17:00:33 #startmeeting qa 17:00:33 Meeting started Thu Aug 17 17:00:33 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is andreaf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:34 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:37 The meeting name has been set to 'qa' 17:00:53 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Agenda_for_August_17th_2017_.281700_UTC.29 Today's agenda 17:00:55 o/ 17:01:02 who's here today for the meeting? 17:01:03 hi 17:01:04 \o 17:01:11 o/ 17:02:50 mtreinish, afazekas: around? 17:03:28 ok let's get started 17:03:58 previous week actions are still for gmann 17:04:15 #action gmann to send ML for upcoming removal of deprecated interfaces and its affect on stable branches 17:04:16 o/ 17:04:34 o/ 17:04:40 #topic PTG 17:05:22 For the PTG, Mon/Tue we will share a room with infra/release/requirements/stable for the help hours 17:05:59 Since questions are likely to span across the responsibility of multiple teams 17:06:16 like Tempest plugins is a lot about setting up the repo which is infra like mtreinish mentioned 17:06:35 also it will make it easier for the room to always be attended by someone 17:07:33 andreaf: how about after Wed? 17:07:56 If you are going to be at the PTG and plan to join QA sessions please do add your name to the list in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/qa-queens-ptg 17:08:18 oomichi: after Wed we'll have a room dedicated to QA for QA team discussions and code sprint 17:08:20 andreaf: do you have separated room for qa project for separated topic on Wed? 17:08:33 so Wed through Friday 17:08:39 andreaf: cool, I'd like to join online 17:09:25 oomichi: I'll try to make a decent schedule for people who want to join remotely 17:09:53 andreaf: thanks, that will be helpful for us 17:10:07 oomichi: remote attendance at PTG may be tricky but we'll see what we can do, we can always setup a quick hangout or so if it makes sense 17:10:48 another thing will be the ptg bot - it will be possible for people to see what's going on in different rooms in real time via a web page (or in IRC) 17:10:48 andreaf: yeah, it is nice to have discussion on the same time even if that is remotely for moving forward together 17:11:01 as long as room owners will provide the info of course 17:11:21 * oomichi nods 17:13:08 we have quite a few ideas for things to do at the PTG 17:13:14 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/qa-queens-ptg 17:13:52 if there is anything that needs to be discussed before the PTG for preparation please add it to the meeting agenda 17:14:07 and if you have more ideas / things to be discussed please add them in there 17:14:36 I expect each session will be lead/moderated by the person proposing it, unless stated otherwise 17:15:07 one last thing 17:15:14 yeah, each person needs to 17:16:03 if you have special scheduling needs in terms of conflicting meetings or late arrival / early departure you may want to track this on the etherpad as well 17:16:28 ok enough for the PTG from my side 17:16:48 anything else? 17:16:59 #topic Gate Stability 17:17:53 Gate failure categorisation rate is still pretty low - partly my fault since I've been busy with test.py patches and ignored by duty on that 17:18:11 I scheduled myself for next week to get more categorization in place 17:18:51 The gate usage is still pretty high, a lot of time we are using all nodes available 17:19:15 and failure rates seems to be still a bit too high looking at the graphs 17:19:42 #link https://goo.gl/ptPgEw 17:19:58 yeah, the usage seems still maximum 17:20:32 I knew folks in infra were investigating networking issues and slow nodes, but I don't have any news on that 17:21:51 anything else on gate stability? 17:21:59 ok moving on 17:22:04 #topic Specs Reviews 17:22:13 anything on specs? 17:22:29 just a reminder for folks to please review open specs before the PTG 17:22:50 so we get there prepared and we can plan queens work accordingly 17:23:18 ok moving on 17:23:21 #topic Tempest 17:23:29 oh, I notice now https://review.openstack.org/#/c/173334/ needs to be updated. OK, I will do before PTG 17:24:14 prateek: around? 17:24:27 Anything on Tempest to be discussed? 17:25:08 oomichi: heh, it's only been 2 yrs so far :p 17:25:40 mtreinish: yeah, that is the same age of my last kid :) 17:25:46 oomichi: do you think you'll have bw to work on that during queens? 