15:00:04 #startmeeting releaseteam 15:00:05 Meeting started Fri Feb 9 15:00:04 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:08 The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam' 15:00:18 Ping list: dhellmann, dims, fungi, tonyb, lbragstad, ttx, armstrong 15:00:24 o/ 15:00:34 Hello 15:00:54 o/ 15:01:10 / 15:01:13 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/queens-relmgt-tracking Agenda 15:01:21 Looks like we are around line 431 15:01:43 armstrong: Will you be able to attend the PTG? 15:02:12 I didn’t get air ticket to come 15:02:21 I would have loved to 15:02:36 armstrong: OK, that's too bad. Was thinking it would be a good time to show you some things. 15:02:56 armstrong: And would be nice to meet. But by no means necessary. :) 15:02:58 howdy 15:03:09 OK, let's get started. 15:03:19 #topic Pipeline 15:03:34 I went through the list to check what was blocked and why 15:03:36 I'll wait to talk about the photo. Just added that on there so I wouldn't forget. 15:03:56 There are a couple in that list which we could unblock ourselves 15:04:06 keystone 15:04:15 devstack-plugin-container 15:04:18 lbragstad: Do you think you will need an rc2? 15:04:25 tacker-horizon 15:04:31 lbragstad approved that patch, didn't he? so it's going to merge into keystone? 15:04:39 yes 15:04:49 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/541567/3 15:04:59 lbragstad : should we wait for a new rc1 then? 15:05:05 or go ahead and have an rc2 later? 15:05:21 i'm working on a bug that would be nice to get included into queens 15:05:30 but it's not a release stopper 15:05:32 so there will be a rc2 anyway 15:05:33 That sounds like an RC2 then. 15:05:37 ok, if you're going to have an rc2 anyway we might as well go ahead with this one 15:05:42 ok approving 15:05:45 yeah 15:05:49 thanks, lbragstad 15:06:04 done 15:06:11 no problem, thanks pinging the translations review 15:06:26 devstack-plugin-container I can fast-track governance 15:06:35 which would unblock it 15:06:42 That one seems trivial enough. 15:06:47 yeah, that seems ok 15:06:55 * lbragstad had a question about release notes, but he'll wait until open discussion 15:07:30 lbragstad: Eh, just go ahead now I guess. :) 15:07:54 smcginnis: dhellmann https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540906/ 15:07:56 i was curious about my comment here - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/542385/4/deliverables/queens/keystone.yaml 15:08:09 if you +1 that review I'll fasttrack it 15:08:13 Done 15:08:37 lbragstad: Oh, sorry, I thought I responded to that. 15:08:48 ttx: done 15:08:57 lbragstad: It ends up with the validation it has to be added after branching, otherwise 15:09:13 you can add a link to the unreleased.html page until then and update after. 15:09:22 ok 15:09:40 or i can just add the release-notes link directly to queens in the rc2 proposal? 15:09:42 lbragstad: But not sure if we need the cycle-highlights linking to the release notes. 15:09:57 lbragstad: Yeah, that would be a good time. 15:09:58 OK governance opatch approved, release patch rebased 15:10:28 i was trying to do what mriedem was doing here - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/542459/3/deliverables/queens/nova.yaml 15:10:52 that leaves tacker-horizon... for which we could push teh project-config patch 15:11:06 but yeah - that makes sense, nova's is tracking unreleased.. 15:11:07 lbragstad: OK, good. I'm sure Anne can give us feedback later when we see how this first time around goes. 15:11:11 lbragstad : we will run a tool to add/update all of the release note links as part of our end-of-cycle process 15:11:23 oh, maybe that's something different? 15:11:25 I'll approve mistral since the proposer is the liaison 15:11:42 Thanks :) 15:11:48 err, it's workflow-1 now 15:12:01 I think it's probably safe to approve ceilometer-powervm, too, since the interaction with that team is minimal 15:12:13 yeah 15:12:17 dhellmann: That's what I was thinking too. 15:12:24 Let's pile up 15:12:39 We could track down Gordon, but I know he was only doing it because we pressured him. ;) 15:12:45 right 15:13:06 Neutron did contact me yesterday asking for a little more time. 15:13:13 dhellmann: smcginnis if we all +2 that shall pass 15:13:25 I think they expected to have things squared away this morning (my morning). 