09:00:31 <gmann> #startmeeting qa 09:00:32 <openstack> Meeting started Thu May 18 09:00:31 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 09:00:33 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 09:00:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'qa' 09:00:49 <andreaf> o/ 09:01:01 <zhufl> hello 09:01:03 <tosky> hi 09:01:11 <chandankumar> hello 09:01:11 <gmann> who all here today? 09:01:36 <martinkopec> hi 09:01:51 <gmann> let's start 09:01:53 <gmann> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Agenda_for_May_18th_2017_.280900_UTC.29 09:02:07 <gmann> ^^ today agenda 09:02:26 <gmann> #topic Previous Meeting Action review 09:02:46 <gmann> no open action as of now #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/qa/2017/qa.2017-05-04-09.00.html 09:03:00 <gmann> #topic The Forum, Boston 09:03:14 <gmann> as you all know, we had summit last week. 09:03:24 <gmann> 1 onbaording and forum sessions 09:03:40 <gmann> Onboarding: May 8(Mon), 16:40- #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-QA-onboarding 09:03:58 <gmann> Forum: May 11(Thurs), 9:00- #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-qa-tools-plugins 09:04:33 <gmann> we tried to capture all discussion on etherpad , who did not make in summit 09:05:05 <gmann> andreaf: how you want to track discussion on forum etc ? 09:05:17 <gmann> i tried to add tags on each query/items 09:05:39 <andreaf> gmann: thanks I saw that - I plan to follow-up on the ML with a summary from the etherpad 09:05:57 <andreaf> gmann: there are few if no actionable items though 09:06:38 <andreaf> gmann: apart from a kind reminder of announcing big changes in devstack / tempest beforehand in the ML 09:06:58 <gmann> andreaf: yea few of them are long term things like coordinating with other community etc 09:07:16 <gmann> andreaf: +1, yea that was one of the pain point 09:07:26 <andreaf> gmann: exactly that's something good to keep in mind / in our vision in general 09:08:09 <andreaf> gmann: so if any of us already work in adjacent communities and you see there an issue that could be solved with an openstack tool 09:08:27 <andreaf> go ahead and share it to the other community 09:09:18 <gmann> yea, that will be nice collaboration and we can get more feedback about doing it in better way if any 09:10:05 <gmann> andreaf: thanks for plan to summarize on ML 09:10:10 <chandankumar> andreaf: gmann is it something related tempest plugin pike goal or other topic? 09:10:39 <gmann> chandankumar: goal is being agreed on other TC sessions. 09:11:00 <gmann> and had lot of voting also but not sure why it was updated :) 09:11:03 <andreaf> gmann: heh yeah - let's wait to see the votes though :) 09:11:16 <andreaf> gmann: because of a misunderstanding... 09:11:26 <gmann> hummm 09:11:28 <andreaf> gmann: it was updated because of a misunderstanding 09:11:40 <andreaf> it was proposed to do an update in a follow up patch 09:11:45 <gmann> link could have been in follow up patch 09:11:47 <gmann> yea 09:11:47 <andreaf> instead a new patchset was proposed 09:11:56 <andreaf> meh 09:11:59 <andreaf> anyways 09:12:02 <gmann> mtreinish has to get all vote again :) 09:12:34 <gmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/369749/ 09:12:34 <patchbot> patch 369749 - governance - Add Queens goal split out tempest plugins 09:12:57 <andreaf> chandankumar: one of the hot topics at the summit as well as in the TC vision is adjacent communities 09:13:15 <andreaf> chandankumar: such as k8s for instance 09:13:52 <chandankumar> andreaf: yes, do we talked there how tempest would fit there as a testing framework 09:14:08 <prateek> andreaf, and how do we plan to consume tempest in them ? 