14:00:26 #startmeeting releaseteam 14:00:27 Meeting started Fri Dec 4 14:00:26 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dhellmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:31 The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam' 14:00:35 courtesy ping: ttx, jokke_, dims, lifeless 14:00:43 o/ 14:00:59 o/ 14:01:10 our meeting agenda is in the R-18 section of https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-relmgt-plan 14:01:43 #topic actions from last week 14:01:51 1. dhellmann work on announce script 14:02:10 that work has merged, but there's still a remaining step to add reno notes to the output for projects using reno 14:02:19 I'll be looking at that next week 14:02:34 that's the only thing I had as actions from last week, did I miss anything? 14:02:51 ok, moving on 14:02:52 #topic Finalize m-1 14:03:12 we have zaqar's request and it looks like their gate is fixed now? 14:03:26 the gate was in bad shape this morning 14:03:26 the mistral team forgot to request a tag for mistral-dashboard, and they've asked what they should do 14:03:34 well, bad shape.. it allowed everything in 14:03:43 so maybe the zaqar tests were lucky 14:03:52 oh, wow, ouch 14:04:26 so the question then is, do we go ahead and tag these projects? 14:04:31 mistral-dashboard ? is it part of the mistral deliverable ? 14:04:43 that's not clear 14:04:50 dhellmann: there is still time, haven't sent anyu annoucement 14:05:00 * ttx checks 14:05:18 how far is zaqar ? 14:05:48 yeah, so mistral-dashboard is a separate deliverable 14:05:54 but also release:cycle-with-milestones 14:06:06 it should probably be in the same deliverable actually 14:06:07 they added the unreleased page for reno and have their release request submitted on time 14:06:16 unless they really can't do, say, RCs at the same time 14:06:56 ok, so zaqar is all set ? I think we should include it 14:07:09 I'm tempted to hold firm on the deadline and not tag either, but I don't know if that's too punitive 14:07:29 they submitted in time, and we could fix them before the announcement 14:08:09 stern warning? :) 14:08:19 ok, I guess that's fair. They did have a long time to add reno, but left it until the last minute. 14:08:36 dims : yeah, I'll talk to flwang 14:08:46 "almost missed" 14:08:52 ok, so zaqar is in, what about mistral-dashboard? 14:09:10 when did the tag come in ? 14:09:22 they haven't submitted it yet, I have a private email asking me what they should do 14:09:28 oh then well 14:09:31 I'd say no 14:10:23 if only because I want to announce in the next 20 min 14:10:45 yeah, I'll reply back that we should sort out whether that is the same deliverable or a separate one before M2 and that it won't be included in M1 14:10:52 o/ ... bit late 14:10:56 ttx: ok, do you want to go ahead and handle zaqar? 14:11:07 that way you can announce as soon as it's done 14:11:14 also they are not release:managed so I don't feel as much responsibility to them 14:11:23 yep will start the process in parallel 14:11:45 dhellmann: waiting for your +2 14:12:04 done 14:12:16 I see that murano has gone ahead and tagged their m1 and have submitted a patch after the fact to record it 14:12:46 and they don't have the setup.cfg version cleanup 14:12:47 dhellmann: yes, well, since we're not release:managed I figured that'd be the correct way to do it 14:12:49 we did that at the end of liberty, so I suppose it's ok to do that for milestones, once they complete the remaining steps 14:13:22 kzaitsev_mb : yes, no problem, we're just talking things through 14:13:52 kzaitsev_mb : see ttx's comments on the patch for some other things we need you to do 14:14:21 I see, that we need to remove versions from setup.cfg. would do that as soon as the gate gets back in order, currently working on that ) 14:14:26 ok, thanks, will do. 14:14:31 kzaitsev_mb : great, thanks! 14:14:44 #topic retrospective on M1 14:14:46 not sure if I should include that in the announcement 14:14:56 #undo 14:14:57 Removing item from minutes: 14:15:10 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/m1-announcement 14:15:23 I was wondering if I should add the links to release notes 14:15:38 but I decided against it since the release notes are not mitaka-1 specific 14:15:52 and may already include more than what is in mitaka-1 14:16:03 yeah, that's the same reason I didn't include links in the releases repo for mitaka, either 14:16:21 comments on that ? should we merge the murano request and include it here ? 14:16:29 as far as the announcement, maybe it makes sense to focus on managed projects this time? 14:16:46 I thought we could encourage others following the process 14:16:50 I guess I'm +0 on including it 14:16:57 ah, sure, that's a good point 14:17:01 ok, +1 14:17:29 so do we want to go ahead and merge the patch now, or wait until the other work is prepared? 