15:13:48 technically jd__ is back to being ptl for telemetry anyway 15:13:50 I approved the ceilometer-powervm release 15:14:01 fungi : that doesn't apply to releases for this cycle, though 15:14:03 or at least will be after release 15:14:06 right 15:14:06 yeah, that 15:14:24 dhellmann: shall we push the project-config patch for tacker-horizon? 15:14:38 noting that he intended to be ptl last time and gordc stood in for him because he wasn't available to post his nomination 15:15:10 was travelling or something like that 15:15:17 yep 15:15:31 ttx: maybe? I'm always more inclined to let teams feel a little pain when they don't pay attention to these things. 15:15:49 dhellmann: they won't fix it before Monday now, due to tz 15:15:56 otoh, with all of the turmoil with the zuulv3 transition and those jobs being changed... 15:16:01 if we are fine waiting until then, then ok 15:16:28 I'm fine going ahead if you all want to. I can propose the patch, but expect to be leaving here in about 90 minutes so I won't be able to watch it for failures 15:16:31 My thinking is the same as dhellmann. With flexibility lately do to external factors. 15:16:47 dhellmann: I'll pick it up if you can't follow up 15:17:11 smcginnis: that is all we can affect at this point imho 15:17:19 just a reminder, but if there are any release-blocker infra patches, please do give me a heads-up/reminder and i'll prioritize them 15:17:21 (in Pipeline) 15:17:26 https://review.openstack.org/542879 15:17:56 Mistral is good now, right? 15:18:15 d0ugal just workflowed-1 it 15:18:28 ttx: That was somehow on the last patchset rev. 15:18:34 ttx: that was PS1 15:18:40 ah ok 15:18:42 he proposed a new patch which has passed the checs 15:18:43 checks 15:18:58 yeah, sorry for the confusion, I noticed we were missing a bug fix that just landed. 15:19:01 approved 15:19:13 d0ugal : good call, saves potentially needing an rc2 15:19:26 yeah, hopefully :) 15:20:01 smcginnis: shall we move to missing bits? 15:20:12 as we might need to decide on triggering those ourself 15:20:15 Yeah, was just taking one last look through. 15:20:23 #topic Missing RCs 15:20:32 Anyone hear anything from these teams? 15:21:08 EmilienM : what's up with tripleo-quickstart? 15:21:17 Was just typing that. :) 15:21:19 ricolin : is heat going to release as part of queens this cycle? 15:22:13 I don't see dave-mccowan for barbican 15:22:51 I can send out a ML post highlighting these and see if that gets those teams' attention. 15:23:05 looks like the searchlight-ui second rc made it through to pypi with both a wheel and an sdist 15:23:19 \o/ 15:23:55 Given the number we pushed through yesterday, I think our odd failure issue count is heading in the right direction. 15:24:15 smcginnis: I'll let you approve https://review.openstack.org/#/c/540570 since I rebased it 15:24:37 OK 15:24:49 I see Neutron pushed an update. 15:25:02 Hopefully they are ready, but neither one is in channel to ask. 15:26:09 @dhellmann: heat suppose to be an inter grail part of all OpenStack releases right? 15:26:27 armstrong : I think that depends on who you ask. 15:26:40 Anything else on the missing RCs? I will post to ML. If we don't hear from them... 15:26:41 the heat team will definitely say so ;) 15:26:58 True ;) 15:27:09 but yeah, I expect them to participate in the release 15:28:06 I'm a little surprised by Barbican and Heat. My impression was they are both fairly active projects right now. 15:28:09 So those are milestone-driven RC1s, for which we have traditionally be a bit flexible around RC1 time 15:28:26 So I would not force-tag them today 15:28:35 smcginnis : heat has given us this sort of issue in the past. I think the small size of the barbican team is probably causing that issue. 