15:00:53 <smcginnis> #startmeeting releaseteam
15:00:54 <openstack> Meeting started Fri Apr 13 15:00:53 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:55 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:55 <ttx> o/
15:00:58 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'
15:01:15 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/rocky-relmgt-tracking Agenda
15:01:43 <dhellmann> o/
15:01:44 * fungi is actually around this week
15:01:54 <smcginnis> We are currently line ~91
15:02:05 <annabelleB> o/
15:02:19 <fungi> text in the new etherpad version is bigger by default, we've noticed
15:02:23 <smcginnis> Great, good turn out this week.
15:02:33 <smcginnis> fungi: I was wondering about that. Thought it was just me.
15:02:44 <smcginnis> My failing eyes are OK with that change. :)
15:02:47 <fungi> totally just you, your eyesight has suddenly improved
15:02:51 <dhellmann> hmm, I'm not noticing any difference
15:02:56 <smcginnis> Wouldn't that be nice. :)
15:02:58 <ttx> no diff here
15:03:02 <dhellmann> maybe my eyes got suddenly worse?
15:03:05 <fungi> it may be that it's relative to dpi now or something
15:03:13 <smcginnis> Oh, maybe.
15:03:15 <dhellmann> ah
15:03:19 <annabelleB> appears to be a ~1.2 line vs 1 line
15:03:31 <annabelleB> spacing*
15:03:40 <fungi> yeah, inter-line spacing seems to have increased as well
15:03:50 <smcginnis> Looks good on my 34" monitor.
15:03:54 <fungi> but sorry to derail, this is totally not what we're here to talk about
15:04:12 <ttx> 34? Nice
15:04:18 <smcginnis> #topic Review list of exception projects that still tag their own releases
15:04:18 <ttx> is it not?
15:04:28 <smcginnis> ttx: It is very nice indeed. :)
15:04:35 <ttx> so....
15:04:54 <ttx> I wanted us to quickly review the list of "exceptions" and see which ones (if any) we should work on reducing
15:05:19 <ttx> Like things under openstack-infra should probably not be made compiant
15:05:27 <ttx> or even compliant
15:05:49 <ttx> but others are more grey and I could tap into collective wisdom
15:06:08 <ttx> I copied the list on the etherpad
15:06:18 <smcginnis> What is the reason for charms, chef, and helm needing to tag their own?
15:06:27 <smcginnis> Well, and rally for that matter.
15:06:39 <ttx> smcginnis: they probably don't
15:06:49 <ttx> are may be doing it for lack of release jobs
15:06:56 <smcginnis> I could see refstack, and agree on the infra ones.
15:07:01 <ttx> s/are/and/
15:07:07 <ttx> so
15:07:21 <ttx> Infra is "not openstack"
15:07:38 <smcginnis> Ah, so their release needs may be unique enough that we don't have those situations covered right now maybe.
15:08:02 <ttx> so it does not need to tag through us
15:08:09 <ttx> Charms
15:08:22 <ttx> If you look at them they are tagged per Ubuntu releases
15:08:28 <dhellmann> I think the thing with infra was they didn't want to wait if they needed a release to fix something in a hurry. Also all of their things are "independent" and we were relaxed about independent projects in the past.
15:08:38 <smcginnis> Oh, that makes sense. (charms)
15:09:29 <ttx> So I guess the question becomes, should we handle tagging for anything in the deployment space
15:10:03 <ttx> since some of those need tagging to align with the ecosystem they proxy with
15:10:40 <smcginnis> We do ansible and puppet. But I suppose these may be distinct enough that we don't need to handle them.
15:11:53 <ttx> We traditionally did not do Charms or Chef, and haven't been doing Helm yet
15:12:05 <ttx> OK, let's set that one aside
15:12:28 <ttx> RefStack -- arguably also not a part of OpenStack but more of a thing that gravitates around it
15:12:40 <ttx> Rally on the other hand...
15:12:58 <ttx> is in the openstack-operations bucket and considered a part of OpenSTack (as of today)
15:13:14 <smcginnis> Yeah, that one looks the most suspect to me.
