14:02:19 <ykarel> #startmeeting RDO meeting - 2020-11-11 14:02:20 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Nov 11 14:02:19 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ykarel. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:21 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:02:24 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'rdo_meeting___2020_11_11' 14:02:43 <spotz> o/ 14:02:46 <amoralej> o/ 14:02:48 <ykarel> Add last minute topics to agenda https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/RDO-Meeting 14:02:52 <ykarel> #topic roll call 14:02:58 <ykarel> #chair spotz amoralej 14:02:59 <openstack> Current chairs: amoralej spotz ykarel 14:02:59 <spotz> \o/ 14:03:42 <jpena> o/ 14:03:56 <ykarel> #chair jpena 14:03:57 <openstack> Current chairs: amoralej jpena spotz ykarel 14:05:16 <ykarel> Ok let's start with topics 14:05:20 <ykarel> #topic Activate Fedora Zuul CI for distgit owned by openstack-sig 14:05:34 <ykarel> seems fbo not around 14:05:51 <ykarel> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci 14:06:00 <ykarel> #link https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/projects 14:06:10 <ykarel> #info Goal is to add https://src.fedoraproject.org/api/0/group/openstack-sig?projects=1 to https://pagure.io/fedora-project-config/blob/master/f/resources/fedora-distgits.yaml 14:06:25 <ykarel> #info Example of jobs on PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/shared-mime-info/pull-request/1 14:07:16 <ykarel> So fbo proposed to use zuul CI for rpms managed under openstack-sig in Fedora 14:07:52 <amoralej> i think today is local holiday in france 14:08:04 <jpena> Yes, we've been successfully using Zuul to test PRs in Fedora distgits for some projects 14:08:13 <jpena> and it would be nice to add the openstack-sig packages 14:08:17 <amoralej> i'm fine with addint it 14:08:34 <amoralej> but most of the times we are not using PRs for fedora packages 14:08:41 <amoralej> but doing direct pushes 14:09:02 <amoralej> that's what our scripts to sync packages to rdo do 14:09:21 <ykarel> i asked this from fbo, he said direct push shouldn't be affected with zuul CI 14:09:29 <amoralej> yes, i guess that 14:09:36 <jpena> right, Zuul doesn't prevent direct push 14:09:46 <jpena> it just tests PRs 14:09:46 <amoralej> but i'm not sure if our projects are goint to be very useful 14:09:52 <amoralej> if we don't use PRs 14:09:58 <ykarel> jpena, so zuul only merges those PRS? 14:10:03 <amoralej> but no problem to add it 14:10:06 <ykarel> s/only/also 14:10:14 <jpena> no, Zuul just tests them. IIRC it doesn't merge, just report 14:10:21 <ykarel> ohhk 14:10:39 <jpena> if it's implemented, it might be nice to test if moving to a PR-based approach works best for us 14:10:40 <amoralej> it would catch issues we've had recently 14:10:43 <amoralej> yes 14:10:54 <spotz> It'd be nice if we could get all our repos on gerrit and zuul:) 14:10:56 <jpena> right, that was my point (aodhclient et al) 14:10:57 <amoralej> we had installation issues recently 14:11:04 <amoralej> yes, that one 14:11:23 <amoralej> i was investigating about automating PRs some time ago 14:11:40 <amoralej> i found some issues but i'm not sure what's the current status 14:11:53 <amoralej> what's the process to add it to zuul? 14:12:59 <jpena> I haven't tried it, but it seems to be documented in https://softwarefactory-project.io/r/20049 14:13:01 <jpena> oops 14:13:04 <jpena> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci#How_to_Zuul_attach_a_Pagure_repository_on_Zuul 14:13:15 <jpena> I guess fbo will take care of that 14:13:21 <ykarel> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci#How_to_Zuul_attach_a_Pagure_repository_on_Zuul 14:13:36 <ykarel> yes we can follow up on this when fbo is back 14:14:45 <amoralej> ok 14:15:38 <ykarel> Ok let's move to next and we can get back to zuul ci next week 14:16:13 <ykarel> #topic related: cleanup of packages owned by Fedora openstack-sig e.g. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475809#c5 14:16:15 <openstack> bugzilla.redhat.com bug 1475809 in python-positional "python-positional-1.2.1 is available" [Unspecified,New] - Assigned to openstack-sig 14:16:21 <ykarel> apevec, you around ^? 14:16:45 <apevec> for few min... 14:16:52 <apevec> ah meeting 14:17:08 <apevec> so yes, I just picked this one as an example 14:17:13 <apevec> which we could retire 14:17:40 <apevec> so more FYI and if anyone is interested to look for more such examples 14:17:51 <apevec> might be even scripted by comparing current u-c ? 