15:28:41 Force a final RC just prior to final release if they don't come around? 15:28:42 ideally they should communicate that they are working on ut 15:28:45 or it 15:29:03 Hopefully if I post something that will get attention. 15:29:12 smcginnis: it's worse than forcing it now tbh 15:29:20 Maybe force it next week 15:29:23 ttx: Oh, that's true. 15:29:28 say, tuesday? 15:29:32 Yeah, next week seems like a good balance. 15:29:33 yeah... 15:29:53 give them until Monday to propsoe one and/or ask formally for delay 15:29:54 #agreed Force RCs next Tuesday for missing projects 15:30:08 I'm fine waiting if we know they are aware they are pushing it 15:30:09 That should be enough time. 15:30:38 Yeah, if they contact us prior to then with a reason to delay, I'm fine with that too. 15:30:50 As long as it's not too much of a delay. 15:30:56 (and then stay on channel to keep us updated ) 15:31:00 ++ 15:31:07 ++ 15:31:10 what's up with patrole? that's the only other deliverable with no releases this cycle that we haven't talked about 15:31:30 Oh right. 15:31:32 * ttx is lost with all those special-cased QA deliverables 15:31:52 maybe that should be independent 15:32:07 they have 2 releases that aren't recorded at all 15:32:07 I would guess that's the case. 15:32:27 ok, we can clean that up 15:32:32 I don't see Andrea around, but we could ask in -qa. 15:32:40 I think we raised that question in the past... not sure what the outcome was 15:33:00 Maybe like forcing a release, we could force a switch to independent? 15:33:02 for sahara-extra... I think we are not in a hurry, they have a 6.0.0 and a stable/queens branch 15:33:39 smcginnis , ttx: I proposed a change to just delete the deliverable file for now 15:33:47 ++ 15:34:19 that leaves tripleo-quickstart 15:34:30 dhellmann: Do we also need to remove it from the repo list in governance/reference/projects.yaml? 15:34:39 s/Do we/Should we/ 15:34:48 smcginnis : no, it's still an official repo, we're just not managing the releases 15:35:00 I have a feeling -quickstart was just overlooked. 15:35:05 dhellmann: OK, makes sense. 15:35:37 tripleo-quickstart is cycle-trailing, so I wonder if they're waiting as long as possible to prepare a release 15:35:43 did we give a separate deadline for them? 15:35:53 Is it trailing? 15:35:56 * smcginnis looks again 15:36:06 trailing but intermediary-released? 15:36:13 yes 15:36:16 * ttx is still confised 15:36:18 u 15:36:19 this came up last cycle, too 15:36:27 Oh, it is cycle-trailing. Then that's OK, right? 15:36:40 they only did one release last cycle, too 15:36:47 oh well 15:36:55 let's say it's ok then 15:37:11 they aren't creating branches in that repo 15:37:30 I don't know anything about it, but a "quickstart" might be something that needs to be updated and released at the end after everything else is done. 15:37:42 I wonder if it should just be independent 15:38:03 it's some sort of bootstrap installer 15:38:08 It's a little early for EmilienM, but we can ask. 15:38:09 so yeah 15:38:19 hello 15:38:29 EmilienM: Good morning! 15:38:32 never too early for EmilienM 15:38:33 we need a section in these deliverable files for notes for us for "special handling instructions" 15:38:35 good morning release-managers 15:38:56 EmilienM: We were discussing tripleo-quickstart. 15:39:01 dhellmann: "handle with care" ? 15:39:08 dhellmann: "this side up" ? 15:39:09 * EmilienM invites weshay|ruck 15:39:11 EmilienM: Should that be independent? Or is it tied to a cycle? 15:39:22 hola 15:39:23 smcginnis: probably independent for now 15:39:24 And if the latter, should it be branching. 15:39:36 smcginnis: we're in discussion to branch tripleo-quickstart-extras 15:39:38 ttx: "deliveries around back" 15:39:46 ya.. when discussed yesterday we said independent 15:39:46 but not tripleo-quickstart 15:39:55 works for me 15:40:13 dhellmann: "keep dry" 15:40:17 EmilienM : would you update the releases repo, please? 15:40:22 ttx: "live animals" 15:40:26 dhellmann: doing it now 15:40:29 thanks! 