15:13:31 <ttx> Well, the most suspect to me is ec2-api
15:13:48 <ttx> since it's in the main "openstack" bucket it's as central as it can be
15:13:59 <ttx> and yet not included in openstack releases I suppose
15:14:06 <ttx> since we don't tag it
15:14:52 <smcginnis> I was just looking at the Teams section. Yeah, ec2-api looks like it should be too.
15:14:53 <ttx> not even independent or cycle-linked
15:14:59 <dhellmann> I guess I'm OK with letting deployment tools tag their own releases. I don't know if any of them would want us to manage the tags for them if we announce that, but are we prepared for a mix (some do, some don't)?
15:15:31 <ttx> yeah the deployment tools are not my major concern right now
15:15:31 <dhellmann> rally and ec2-api feel like things we should be including in the releases site
15:15:37 <fungi> i foresee infra probably adopting a lot of the same release automation in time, but probably with its own release management team
15:15:39 <ttx> libraries and openstack bits are
15:15:52 <ttx> dhellmann: +dragonflow
15:16:03 <dhellmann> yeah, I see no reason to make exceptions for those
15:16:08 <ttx> all the others are more corner cases
15:16:20 <ttx> like openstack/manila-test-image
15:16:31 <smcginnis> Was there some talk of rally moving out of OpenStack proper into a more general Python security thing?
15:16:32 <ttx> not really part of the "product"
15:16:43 <fungi> smcginnis: that was bandit, not rally
15:16:49 <smcginnis> Oh, right!
15:17:07 <ttx> smcginnis: rally just moved openstack-specuific stuff into a plugin to be more generally applicable
15:17:10 <fungi> though rally has recently decomposed its openstack-specific bits and moved them into their own repo so that it can be a more generalized testing framework, according to that recent ml thread
15:17:19 <ttx> right that ^
15:17:46 <ttx> So the other one I'd like to prioritize is openstack/yaql
15:17:53 <ttx> since afaict it's a lib
15:17:57 <dhellmann> yes
15:18:10 <dhellmann> that's part of mistral, iirc
15:18:22 <d0ugal> it is
15:18:26 <ttx> and maybe openstack/networking-powervm and openstack/nova-powervm, if we do dragonflow
15:18:27 <fungi> murano
15:18:32 <dhellmann> I thought we had all of the libraries covered already
15:18:46 <fungi> not mistral
15:18:52 <smcginnis> Ah, I didn't think that was used by other deliverables, but if others are, that should be part of the deliverables.
15:19:09 <ttx> it's in global reqs yes
15:19:29 <ttx> So I created tasks on that story:
15:19:37 <dhellmann> I think we want anything installed in a production deployment to be listed on releases.o.o
15:19:51 * jungleboyj sneaks in late
15:20:06 <ttx> https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001831
15:20:39 <smcginnis> Hey jungleboyj
15:20:58 <smcginnis> ttx: Great, those tasks look good to me.
15:21:02 <smcginnis> And now we have somewhere to track it.
15:21:11 <ttx> I just adjusted them
15:21:17 <ttx> Trying to prioritize them
15:21:39 <jungleboyj> @!
15:21:40 <_pewp_> jungleboyj ＼( ･_･)
15:21:56 <ttx> I kept only 5 for the time being
15:22:03 <ttx> (you might need to refresh page)
15:22:15 <smcginnis> So we should contact those teams and make sure they are aware of it (and make sure they don't have a good reason for not changing things).
15:22:22 <ttx> We traditionally did not do Charms or Chef, and haven't been doing Helm yetec2-api dragonflow rally powerVMstackers and yaql
15:22:31 <ttx> err
15:22:37 <ttx> ec2-api dragonflow rally powerVMstackers and yaql
15:22:50 <smcginnis> That list is a good start.
15:23:19 <ttx> OK, if you contact any of those teams, don't forget to put your name on that task
15:23:25 <ttx> so that we don't duplicate work
15:23:37 <smcginnis> I can post something on the ML tagging these teams. Unless someone else wants to take that task.
