14:01:20 <dhellmann> #startmeeting releaseteam
14:01:21 <openstack> Meeting started Fri Jan 22 14:01:20 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dhellmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:01:22 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:01:24 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'
14:01:37 <dhellmann> #info this is week R-11
14:01:45 <dhellmann> our agenda is in the etherpad as usual
14:01:46 <dhellmann> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-relmgt-plan
14:02:05 <dhellmann> #topic ttx to review release models for obvious errors
14:02:23 <dhellmann> wow, lots of discrepancies
14:02:27 <ttx> had a bit of a fun moment this morning going through them all
14:02:31 <ttx> soo
14:02:45 <ttx> monasca is completely off
14:03:05 <dhellmann> sigh
14:03:05 <ttx> it has a large monasca deliverable in milestones mode
14:03:21 <ttx> but it releases piecemeal with different version numbers
14:03:40 <ttx> *and* of course doesn't sync openstack/releases
14:03:52 <ttx> looks like they need "the talk"
14:04:02 <dhellmann> shall we draw straws?
14:04:15 <ttx> I'm away next week
14:04:22 <dhellmann> ok, I'll get in touch with rolland
14:04:38 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann talk to monasca team about releases
14:04:45 <ttx> next, we have a few neutron stadium projects
14:05:01 <ttx> which use the milestones model, except they missed m1 and m2
14:05:22 <ttx> networking-ovn, octavia, vmware-nsx
14:05:42 <ttx> those should probably just switch to intermediary
14:05:49 <dhellmann> yeah, I don't know if that makes them cycle-with-intermediary or just that they've missed a deadline
14:05:59 <ttx> we should ping mestery and align
14:06:21 <ttx> A few things did mitaka-1 but missed mitaka-2
14:06:40 <ttx> That would be *astara* and murano-apps
14:06:50 <ttx> could be harmless
14:07:02 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann talk to mestery about networking-ovn, octavia, vmware-nsx
14:07:05 <ttx> is cycle-with-intermediary but did milestones: freezern searchlight and aodh
14:07:15 <ttx> fix for freezer is already in
14:07:30 <dhellmann> ok, I'll propose changing the tags for those others
14:07:40 <ttx> yeah, and get the ptl +2
14:07:44 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann change searchlight and aodh to cycle-with-intermediary
14:07:55 <dhellmann> maybe we should add some validation for tag type and release model
14:08:05 <dhellmann> I didn't want to do that, but I haven't been doing the manual checking either
14:08:37 <ttx> then there is a bunch of "intermediary" projects that haven't done a release yet. Probably nothing to worry about, but we should keep an eye on those
14:08:45 <ttx> we kinda want at least one
14:09:18 <ttx> if senlin just posted an m2, they got the wrong model, too
14:10:08 <ttx> we have three that are still marked independent but may want to be intermediary to be able to say "mitaka": magnum, cue and rally
14:10:30 <ttx> I pinged Adrian yesterday and he said he would do it
14:10:35 <ttx> but still nothing
14:10:45 <dhellmann> I left a comment on the senlin release request
14:11:06 <dhellmann> ok, I think the magnum team has had enough opportunities
14:11:11 <ttx> finally, we have a few that follow cycle, did tags but did not have the corresponding releases change
14:11:44 <dhellmann> so they tagged, but didn't file an update in the releases repo?
14:11:57 <ttx> I think we'll have those as long as we don't reclaim tagging rights
14:12:04 <ttx> yeah
14:12:08 <dhellmann> yeah, I'm not too worried about that
14:12:34 <dhellmann> I really want to get the automation done so we can just use the repo for all releases starting next cycle, but this cycle we're going to have missing info
14:12:53 <dhellmann> I'll send a general email, though
14:13:07 <ttx> for magnum if they file before the end of my day today I'll take them -- takes time to go through the governance repo anyway
14:13:10 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann send email encouraging independent projects to record their releases in the releases repository
14:13:29 <dhellmann> ttx: yeah, I told everyone else the deadline was yesterday
14:13:31 <ttx> dhellmann: alternatively we could just take away tagging perms
14:13:44 <dhellmann> how many times have you had to ask magnum to fix their settings?
