <mtreinish> we have 1 unused slot, if there are no other ideas I can fill that with an administrative topic, or talk to ttx and give that back to the pool
23:05:13 <mtreinish> or we can use it as an extension of the meetup time
23:05:25 <mtreinish> andreaf: ok yeah I was surprised you joined :)
23:05:26 <dmorita> Ok. Thanks!
23:06:10 <gmann> may be we can extend Gap analysis in 2 sessions which may need more time
23:06:16 <gmann> just a option :)
23:06:27 <mtreinish> oh, I know dtroyer said he didn't want a devstack/grenade topic, but we could use that for the 1 slot :)
23:06:35 <mtreinish> gmann: yeah that was the other thing I was conisdering too
23:06:54 <mtreinish> anyway we're ~5 min over time so let's end the meeting and we can pick this up in -qa
23:06:55 <masayukig> gmann: that's sounds good.
23:07:07 <mtreinish> thanks everyone
23:07:08 <masayukig> mtreinish: ok
23:07:09 <mtreinish> #endmeeting