09:14:17 <andreaf> chandankumar: as an openstack community we want to work well with them share best practices, tools, do cross testing where it makes sense etc 09:14:28 <prateek> sounds good 09:14:44 <andreaf> prateek, chandankumar: it depends very much on the community 09:15:05 <gmann> yea, and can get their best practices too 09:15:09 <andreaf> we are not going to go and tell people "use this tool for testing" 09:15:25 <andreaf> but we can share success stories / best practices 09:15:48 <andreaf> and if someone has a problem that can be solved with tempest we should suggest it 09:16:22 <andreaf> or in future we could run integration tests in openstack gates which pull other components and drive them via Tempest for instance 09:16:39 <gmann> opencontrail seems using tempest plugin it think 09:17:34 <andreaf> gmann: https://github.com/Juniper/contrail-tempest? 09:17:51 <gmann> :) 09:17:59 <chandankumar> gmann: andreaf https://github.com/Juniper/contrail-test 09:18:01 <prateek> :) 09:18:02 <andreaf> the repo is rather empty :P 09:18:07 <gmann> not sure this but few guys told they use it 09:18:33 <chandankumar> https://github.com/Juniper/tempest 09:18:34 <prateek> maybe they might not have open sourced it 09:18:39 <chandankumar> https://github.com/Juniper/contrail-test/wiki/Running-Neutron-Tempest-Tests 09:18:41 <gmann> even in upstream training, ll check with them if i can reach 09:18:58 <gmann> anyways 09:19:15 <gmann> anything else on summit queries/discussion ? 09:19:32 <chandankumar> nope from myside! 09:19:53 <gmann> #topic Gate Stability - status update 09:20:02 <gmann> #link https://goo.gl/LV4kel 09:20:20 <andreaf> it looks pretty good :) 09:20:28 <gmann> i cannot see high peak recently 09:20:29 <gmann> yea 09:20:45 <gmann> #link http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/gate.html 09:21:06 <andreaf> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465487/ The patch to run migration tests now merged 09:21:06 <patchbot> patch 465487 - openstack-infra/project-config - Run migration tests along scenario ones (MERGED) 09:21:15 <andreaf> nova migration tests that is 09:21:43 <andreaf> so we now have a non-voting multi-node job which runs all scenario and nova migration tests with concurrency 2 09:21:47 <gmann> andreaf: but that need multinode 09:22:00 <gmann> ohk with scenario tests 09:22:20 <andreaf> if that is stable enough I will try to make it voting :) 09:22:28 <andreaf> it also runs with no identity v2 09:22:31 <andreaf> and test accounts 09:22:45 <gmann> you mean v3 + test account? 09:23:17 <andreaf> yes identity v2 disabled 09:23:24 <andreaf> v3 is not the default anyways 09:23:48 <gmann> andreaf: nova have separate job to run migration tests and i think not running new scenario job 09:24:09 <gmann> in case nova want to run scenario tests too? 09:24:58 <andreaf> gmann: maybe - mostly I wanted to have a job on Tempest side where we can see those kind of tests running 09:25:30 <gmann> yea, may be nova can add that as separate job, should not be harder 09:25:33 <andreaf> gmann: because otherwise I fear we may break them - especially since they are used in nova gates 09:26:00 <gmann> yea, everytime we have to tests those on nova side or experimental 09:26:15 <gmann> let's see how stable they are and good to make them voting 09:26:46 <andreaf> related to the gate, I also have another patch up to enable ssh by default in devstack (i.e. for master only) 09:26:56 <andreaf> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/458678/ turning ssh on in all jobs 09:26:57 <patchbot> patch 458678 - openstack-dev/devstack - Enable ssh validation by default 09:27:32 <gmann> andreaf: for all job. hummm 09:27:36 <andreaf> I think it would be good to have ssh validation on by default 09:27:51 <gmann> then we do not need separate ssh job 09:28:05 <andreaf> gmann: yes, indeed! 09:28:07 <gmann> that is kind of stable right 09:28:34 <andreaf> gmann: yes, however it only runs against tempest 09:28:47 <gmann> yea 09:28:55 <andreaf> and I fear that changes on nova / neutron side might introduce regressions 09:29:14 <andreaf> there are still one or two scenario tests in the integrated gate that do ssh validation 09:29:15 <gmann> andreaf: any tempest test patch with Depends-ON ? 