14:13:53 <ttx> that would avoid crazy tags like 2.0.0b2
14:13:54 <dhellmann> take away perms from whom?
14:14:12 <ttx> official project teams
14:14:23 <ttx> force them all to go through the repo
14:14:25 <dhellmann> so far we've only done that for managed projects, but we could think about extending it to all official projects
14:14:36 <ttx> magnum ? I think 3 times
14:14:53 <ttx> the -dev email, a personal email, irc ping
14:15:02 <dhellmann> did you go to their meeting?
14:15:05 <dhellmann> *didn't
14:15:48 <ttx> oh yes, that too
14:15:56 <dhellmann> so 4
14:15:57 <ttx> so 4
14:16:06 <ttx> we could also fix it for them
14:16:11 <ttx> since they said yes
14:16:18 <dhellmann> did they file a release request for m2?
14:16:25 <dhellmann> I suppose we could
14:16:28 <ttx> they are intermediary
14:16:39 <dhellmann> ah, ok
14:16:43 <ttx> they said yes in the logged meeting
14:16:46 <dhellmann> yeah, let's just fix it for them
14:16:53 <ttx> I'll file it
14:16:54 <dhellmann> I didn't realize we'd had a response at all
14:16:55 <dhellmann> ok
14:17:12 <ttx> #action ttx to file the magnum fix today
14:17:31 <dhellmann> they don't have the managed tag, do we need to add that or do they want to stay unmanaged?
14:17:38 <ttx> so I'll put in bold things we need to fix IMHO
14:17:54 <ttx> stay unmanaged, they are not eeven cose to being responsive enough
14:17:56 <ttx> close*
14:18:03 <dhellmann> yeah
14:18:41 <ttx> I would ignore the rest for the time being
14:19:00 <ttx> missed m2, no big deal, will tell them a lesson
14:19:03 <dhellmann> yeah, I'll send email encouraging intermediary projects to file releases if they haven't already
14:19:12 <ttx> no release yet for intermediary: not yet time to panick
14:19:25 <dhellmann> and the ones who forgot to publish to releases repo
14:19:34 <ttx> cue and rally as independent -- they don't really claim to make a mitaka release so I'm fine with that
14:19:35 <dhellmann> but I won't try to chase down individual liaisons
14:19:56 <ttx> and the things which don't publish to releases... that's bound to happen all the time
14:20:03 <ttx> until we take away tagging
14:20:10 <dhellmann> right
14:20:21 <dhellmann> cue and rally are both independent, so that's fine
14:22:14 <ttx> alrighty
14:22:19 <ttx> I think I should script this
14:22:27 <ttx> or develop a check test
14:22:47 <dhellmann> yeah, let's add some tests to the validator in the repo
14:23:19 <dhellmann> no beta tags unless they have cycle-with-milestones and release:independent can't be in a named series directory
14:23:29 <ttx> yep
14:24:28 <dhellmann> it would also be useful to have a script to scan all cycle-with-milestone projects to find ones that haven't added a given beta tag (with an input like "mitaka 2")
14:24:51 <dhellmann> that's more complex, though, and the checks are more important
14:25:33 <dhellmann> we do have some release requests for intermediary projects that haven't been processed. I was going to wait and do those Monday, to avoid introducing new versions of libs into the already overloaded gate.
14:26:04 <dhellmann> the same for the liberty stable releases
14:26:13 <ttx> yep
14:26:28 <ttx> I only caught the most obvious stuff here
14:26:44 <dhellmann> #info waiting for monday to release cycle-with-intermediary projects to avoid introducing new libs into the gate
14:26:53 <dhellmann> #info waiting for monday to tag liberty stable releases
14:27:10 <dhellmann> alright, is there anything else we need to discuss about the milestone?
14:27:46 <ttx> not really
14:27:46 <dhellmann> #topic Release tag changes
14:27:57 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/259392 (sahara-test)
14:27:57 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269858 (manila-ui)
14:27:57 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/271203 (freezer) + deliverable issue
14:27:58 <ttx> https://review.openstack.org/271318 <-- magnum change
14:28:03 <dhellmann> do those just need reviews?