14:17:40 ah, hm. 14:17:57 I guess we should skip murano since it's not ready at announcement time. 14:18:18 I want them all to appear in http://docs.openstack.org/releases/releases/mitaka.html and would rather not merge the release request until they are clean 14:18:26 yeah, we have to draw the line somewhere 14:18:36 I agree, I want everything recorded, even if we're not doing the tagging for them 14:18:48 again, give encouragement to those who followed the guidelines you sent 14:18:50 maybe we should announce that formally 14:19:34 I expect some other projects to have pushed a random 0b1 tag while we were looking the other way 14:19:35 ++ 14:20:01 #action dhellmann send email encouraging unmanaged projects to record their m1 releases in the releases repository 14:20:27 ok, so do we have anything else to add to the announcement email ? 14:20:31 * ttx adds zaqar 14:21:15 I assume you've already made the complete list of projects based on the tracking etherpad 14:22:04 what you have looks good, so I don't have anything to add 14:22:05 I actually extracted it from http://docs.openstack.org/releases/releases/mitaka.html this morning 14:22:20 with way too much manual juice 14:22:31 I had intended to write a script to read the yaml files, but didn't get to it yesterday 14:22:36 once we agree on format I can automate it 14:22:50 what you have looks pretty good to me 14:23:04 ok, I'll let the post-merge publish job run first and send the announcement asap 14:23:11 ++ 14:23:15 is there anything else on this topic before we move on? 14:23:18 nope 14:23:30 #topic retrospective on M1 14:23:43 I was pleased with the way most of the milestone worked out 14:23:56 we only had a couple of liaisons show up asking "what is reno?" this week 14:24:12 most projects had it integrated with time to spare before tagging their milestone 14:24:18 and one also showing up not being subscribed to [release] emails 14:24:25 maybe the same 14:24:41 yes, that person fell into my "couple" aggregation 14:25:03 I also had someone say they were behind on reading the messages, but that they did have them going to a special folder 14:25:11 I was actually surprised everyone had their reno ducks mostly in line 14:25:22 yes, me, too 14:25:37 and also that the rather complex instructions were mostly followed. So good point 14:25:40 there's still some confusion about how it works, and I think part of that is due to the bug that mtreinish and bknudson found related to merge commits 14:25:57 oh well, that's what a m-1 is for 14:25:59 because sometimes merged notes are being missed entirely 14:26:26 I'm actually very happy we could get most of the thing in place before the m-1 week 14:26:37 yeah, I tried to keep things simple but at some point it was just necessary to start educating folks 14:26:41 we'll review what we missed and still need to do in a few 14:26:52 right 14:26:54 but it doesn't feel like that much 14:27:19 do you think the countdown emails are helping? 14:27:22 we should watch those setup.cfg removal merges as well 14:27:46 I think they more clearly put the blame for not following onto the liaison 14:27:57 #link retrospective on M1 14:27:59 oops 14:28:01 #undo 14:28:02 Removing item from minutes: 14:28:02 so yeah, I think the countdown emails are helping 14:28:09 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:remove-version-from-setup,n,z 14:28:34 * dhellmann may need to restart his browser 14:29:38 ok, moving on 14:29:40 #topic status review of all projects listed at the top of this etherpad 14:29:56 I went through these items this morning to try to spot the ones that were completed 14:30:20 the lists are growing long enough that I think we need a better way to highlight TODO vs notes, so I'm going to go back through and add TODO to lines that are actions we need to take 14:30:36 ok, let's start with " enabling new model for milestones" 14:30:39 now that we're past m1, I'll also unbold those things 14:35:43 ok, I think the first one looks good 14:35:56 yep, let's look at stable branches 14:37:26 when does that election close? early next week? 14:37:32 so on the stable part we may ned to start encouraging releases there before the end of month 14:37:45 yeah, election closes Tuesday 14:37:49 we have a bunch of stable releases queued up for review, actually 14:37:56 then I push the governance patch 14:37:56 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/dashboard/?foreach=is%3Aopen&title=Releases+Inbox&mitaka=project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases+file%3A%5Edeliverables%2Fmitaka%2F.%2A&liberty=project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases+file%3A%5Edeliverables%2Fliberty%2F.%2A&kilo=project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases+file%3A%5Edeliverables%2Fkilo%2F.%2A&juno=project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases+file%3A%5Edeliverables%2Fjuno%2F.%2A&independent=project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases+file%3A%5Ed 14:37:57 eliverables%2F_independent%2F.%2A&all+releases=is%3Aopen+project%3Aopenstack%2Freleases&tools=project%3Aopenstack%2Dinfra%2Frelease%2Dtools 14:38:00 oh, ugh, too long 14:38:14 #link http://bit.ly/1jDpuk8 14:38:34 yeah, I'm more concerned about those not queued for review yet. But agree we may need to process those first :) 14:38:41 yeah :-) 14:39:04 I've been including reminders in the countdown emails, but maybe a separate email would make sense 14:39:09 with m1 behind us we'll have more time to finalize the hand-off there 14:39:16 right 14:39:28 comms overhaul ? 