09:29:37 <andreaf> so we are not fully exposed - but I think more tests with ssh checks would be good in the integrated gate 09:29:46 <andreaf> gmann: heh good point I will make one 09:29:53 <gmann> andreaf: thanks 09:31:26 <gmann> andreaf: will be good to see the scenario job behavior 09:32:40 <gmann> let's move next 09:32:42 <gmann> #topic Specs Reviews 09:32:57 <gmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/qa-specs,n,z 09:33:44 <gmann> saw new spec #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461140/ 09:33:44 <patchbot> patch 461140 - qa-specs - RBAC testing multiple policies 09:34:17 <andreaf> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461140/ new spec 09:34:18 <patchbot> patch 461140 - qa-specs - RBAC testing multiple policies 09:34:21 <gmann> i need to check this. cannot find patrole team 09:34:31 <gmann> andreaf: yea 09:34:39 <chandankumar> gmann: this spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461140/ is for patrole na? 09:34:40 <patchbot> patch 461140 - qa-specs - RBAC testing multiple policies 09:34:52 <gmann> chandankumar: yes 09:35:02 <chandankumar> ack! 09:35:03 <blancos> Is there a question regarding the spec? 09:35:20 <chandankumar> not from myside. 09:35:20 <gmann> blancos: hi 09:35:27 <andreaf> blancos: I haven't read it yet, but I will :) 09:35:40 <gmann> blancos: we have not reviewed yet, any thing you want to bring before review 09:35:57 <blancos> gmann No I don't think so 09:36:14 <blancos> gmann Besides that spec :) 09:36:22 * gmann blancos seems changed irc name was searching with sblancos :) 09:36:29 <andreaf> blancos: but a NIT - I think we should have a patrole folder in there 09:36:32 <gmann> blancos: ok 09:36:42 <gmann> andreaf: good catch 09:36:56 <blancos> andreaf In the qa-specs repo? 09:37:05 <andreaf> yes 09:37:29 <andreaf> it's not really important, I though it would be nice to have 09:37:32 <gmann> blancos: yea like devstack has one- https://github.com/openstack/qa-specs/tree/master/specs 09:38:12 <blancos> andreaf gmann Okay, will do. And I agree, it keeps everything much neater 09:38:13 <chandankumar> that would be better, otherwise people will get confused whether the spec is for temepst or othere 09:38:43 <gmann> andreaf: blancos: ok, we can do in same patch only. right 09:38:50 <gmann> chandankumar: yea 09:39:35 <gmann> #action blancos to propose new patrole spec with separate folder in qa-specs 09:39:49 <gmann> anything else on spec 09:39:54 <gmann> 20 min left 09:40:33 <gmann> #topic Tempest 09:40:35 <gmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/tempest+status:open 09:41:00 <gmann> andreaf: thanks - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465897/ 09:41:00 <patchbot> patch 465897 - tempest - DNM Throughaway patch to test ssh validation 09:41:30 <gmann> i have 1 thing on tempest about cinder v3 tests and clients 09:41:49 <gmann> i saw some of the patches proposing the same client for v3 tests 09:42:29 <gmann> but we do not want to have duplicate clients 09:42:39 <gmann> i think we discussed it before also 09:42:52 <andreaf> right we need to connect the folks doing the work 09:43:06 <gmann> so what i want to know/track is how far are we from that merge 09:43:23 <andreaf> gmann: perhaps we could have an open etherpad for things like service clients or schemas 09:43:29 <gmann> andreaf: oomichi was working on that. but not sure the progress 09:43:57 <gmann> andreaf: yea, i have do for schema after simple spec. planed for next month 09:44:17 <andreaf> gmann: so that people sign up their name there and we can help avoiding conflict 09:44:18 <andreaf> that only works if it is advertised properly though 09:44:21 <gmann> oomichi: any etherpad you have for cinder client merge? where people can help 09:44:25 <andreaf> gmann: that would help thank you 09:44:34 <gmann> yea 09:45:10 <gmann> Bug Triage: 09:45:12 <gmann> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/pike-qa-bug-triage 09:45:25 <gmann> andreaf: your turn this week 09:45:26 <andreaf> gmann: it was me this week 09:45:53 <andreaf> I've not done much tbh - I've not seen much coming in either, I will try to smash some bugs today and tomorrow 09:46:11 <andreaf> so nothing else to report 09:46:14 <gmann> andreaf: thanks 09:46:35 <gmann> next week is mine turn. 09:46:57 <gmann> #topic Patrole 09:47:08 <gmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/patrole 09:48:06 <gmann> seems like blancos is offline 09:48:19 <gmann> so there is first release going on for patrole 09:48:43 <gmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/463578/ 09:48:44 <patchbot> patch 463578 - releases - Release Patrole 0.1.0 09:49:07 <gmann> and before that release notes were needed #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/464072/ 09:49:07 <patchbot> patch 464072 - patrole - Prepare release notes for release 0.1.0 09:49:34 <gmann> once patrole patch is merged, use that commit as release one 09:49:43 <andreaf> gmann: ah good, I will review those two 09:49:54 <gmann> andreaf: nice, that will help them. thanks 09:50:34 <gmann> anything else on patrole ? 09:51:15 <gmann> #topic DevStack 09:51:42 <andreaf> gmann: I think the 'not fully stable' was meant for the library part of patrole - that is not there yet : 09:51:43 <andreaf> :) 09:51:53 <andreaf> so as a message that there is no stable API yet 09:52:14 <andreaf> i.e. there is no guarantee of backward compatibility on patrole common classes yet 09:52:25 <andreaf> I think it would be good to clarify that in the release notes 09:52:52 <gmann> humm, but there is no lib things in patrole yet 09:53:25 <gmann> i mean the framework they have is stable. as they asked to add that in tempest lib initially 09:53:59 <gmann> felipe reply was "Not "fully stable" means that we're not done enhancing it" 09:54:39 <gmann> anyways let's review on patch, 5 min left 09:54:46 <andreaf> gmann: ok 09:54:54 <andreaf> can we jump to the last topic? 09:54:57 <gmann> on devstack, ssh things already discussed 09:55:11 <gmann> i will review that once tempest patch results 09:55:27 <gmann> andreaf: anything else on devstack ? 09:55:48 <andreaf> nope - I would like to skip the the last two bullets in the agenda if that's ok 09:56:08 <gmann> doc and open one ? 09:56:25 <andreaf> Metting changes proposal 09:56:42 <gmann> ok 09:56:51 <andreaf> I wanted to propose to move this meeting to either 8:00 or 8:30 UTC 09:56:55 <gmann> let's jump to Open 09:57:00 <gmann> andreaf: yea go ahead 09:57:26 <gmann> m +1 on 8 or 8.30 09:57:31 <andreaf> which will make it easier for contributors in China TZ to join 09:57:35 <gmann> andreaf: you want voting 09:57:55 <andreaf> I will send an email to the LM 09:57:57 <andreaf> ML 09:58:05 <chandankumar> andreaf: for us also this time suits for meeting 09:58:06 <andreaf> but I wanted to know if there is strong opposition 09:58:19 <andreaf> chandankumar: cool 09:58:22 <gmann> andreaf: cool, thatnks 09:58:26 <gmann> zhufl: ? 09:58:42 <gmann> #action andreaf to propose new meeting time on ML 09:58:56 <andreaf> also you have seen on the ML the mail proposing zhufl for core 09:59:14 <gmann> yup. 09:59:29 <andreaf> afazekas, sdague and jordanP have not voted yet so I will keep the pool open a bit longer 09:59:40 <gmann> ok 09:59:48 <gmann> 1 min left anything else anyone want to discuss 10:00:06 <chandankumar> and tempest-plugin-sanity gate again failed 10:00:10 <andreaf> I look forward to having a new core member soon :) 10:00:16 <gmann> let's move to qa channel 10:00:21 <gmann> thanks all 10:00:24 <gmann> #endmeeting