14:18:22 <amoralej> sounds good, so let list all packages in openstack-sig 14:18:26 <amoralej> and check status 14:18:29 <ykarel> +1 14:18:52 <amoralej> we can look for packages in openstack-sig not longer in rdo deps 14:19:39 <ykarel> also there might be some packages which are not dep of any other openstack package in Fedora? 14:20:04 <amoralej> but if it's dep for anything in RDO we need to maintain it in fedora 14:20:25 <amoralej> so, criteria would be 14:20:54 <amoralej> if it's in rdoinfo we should maintain 14:21:05 <apevec> yes 14:21:15 <amoralej> we may also see if we have deps that can be removed from rdo 14:21:17 <spotz> Once we have the 2 lists maybe we can sit down and go through them? 14:21:32 <amoralej> but after we cleaned when moving to c8, i don't expect many 14:21:41 <apevec> and yes, before retiring in Fedora it needs to be confirmed as "leaf" RPM 14:22:51 <amoralej> #action amoralej to create a trello card and an etherpad and list all packages in openstack-sig 14:22:56 <ykarel> actually i meant, it might be an RDO dep, and originally was added in Fedora for some openstack dep, but it's possibly that openstack dep no longer depends on that dep, so it might be removed 14:23:26 <amoralej> btw, check the packages you own that should be in openstack-sig 14:23:28 <amoralej> in fedora 14:23:38 <ykarel> we would know that when we start filtering based on list, so not a big issue 14:23:46 <amoralej> apevec, jpena ykarel ^ 14:23:49 <apevec> yes, I found few I had which were missing openstack-sig 14:24:11 <ykarel> hmm there are few i noticed which are owned by number80 14:24:34 <amoralej> number80, ^ 14:25:29 <ykarel> iirc one was json-logger, other was ldappool 14:25:32 <amoralej> i need to check if we can script it 14:25:34 <ykarel> but can confirm again 14:26:50 <ykarel> Ok trello card can be used to track that, anything else on this, or let's move on to next topic? 14:27:07 <amoralej> yes 14:27:23 <ykarel> ack let's move 14:27:28 <ykarel> #topic Clean up of BuildRequires on git(git pulls lot of dependencies which we don't need, git-core is enough for package build) 14:27:37 <ykarel> #link https://trello.com/c/1uY5Y0uq/747-fedoraxinetd-orphanedgit-core 14:28:04 <ykarel> So this originated from orphan of xinetd in Fedora https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/O4UIVXUHBWC335ABJ27QSANQZK2HEIJG/ 14:28:51 <ykarel> As git in itself pulls lot of perl/python deps which we don't really need, let's move to git-core which is what we need during package builds 14:29:00 <ykarel> #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/O4UIVXUHBWC335ABJ27QSANQZK2HEIJG/ 14:29:14 <ykarel> Any thoughts/suggestions on this? 14:29:25 <amoralej> does GitPython requires git? 14:29:51 <ykarel> no i think 14:30:27 <amoralej> requires git-core 14:30:28 <ykarel> it's needs git-core 14:30:29 <amoralej> nice 14:31:48 <ykarel> Ok so let's move to git-core 14:31:54 <amoralej> i see some packages also require git 14:32:05 <amoralej> diskimage-builder-0:2.36.0-1.el8.noarch 14:32:27 <amoralej> sahara-image-elements 14:32:34 <amoralej> python3-reno 14:32:39 <amoralej> i guess we can clean those too 14:32:41 <apevec> they most likely just need git-core 14:32:42 <ykarel> do we have those in Fedora too 14:32:43 <amoralej> looks good 14:32:44 <amoralej> yes 14:33:20 <amoralej> so ykarel i think it's good to move on with that 14:33:24 <ykarel> ok we can check those packages too and move to git-core in Requires: too if possible 14:33:32 <amoralej> yes 14:33:50 <ykarel> Do we also need to backport those to victoria-rdo? 14:34:04 <amoralej> mmm 14:34:39 <ykarel> shouldn't be needed though 14:34:50 <amoralej> what's the decission in fedora? 14:35:37 <amoralej> if they plan to break git in fedora rawhide 14:35:47 <amoralej> we'll need to fix it in fedora 14:36:02 <ykarel> i have seen some patches in fedora where they making xinetd optional 14:36:08 <amoralej> ok 14:36:14 <amoralej> so it will be backwards compatible 14:36:33 <amoralej> let's do in rpm-master only to start 14:36:33 <ykarel> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cvs/c/b26b56582114baccc3d4cc122fd8d09442349c24?branch=master 14:36:39 <ykarel> Ok +1 14:37:24 <ykarel> #agreed to move to RPMs to depend on git-core(in place of git) on rpm-master branches 14:37:52 <ykarel> k let's move to next topic 14:37:55 <ykarel> #topic decisions during get together, FOSDEM? 