15:23:48 <ttx> go for it
15:23:51 <dhellmann> d0ugal seems to be here, we could tackle yaql now
15:23:59 <ttx> That is all I had
15:24:13 <d0ugal> dhellmann: What needs to be tacked? :)
15:24:28 <d0ugal> tackled*
15:24:49 <dhellmann> d0ugal : we would like to add yaql to the list of repos with releases managed through openstack/releases. That means an ACL change and importing the history. I can do that for you if you don't have an issue with it.
15:25:34 <dhellmann> it's not really clear why it isn't already being handled that way
15:25:48 <fungi> i'm curious why we're asking d0ugal though
15:25:56 <fungi> as it's a murano deliverable, not mistral
15:26:03 <d0ugal> Yeah, that is the confusion
15:26:08 <d0ugal> Thanks fungi - I was just trying to type it up
15:26:16 <dhellmann> oh, is it?
15:26:20 <d0ugal> Mistral uses YAQL only
15:26:20 <fungi> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/projects/murano.html#yaql
15:26:20 <dhellmann> why did I think it was mistral?
15:26:28 <dhellmann> ok, nm then
15:26:30 <dhellmann> sorry, d0ugal
15:26:34 <d0ugal> dhellmann: np
15:26:41 * fungi tried to correct that misconception up at 15:18
15:26:53 <d0ugal> I would be happy to help more with YAQL as we are heavy users... but that is another matter :)
15:27:03 <dhellmann> yeah, I thought when d0ugal said "it is" he was saying it was owned by mistral, not just used
15:27:10 <d0ugal> my bad.
15:27:22 * d0ugal steps aside
15:27:45 <fungi> zhurong doesn't seem to be in channel, but this may also be a bad time to get ahold of them
15:27:52 <dhellmann> probably
15:27:59 <smcginnis> We can cover it on the ML.
15:28:00 <dhellmann> I'll wait for smcginnis' email
15:28:22 <smcginnis> ttx: AOB?
15:28:43 <smcginnis> #topic Availability next week
15:29:21 <ttx> yeah won't be around
15:29:22 <smcginnis> Ah - absent du bureau
15:29:37 <ttx> Will be drinking Tuscan wine with flaper87 in Florence
15:29:44 <smcginnis> So ttx and I are out Thursday and Friday.
15:29:46 <smcginnis> Nice!
15:29:52 <ttx> AND not even ashamed
15:30:14 <smcginnis> I may be around, but I will be chaperoning a group of high school students in Chicago, so not sure on my availability.
15:30:21 <smcginnis> So don't want to commit to anything.
15:30:24 <dhellmann> that sounds like a full time job
15:30:33 <smcginnis> dhellmann: Do you want to run the meeting next week? Or should we just skip.
15:30:46 <dhellmann> we can probably skip the meeting if it's just me and fungi. I know how to reach him if we have issues.
15:30:49 <smcginnis> It is Rocky-1, so not sure.
15:31:10 <fungi> sure, i'll be around
15:31:11 <smcginnis> But yeah, we can probably sync up async in our normal channel.
15:31:11 <dhellmann> if people have issues, they usually come to the channel rather than the meeting anyway
15:31:28 <dhellmann> though we do seem to have a nice crowd here today :-)
15:31:41 <ttx> dhellmann: drinking with flaper87 is indeed a full time job
15:31:59 <dhellmann> heh
15:32:00 <fungi> i have no opinion on whether it's necessary to hold the meeting, but happy to help out with any issues which arise either way
15:32:11 <smcginnis> Let's plan to skip. We can leave it up to you if you decide to hold one based on what the need ends up being.
15:32:17 <dhellmann> wfm
15:32:24 * flaper87 is proud to be a job provider for ppl around the world
15:32:30 <smcginnis> #info Likely skipping next weeks meeting unless some compelling need comes up
15:32:35 <smcginnis> flaper87: :)
15:32:53 <smcginnis> #topic Rocky-1 actions
15:33:08 <smcginnis> Just thought we should do a quick update ahead of next weeks milestone
15:33:22 <smcginnis> I actually think we are in great shape. At least better than we were for queens at this point.
15:33:37 <smcginnis> So (knock on wood) I don't expect next week to be too crazy.