17:25:49 :D 17:26:26 andreaf: yeah, the spec working item will be I can work in queens 17:26:44 oomichi: cool :) 17:26:45 I want to make it grow 17:27:09 oomichi: do you know any user / cloud that would benefit from that? 17:27:55 andreaf: yeah, my company folks want to use it for system integrations 17:28:08 before releasing it on production 17:28:17 oomichi: cool good to hear some feedback on that 17:28:33 I guess that is usual use case of the feature 17:29:27 oomichi: if you have any more description / use cases from NEC to be put in an etherpad or so it might be useful as well 17:29:45 oomichi: yeah indeed 17:30:02 oomichi: I was going to use that for Helion ... long time ago 17:30:33 andreaf: yaeh, ok I make them write on that 17:30:40 thanks 17:30:45 ok moving on 17:30:48 This week I've been working on two things on Tempest side 17:31:15 one is cleanup the console log of the unit test jobs which has become polluted with pieces of logs from various tests 17:31:42 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/tempest+branch:master+topic:cleanup_test_log 17:32:02 that's still in progress 17:32:37 one of fixes breaks fwaas and another one removes a stable interface so it's not really straight forward 17:33:51 mtreinish: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/494197/ do you think we need deprecation for DEFAULT_PARAMS? 17:34:18 it's a stable interface but it has been so for only a few days :S 17:34:43 andreaf: I'm totally fine just deleting it 17:35:32 oomichi: perhaps you want to weigh in as well, if we can get consensus on deletion it would great I don't think this is worth a lot of extra effort really 17:36:34 The other thing I've been working on is making validation resources and test.py stable 17:36:39 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/tempest+branch:master+topic:test_module_stable 17:36:50 I've found some interesting unit test issues 17:36:51 andreaf: humm, I could not follow ^^^, maybe that is gmann? 17:37:10 gmann puts -1 on that 17:37:41 oomichi: yeah gmann recommends we go through deprecation 17:37:55 oomichi: but I'm not fully convinced it's worth it in this case 17:38:47 andreaf: I am good to remove it directly if we never say it as stable interface even if users exist 17:39:24 oomichi: the module was declared as a stable interface a few days ago 17:39:43 andreaf: omg, that is.. 17:39:51 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/487482/ 17:40:17 7 days ago to be precise :D 17:41:02 I need to be your enemy on this case ;) 17:41:06 oomichi: also that dict is not the correct one to use, so if we leave it around we should fix it 17:42:10 andreaf: ok, I will check it more carefully after meeting 17:42:17 oomichi: cool thanks 17:43:41 so anything else on Tempest? 17:44:20 #topic Patrole 17:44:30 anything on Patrole to be discussed? 17:44:55 Felipe has a few things for the PTG 17:45:04 but nothing urgent that I can think of 17:45:26 blancos: ok 17:46:00 if nothing else, I'll move to open discussion 17:46:09 #topic Open Discussion 17:46:41 on the stestr migration stuff, I think the ostestr patch is ready: 17:47:00 #link https://review.openstack.org/488441 17:47:25 I'm hoping people could test it out, because I'm sure I'm missing an edge case somewhere 17:47:54 like just the other day I realized most projects won't have an .stestr.conf, so ostestr will have to parse the .testr.conf and pass the args to stestr 17:48:22 but overall I'm really happy with that transition, it makes the code so much cleaner 17:48:56 and eventually we can hopefully remove the testr transition bits and make it just a straight passthrough command (and eventually maybe even delete the ostestr entrypoint) 17:49:42 cool 17:49:43 I will try it out 17:49:43 couldn't that issue (missing .stestr) and potentially others be discovered with some.targeted reviews? 17:50:24 eventually we'll have to migrate .testr.conf to .stestr.conf - but I guess we can do that over time 17:51:32 mtreinish: I wss wondering - is there support in stestr for the test bisect - to find dependencies between to tests? 17:51:52 andreaf: yeah: http://stestr.readthedocs.io/en/latest/MANUAL.html#automated-test-isolation-bisection 17:52:04 mtreinish: I had to do that today, I didn't manage to get testr doing that for me so I handed up scripting it myself quickly 17:52:09 that was just straight ported over from testr though 17:52:15 so I haven't really tested it 17:52:32 mtreinish: ok I will test it 17:52:33 andreaf: ah, ok. Well we can work on fixing that to make it easier 17:52:57 ltosky[m]: targeted reviews? 17:53:19 ltosky[m]: like getting people to look at it? Or throwaway test patches? 17:53:34 the latter 17:53:53 Well, not that the former is bad :) 17:54:02 yeah, I thought about doing that, but I didn't want to waste test nodes right now 17:54:29 right 17:57:02 one last thing 17:57:12 what should I name the module in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/493668/ 17:57:25 changing that name in that patch is daunting process 17:57:33 so I'd rather do it once only :D 17:57:43 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/493668/ 17:57:48 andreaf: I'm happy with the name there now 17:57:54 suggestions on the patch are welcome 17:59:11 mtreinish: heh ok thanks 18:00:11 ok thanks for joining everyone :) 18:00:16 #endmeeting