14:37:58 <ykarel> spotz, ^ 14:39:29 <spotz> SO for anyone not at the Get Together we decided to do the first meeting of the month on video (I'll see if we can use meetpad if not we'll use Google Meet or Blue Jeans) and we also decided to do 1 or 2 virtual get togethers a release especially until we can all be in one place again 14:40:25 <ykarel> +1 14:40:31 <spotz> I'm a little worried about publishing a video link on a website so we don't get Zoom bombed:( So need to work that part out as well as the platformm before I can put that up on the website 14:41:46 <amoralej> ok 14:41:53 <spotz> And the get together cadance my only suggestion might be not on top of PTG or summit like we would in person to prevent meeting burnout so have it maybe in between events 14:41:57 <ykarel> you mean recording the video meeting and then publishing it? 14:42:52 <spotz> ykarel: No like putting the mlink to join publically accessible. It does seem in Bluejeans at least if not coming from a Red Hat login you need to be approved which would fix my concerns 14:43:12 <ykarel> okk 14:43:35 <spotz> We had some trolls get a hold of the link via twitter for the summit feedback session and it wasn't nice 14:43:59 <spotz> So I'd just like to make sure we can't be trolled 14:44:33 <jpena> I think there's a similar approval request in Meet, at least I remember seeing it sometimes 14:44:45 <spotz> For the monthly meeting I do thing the link needs to always be available not passed out just before 14:45:11 <spotz> jpena: I'll check that out as well so we have a good option 14:45:50 <amoralej> couldn't we create a new link for each monthly meeting and provide it right before somewhere? 14:46:51 <spotz> So that's it for us going video and get togethers. Well for the monthly it could be whoever is leadings link but I think that might not be as Open as we'd like 14:47:42 <spotz> So as long as folks need approval to join I think that'll be good enough. The twitter link had the zoom password as part of the link so folks could join directly 14:47:44 <amoralej> yep, makes sense 14:48:05 <spotz> The OPS in me just wants a little security:) 14:49:08 <spotz> We issed submitting anything for devconf though we can probably get a booth like we had for the US version. DO we want to try and do something at FOSDEM if it's not too late? 14:50:46 <amoralej> jpena and myself were chating about proposing something for Dojo 14:50:49 <amoralej> or fosdem 14:50:57 <amoralej> still under discussion 14:51:28 <spotz> Ok let me know how I can help 14:51:42 <spotz> That's it for me then 14:52:11 <ykarel> Thanks spotz 14:52:19 <ykarel> #topic chair for next week? 14:52:22 <ykarel> any volunteer? 14:52:56 <spotz> I can 14:53:15 <ykarel> #action spotz to chair next meeting 14:53:16 <ykarel> Thanks spotz 14:53:21 <ykarel> #topic open floor 14:53:27 <ykarel> Feel free to bring any topic now 14:54:49 <ykarel> chandankumar, you recall why httpcore 0.9.1 was choosen in https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/29865 ? 14:55:59 <chandankumar> ykarel: nope, need to check the logs 14:55:59 <ykarel> new octavia-tempest-plugin fails on that low version https://logserver.rdoproject.org/46/28446/17/check/tripleo-ci-centos-8-scenario010-standalone-test-octavia/401ad82/job-output.txt 14:56:41 <spotz> Oh wait did we ever hear back from CentOS about the release? 14:56:46 <ykarel> chandankumar, ack please check and try to bump that as per version of httpx 14:56:54 <ykarel> spotz, nope 14:57:11 <ykarel> amoralej even sent the mail on #centos-devel but still no response 14:57:37 <chandankumar> amoralej: how we get sources_gpg_sign in the spec file? 14:57:46 <chandankumar> ykarel: ack 14:57:48 <spotz> Ok 14:58:28 <amoralej> chandankumar, wdym ? 14:58:46 <chandankumar> amoralej: regarding this value https://github.com/rdo-packages/ansible-role-chrony-distgit/blob/rpm-master/ansible-role-chrony.spec#L2 14:59:04 <amoralej> ah 14:59:10 <amoralej> from openstack web page 14:59:12 <amoralej> gimme a while 14:59:25 <ykarel> hmm for wallaby it's updated 14:59:39 <chandankumar> ykarel: do we update it manually? 14:59:47 <chandankumar> or does tooling takes care of that? 15:00:06 <amoralej> chandankumar, manually so far 15:00:07 <ykarel> chandankumar, yes manual 15:00:18 <amoralej> but at some point we may want to update automatically 15:00:26 <amoralej> as they rotate the key every release 15:00:34 <ykarel> Ok we are out of time, Thanks all 15:00:44 <ykarel> #endmeeting