15:33:53 <fungi> making headway while we can, because the switch from xenial to bionic will probably set people back
15:33:57 <dhellmann> I have a foggy mind today, which I blame on a cat that decided 6:00 was a good time to turn the bed into a race track. What did we decide about applying tags for teams?
15:34:15 <dhellmann> for teams that do not submit them, that is
15:34:39 <smcginnis> I actually meant to bring that up as it was one of the things I moved to SB.
15:34:54 <smcginnis> I _think_ we said we force tagging if it was missed.
15:35:15 <dhellmann> so maybe on friday around our meeting time?
15:35:19 <ttx> yes I think we said that would tarin people to expect us to step in
15:35:23 <ttx> train
15:35:48 <ttx> downside being for milestones I expect most would just wait for us to step in
15:36:10 <ttx> can't remember if we said that we'd do it for milestone-1 though
15:36:10 <smcginnis> I do think we need to track which ones we initiate so if we end up forcing it this cycle, we kick them out of the common release next time around if they do not step up.
15:36:32 <ttx> ok, so it would still be condidered a fail
15:36:33 <smcginnis> Maybe good to just force it starting with milestone 2?
15:36:43 <ttx> yeah...
15:36:48 <ttx> We can miss m-1
15:36:51 <dhellmann> ok, that sounds good
15:36:56 <ttx> use m-2 as a reminder
15:37:03 <ttx> so that we can step in m-3
15:37:17 <ttx> and if people missed too often we have "the discussion" with them
15:37:23 <smcginnis> ttx: Wait, force only on 3? Or 2 and later?
15:37:31 <ttx> break a few fingers
15:37:35 <ttx> 2 and later
15:38:10 <ttx> I need to run in a minute
15:38:15 <smcginnis> OK, so the plan is: miss milestone 1 - public shaming on the ML, miss milestone 2 - public shaming an ML and we force a release, etc.
15:38:36 <ttx> I'm fine with that
15:38:45 <dhellmann> wfm
15:38:46 <smcginnis> And if they miss all, they are on "the list" and if they miss milestone 1 in the next cycle they are out.
15:38:50 <dhellmann> I'm going to write that up in a patch to the readme
15:39:08 <smcginnis> dhellmann: Want to take my SB task for that?
15:39:15 <dhellmann> sure
15:39:17 <ttx> yes our aging brains are not working that well as a memory device those days
15:39:32 <smcginnis> https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001847
15:39:33 <dhellmann> ttx: it's all that drinking with flaper87
15:39:38 <smcginnis> Haha
15:40:05 * fungi hasn't been drinking with flaper87 lately, so not sure what my excuse is
15:40:36 <ttx> must be rum
15:40:44 <smcginnis> Or sake.
15:40:51 <ttx> ok got to run
15:40:54 <ttx> ttyl
15:40:59 <smcginnis> OK, anything else we need to discuss for R-1?
15:41:01 <fungi> both probably
15:41:01 <smcginnis> ttx: o/
15:41:13 <ttx> don't assign too many work items to me while I look the other way
15:41:22 * flaper87 is happy to be blamed for these things
15:41:25 <ttx> I READ LOGS
15:41:25 * smcginnis fires up SB
15:41:37 <flaper87> fungi: we can fix that in YVR
15:41:49 <ttx> flaper87: you're happy to be blamed for everything
15:42:05 <fungi> flaper87: you're on ;)
15:42:08 <flaper87> ttx: it's tough but someone has to do the job
15:42:21 <dhellmann> can someone remind me how to link to a storyboard story in a git message?
15:42:25 <dhellmann> "Story-ID"?
15:42:33 <fungi> Story: #NNNNN
15:42:37 <fungi> Task: #NNNN
15:42:46 <dhellmann> thanks
15:42:48 <fungi> capitalization, spacing and the # are optional
15:43:00 <fungi> we have documentation somewhere ;)
15:43:04 <smcginnis> fungi: Is it both story and task?
15:43:15 <smcginnis> Or just task is enough?
15:43:25 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/561258
15:43:26 <patchbot> patch 561258 - releases - document that we will force tag milestones
15:43:41 <smcginnis> dhellmann: You're quick!