15:40:40 dhellmann: "do not stack" 15:40:46 Thanks EmilienM, weshay|ruck. 15:40:52 ttx: "team lift" 15:41:01 :) 15:41:26 OK, anything else on missing RCs? 15:41:27 are you in a naming battle? 15:41:47 EmilienM: I think it's end of release week delirium. ;) 15:41:51 EmilienM : it's like a rap battle, but we're quoting boxes at each other 15:42:17 ... on IRC. Very nerdy rappers ;-) 15:42:24 Hah! 15:42:32 "Stack correctly" 15:42:40 #topic Issues 15:42:41 https://www.shutterstock.com/da/image-vector/set-packaging-symbols-this-side-up-330528794 15:43:02 ttx: if memory serves, the signs we saw on the pallets during the vancouver marketplace tour before the last summit there said "no stack!" 15:43:12 "Stacking limitation" 15:43:13 ttx: oh, you're cheating. I'm coming up with these from memory! 15:43:29 fungi : are you sure that wasn't KubeConf? 15:43:31 oooooh "Max Stack" 15:43:34 ouch 15:43:40 * smcginnis tries to remember some of the signs from Walking Dead 15:43:53 Haha, nice one. 15:44:07 OK, heat-translator... 15:44:11 dhellmann: i think they call it "kubageddon" now 15:44:27 This one apparently is a client lib? 15:44:36 so for heat-translator we need to get the heat team to ask the requirements team for that FFE or we're going to be in a weird state where we've released something that isn't in CI 15:44:47 dhellmann: no it was at OpenSTack Summit, although on a Oracle booth. 15:44:48 I can't tell if it's a client lib or a regular lib 15:44:56 we probably shouldn't have released it since it came after the deadline 15:45:01 ttx: zing 15:45:39 Yeah, we're kind of in a bad spot now with having a release that won't actually be picked up 15:46:09 yeah, we should probably have a separate email thread about that 15:46:20 + 15:46:25 or maybe we ask for the ffe ourselves? 15:47:05 Let's do that. 15:47:16 Since we've released it. 15:47:22 ok. I'm off to the airport shortly so can someone else do it? 15:47:29 I can send that with the other post. 15:47:33 ok, thanks, smcginnis 15:47:37 thanks 15:47:37 With, but separate. 15:47:41 ++ 15:48:06 And for Rocky, we need to sort this out before lib freeze time. I will mention that in there as well. 15:48:26 #topic PTG 15:48:39 There are going to be team photos again. 15:48:51 whatever happened to the pictures from denver? I haven't seen them. 15:49:02 I never know when to schedule these, because no matter what they will be a disription. 15:49:08 dhellmann: I was just wondering that. 15:49:12 yeah, the time you picked seems fine 15:49:13 I'm sure they are out there somewhere. 15:49:29 or we could do it on wednesday since I assume that's when we're getting together to tag the release 15:49:32 I figured right after the requirements team might at least be a little better. 15:49:56 oh, wednesday doesn't seem to be an option 15:50:06 Yeah. 15:50:11 thursday is better than tuesday for sure 15:50:14 Might be better to have that behind us too. 15:50:23 yeah, good point 15:50:39 Mon-Tue is usually pretty overbooked for this group anyway I think. 15:51:03 right 15:51:47 As far as tagging the release, I assume we'll just find a table somewhere relatively quiet and work through all that again. 15:51:50 I'll make whatever time you pick 15:52:16 smcginnis : yeah, good plan. 15:52:23 https://www.flickr.com/photos/152419717@N06/sets/72157680602754246/ 15:52:52 Was there one from Denver? I think when I had looked before I only found this one for ATL. 15:53:00 we don't seem to be on that list 15:53:31 oh that was ATL 15:53:48 Always chuckle at that Designate photo. 15:53:51 https://www.flickr.com/photos/152419717@N06/37246381525/in/album-72157689092104285/ 15:53:55 I need to run, unfortunately. 15:53:55 Here we are 15:54:03 Thanks dhellmann! 15:54:11 have a good weekend, folks! 15:54:22 You too. And enjoy PTO. 15:54:26 have a good week ! 15:54:30 thanks! 15:54:32 Bye @dhellmann 15:54:34 thanks! I'll be back online thursday 15:54:48 I think we're probably done here too. Anything else? 15:55:21 nothing else from me 15:55:30 OK, back to it then. Thanks everyone. 15:55:34 #endmeeting