14:40:06 looking good 14:40:13 post versioning 14:40:28 that's going pretty well, too 14:40:31 yep 14:40:41 we might want to add a task to track stragglers 14:40:44 we should encourage unmanaged teams to remove the version line 14:41:12 also what did we decide for end of cycle / start of new one ? Should just work ? 14:41:31 i.E. no need to put a version line back for handling the first commits ? 14:41:56 yeah, lifeless convinced me that folks should only be tracking a single branch in a given environment, so the fact that we have 2 commits in different branches with the same version is not a problem 14:42:30 ok, automation ? 14:42:36 yep 14:43:30 I have some comments on that spec I need to reply to. I'll try to do that today 14:43:58 fungi and I talked about it earlier this week, and it's on the agenda for the infra team to review next tuesday, so I have that as a deadline 14:44:39 next up, dropping launchpad 14:46:46 release status page, nobody complained about it. I should probably phase it out 14:47:40 do you think folks will look at that after the milestone announcement? 14:47:55 well let's see 14:48:01 I won't remove it tomorrow anyway 14:49:07 yeah 14:49:28 dhellmann: I propose we update the rest of them another week, I think we cover all the critical/urgent ones 14:49:35 sounds good 14:49:38 oh, maybe the reno stuff 14:50:00 what happened 14:50:09 I just move reno up 14:50:23 oh, some of the formatting below it looks off now 14:50:26 there we go 14:51:14 ok, let's move on to the next agenda item then 14:51:21 #topic Update on current library release process 14:51:26 ttx, you added this? 14:51:29 yeah, that's one of mine 14:51:45 Wanted an update on how we do lib releases with the changes in tooling 14:51:58 (if the doc is still up to date, it's fine to tell me to rtfm 14:52:00 ) 14:52:03 the only thing I did differently was run announce.sh after running release.sh 14:52:17 still haven't really done one yet and you'll be away the coming weeks, so better be up to date 14:52:26 to run announce.sh I had to update my local sandbox to get the new tag 14:53:04 I thought about creating a wrapper for announce.sh like announce_by_hand.sh and letting that do a clone, like release.sh does 14:53:36 but it's just 3 or 4 commands, so it wasn't a big deal to do it by hand 14:53:40 dhellmann: should we update the top paragraph on release-tools README to also cover libs ? 14:54:02 yeah, that's a good idea, esp. now that release_postversion.sh isn't the right tool 14:54:10 I'll take a look at that 14:54:19 #action dhellmann update library release instructions in readme 14:54:21 some of it is on the releases repo too 14:54:38 but it's actually simpler to update the release-tools README as we push new tooling 14:54:52 ok, I'll look at the releases repo instructions, too 14:54:53 #undo 14:54:54 Removing item from minutes: 14:55:04 #action dhellmann update library release instructions in release-tools and releases repositories 14:55:15 ok, ping me when done and I can be the guinea pig for testing the instructions at least once 14:55:27 sounds good, I think we have a library release request up as a matter of fact 14:55:38 #topic open discussion 14:55:47 is there anything else we need to talk about in the last 5 minutes? 14:55:51 dhellmann: just one ? 14:55:53 :) 14:56:06 nothing comes to mind 14:56:10 oh, I was thinking of mistralclient but we haev some stable releases, too 14:56:22 docs.o.o/releases still not updated 14:56:32 :-( 14:56:39 so that is a good topic of discussion 14:57:02 the release process is still dependent on post-jobs with lower priorities 14:57:03 ttx: it would be good to get your input on https://review.openstack.org/250038 14:57:20 are all post jobs low priority, or just the ones for releases? 14:57:32 well, it's a bit complex 14:57:42 tarball jobs generally run as a generic post-job (low prio) 14:57:44 * dhellmann thinks that's the best description of openstack development ever 14:57:47 except when triggered by a tag 14:58:08 in which case they end up in specific queues (pre-release and release) 14:58:27 However openstack/releases postjobs are run in the general pipeline 14:58:34 so those are run with lowest prio 14:58:43 any chance that it's caused by the issues with jenkins masters infra is battling? 14:58:45 it sounds like that's adjustable, though? 14:58:50 executed when nothing else requires resources" 14:59:00 which can easily take a few hours 14:59:19 yeah, if we can increase the priority we should bump it up some -- ttx, can you handle that? 14:59:34 dhellmann: one does not simply.. bump a postjob priority 14:59:45 oh, it's not just a configuration setting? 15:00:00 nope, you may have to define a completely separate pipeline 15:00:05 guh 15:00:14 anyway, something we should probably look into 15:00:18 yeah 15:00:22 since we have grown that dependency which wasn't there before 15:00:34 I'll add it somewhere on the etherpad 15:00:37 ok, thanks 15:00:51 we're out of time, and I have a real-space interruption about to happen so I'm going to call the meeting 15:01:17 good teamwork this milestone! 15:01:26 #endmeeting