15:43:50 <dhellmann> I didn't want to forget to do it ;-)
15:44:00 <fungi> story makes its-storyboard leave a comment on the story with a hyperlink to the review (or it should, but we broke that and i'm trying to hunt down how we should fix it). task changes the status of a single task
15:44:25 <dhellmann> oh, I guess I could add the task too
15:44:35 <fungi> we separated story commenting from task status updating because by composing the two (or not) you can achieve different desired effects
15:45:11 <fungi> like you may want to have a review leave a comment on a story even if there's no task associated with it, or you may want to update multiple tasks
15:45:24 <dhellmann> makes sense
15:45:26 <smcginnis> Makes sense.
15:45:30 <smcginnis> :)
15:45:36 <smcginnis> OK, anything else for today?
15:46:03 <fungi> #link https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#working-on-bugs Working on Bugs
15:46:14 <fungi> is where we have it documented in the developer workflow
15:46:17 <dhellmann> this week at some point tonyb mentioned in a review comment that we need to be able to show the support status for a deliverable in a series
15:46:23 <dhellmann> I opened a story for that
15:46:38 <smcginnis> #topic Open discussion
15:46:48 <smcginnis> dhellmann: I missed that.
15:46:52 <dhellmann> but I can't figure out how to make SB open it in a way that I can past the link
15:47:02 <dhellmann> here we go
15:47:03 <dhellmann> #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001852
15:47:43 <smcginnis> So for extended maintenance, being able to show the state of a stable deliverable.
15:47:46 <dhellmann> that web ui is too smart; it doesn't work with right clicking to open things in new windows
15:47:50 <dhellmann> right
15:48:04 <dhellmann> the point is that some things won't actually have support so we can no longer say that "ocata" is under EM
15:48:09 <dhellmann> although that might be the default for ocata
15:48:33 <smcginnis> A repo tag? Or another line in the deliverable file of that cycle?
15:49:02 <dhellmann> I was thinking a new field in the deliverable file, with a default that comes from something built into the rendering code
15:49:33 <dhellmann> I put it on the backlog for now
15:49:49 <smcginnis> OK, sounds good.
15:50:07 <smcginnis> And then we'll need some update on the web page to reflect that.
15:50:13 <dhellmann> right
15:50:44 <dhellmann> fungi : after you figure out what's going on with commenting on stories, maybe you can also help with https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001806
15:50:53 <smcginnis> I think the top level releases.o.o can still show the overall phase that a release is in, but then going into that release, each project needs its own status.
15:51:07 <dhellmann> we want comments on stories or tasks or whatever when a change is released, like we have with LP
15:51:26 <dhellmann> smcginnis : yeah, we'll have to figure out how to represent that but you're probably right
15:51:55 <fungi> dhellmann: sure, that shouldn't be too hard
15:52:34 <dhellmann> one of these days I'll get back around to try to release the storyboard client
15:52:35 <fungi> the bit with gerrit not commenting on stories is harder to track down due to the opaque nature of its inferred configuration and being implemented in java (as a gerrit plugin)
15:52:57 <dhellmann> oh, yeah, this other thing should be easy in comparison
15:56:54 <smcginnis> Any final things?
15:57:06 <dhellmann> smcginnis, ttx: it looks like you opened stories. Maybe add them to the backlog column on https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/board/64 as well?
15:57:39 <fungi> nothing from me
15:57:47 <smcginnis> I needed to look into that next. Too bad it doesn't automatically pick those up.
15:58:10 <fungi> it can pick them up if you do an automatic lane based on a tag name or something
15:58:11 <dhellmann> hmm, I suppose I could set the board up that way
15:58:22 <smcginnis> I can get mine added.
15:58:33 <dhellmann> yeah, we could just do it by repo and status or something
15:58:43 <dhellmann> that makes it harder to separate backlog and todo, though
15:58:56 <smcginnis> We can follow up on that later. 1 minute left.
15:58:59 <dhellmann> k
15:59:12 <fungi> right. using story tags can make some of that viable depending on what you want
15:59:13 <smcginnis> Guess that's it for the meeting then. Thanks everyone.
15:59:34 <fungi> thanks smcginnis!@
15:59:41 <annabelleB> thanks smcginnis!
15:59:48 <smcginnis> #endmeeting