14:28:14 <ttx> and maybe a bit of discussion
14:29:01 <dhellmann> shall we do that now? or in the reviews?
14:29:20 <ttx> no hurry
14:29:32 <ttx> I just wanted to flag them to attention
14:29:37 <dhellmann> ok, I'll leave some comments today
14:29:44 <ttx> oh, on the freezer one
14:30:01 <ttx> they declared two deliverables, but I think it should be one
14:30:12 <ttx> freezer and freezer-api
14:30:20 <dhellmann> ah, right, I saw that discussion
14:30:21 <dhellmann> I'll file a follow-up
14:30:40 <ttx> it would be more consistent with how other services show up
14:30:51 <dhellmann> I wonder if they were concerned about the type:service tag not being right for the freezer repo?
14:31:14 <dhellmann> I can't remember, can we have repo-specific tags? or just for deliverables?
14:31:31 <ttx> deliverables
14:31:45 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann file governance change to merge freezer deliverables for consistency
14:31:48 <ttx> it's basically the same thing, split across a number of repos
14:31:55 <dhellmann> yeah, that's what it seemed
14:32:09 <ttx> as it stands, only freezer-api would have the service tag
14:32:15 <dhellmann> we should add a check for that, too -- things in the governance repo as a deliverable should be in the same deliverable in our repo
14:32:35 <ttx> but the way everyone else does it is to ship the api node together with the other nodes
14:32:39 <dhellmann> although that might cause problems when someone adds a new repo
14:32:52 <ttx> that way the "service" also happens to be the main repo
14:32:55 <dhellmann> that makes sense
14:32:59 <ttx> err.. deliverable
14:33:19 <ttx> anyway, more consistent to bundle them.
14:33:24 <dhellmann> noted
14:33:32 <ttx> and if they follow milestones, an easy constraint
14:33:50 <ttx> since they already release at the same time
14:33:56 <ttx> with same version number
14:34:06 <dhellmann> you can merge https://review.openstack.org/#/c/271203/1 and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269858/1 and I'll file that follow-up
14:34:11 <dhellmann> I need to look at the other 2 more closely
14:34:21 <dhellmann> oh, wait, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/271318/1 looks fine
14:34:32 <dhellmann> so it's just the sahara-tests thing I need to look at
14:34:47 <ttx> 271203 I'll have to wait for the official cooling period
14:35:03 <ttx> 269858 same
14:35:05 <dhellmann> hmm, ok
14:35:24 <ttx> only the sahara one is old enough I think
14:35:46 <dhellmann> that one has vulnerability:managed with no comment from fungi
14:36:07 <dhellmann> oh, actually, a previous version has a -1
14:36:14 <ttx> yeah which is why I left it standing
14:36:51 <dhellmann> ok
14:37:02 <dhellmann> so let's move on
14:37:05 <fungi> i can refresh my -1 if needed
14:37:20 <dhellmann> fungi : good idea, I left a non-voting comment
14:37:27 <dhellmann> #topic URL structure of releases.openstack.org
14:37:48 <dhellmann> I filed some infra changes to move docs.o.o/releases to releases.o.o/
14:38:06 <dhellmann> then I saw ttx comment somewhere (email chain or IRC, I'm not sure) about having signed tarballs on the same subdomain
14:38:38 <dhellmann> I wonder if that means we need to make any changes to the move I've already proposed? or if it would be fine to have releases.o.o/downloads (or something) coming from somewhere other than the openstack/releases repository?
14:38:43 <ttx> did I?
14:38:59 <dhellmann> yeah, that's why I wanted this on the agenda today, it came up this week
14:39:15 <dhellmann> it's very likely I just misunderstood what you were saying
14:39:29 <ttx> I think it's fine to have links to tarballs.o.o in releases.o.o
14:39:51 <ttx> especially since there are a lot more tarballs than there are releases
14:39:56 <dhellmann> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-January/084548.html
14:40:01 <dhellmann> ttx: that was your comment ^^
14:40:11 <dhellmann> "We are working on moving all that to https://releases.openstack.org and implement artifact GPG signing as well."
14:40:27 <ttx> oh, I didn't mean moving tarballs
14:40:28 <dhellmann> maybe by "all that" you just meant the launchpad milestones?
14:40:38 <ttx> yeah, "release links"
14:40:45 <dhellmann> ok, cool, I just misunderstood then
14:40:49 <dhellmann> that's why I wanted to clarify :-)
14:40:59 <ttx> oops sorry
14:41:08 <ttx> I can see how that was confusing
14:41:27 <ttx> all that = docs.o.o/releases
14:41:48 <ttx> and the links within, not the tarballs themselves
14:41:49 <dhellmann> ok, so we'll continue with the existing plan
14:41:55 <ttx> dhellmann: +1
14:42:31 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:releases-openstack-org
14:42:33 <dhellmann> for anyone following along
14:43:17 <dhellmann> #topic open discussion
14:43:23 <dhellmann> that's all we have on the agenda, is there anything else we need to talk about?
14:43:32 <ttx> about url structure, we could avoid the "releases" redundancy
14:43:37 <dhellmann> ttx: are you out next friday? we can skip the meeting
14:43:50 <dhellmann> yes, the proposal is to publish to the root of releases.o.o
14:43:58 <ttx> releases.o.o/mitaka instead of releases.o.o/releases/mitaka
14:44:02 <dhellmann> right
14:44:15 <ttx> hmm
14:44:16 <dhellmann> I need to fix the existing patch to use the proper publisher, but that's the goal
14:44:41 <ttx> currently we have docs.o.o/releases/releases/mitaka so I was wondering how many levels that would remove
14:44:55 <dhellmann> oh, I see what you mean
14:45:02 <ttx> I bet we'd keep one
14:45:06 <dhellmann> yes, it will
14:45:11 <dhellmann> we can remove the other with a patch in our own repo
14:45:20 <ttx> yeah
14:45:26 <ttx> that would look better in links
14:45:29 <dhellmann> though maybe we want that to be "series" instead of "releases"
14:45:32 <dhellmann> and keep the level
14:45:38 <dhellmann> that way we can have "schedules" etc.
14:45:50 <ttx> the issue is we have schedules/
14:45:55 <dhellmann> or I guess we could put the schedule in the series dir
14:46:07 <dhellmann> so /mitaka/index.hml and /mitaka/schedule.html
14:46:11 <ttx> and instructions.rst
14:46:25 <ttx> yeah
14:46:38 <dhellmann> ok, I'll work on reorganizing the content where it is
14:47:03 <ttx> we need to do that before we communicate those urls too much
14:47:08 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann reorganize releases repository to clean up urls
14:47:11 <dhellmann> yeah, I'll do it today
14:47:11 <ttx> are stuck with them :)
14:47:46 <ttx> that said the urls I just send for m2 point to releases/releases/mitaka
14:47:46 <dhellmann> I can leave some stub pages in place for now, that we can delete later
14:47:49 <dhellmann> "this page moved to ..."
14:48:04 <ttx> yeah , would win extra points
14:48:15 <dhellmann> and we can delete them after we move to the new subdomain
14:48:42 <ttx> sorry I"m not signing up for a lot of work because I'll likely not be able to do any next week ;)
14:48:53 <dhellmann> yeah, no problem, it will give me something to do ;-)
14:49:12 <ttx> feel free to procrastinate and assign me again next week.
14:49:20 <dhellmann> noted
14:49:57 <ttx> I'll be on a plane at meeting time next week
14:50:08 <dhellmann> ok, so we'll skip the meeting next week
14:50:10 <ttx> or in a car just out of a plane
14:50:18 <ttx> fine by me
14:50:19 <dhellmann> #action dhellmann announce no release team meeting next week
14:50:45 <dhellmann> if that's all we need to discuss, I'll use the remaining 10 minutes to file some of those patches
14:50:56 <ttx> and me to pack
14:51:03 <dhellmann> enjoy the off-site!
14:51:06 <ttx> ttyl!
14:51:16 <dhellmann> #endmeeting