15:00:04 <smcginnis> #startmeeting releaseteam
15:00:05 <openstack> Meeting started Fri Oct 12 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 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:08 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'
15:00:22 <smcginnis> Ping dhellmann, evrardjp, armstrong
15:00:25 <armstrong> hello
15:00:29 <smcginnis> Morning!
15:00:32 <evrardjp> o/
15:00:38 <abhishekk> o/
15:00:57 <smcginnis> Don't want to leave you out annabelleB if you are still here. :[
15:00:58 <dhellmann> o/
15:01:06 <smcginnis> Hey abhishekk!
15:01:11 <smcginnis> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stein-relmgt-tracking
15:01:15 <abhishekk> hey
15:01:16 <annabelleB> o/
15:01:17 <smcginnis> R-26 week
15:01:32 <smcginnis> annabelleB: Yay, you haven't abandoned us yet. :)
15:01:41 <annabelleB> hehe, here for another week!
15:01:56 <smcginnis> annabelleB: We'll take you as long as we can get you!
15:01:56 <dhellmann> ooo, short-timers ;-)
15:02:09 <smcginnis> #topic Handling version increases at the start of each cycle
15:02:19 <smcginnis> dhellmann: All yours.
15:02:37 <dhellmann> I wrote up the basics of this in the meeting agenda
15:02:48 <elbragstad> o/
15:02:56 <dhellmann> the shift away from having milestone tags is going to make upgrade testing downstream more complicated
15:03:18 <dhellmann> there are a few ways to fix that upstream, and I've proposed a patch to implement 1 of those ways by injecting pbr instructions to bump the versions on master
15:03:22 <dhellmann> after we create branches
15:03:46 <evrardjp> but to be clear, it's still possible to create milestone for those who want, right?
15:03:53 <dhellmann> evrardjp : oh, yes, definitely
15:03:54 <smcginnis> So I don't know pbr well enough, but just having something in the commit message will trigger something with pbr that will handle this?
15:03:56 <evrardjp> or whatever we name it
15:03:59 <dhellmann> although I don't expect anyone to actually do it
15:04:01 <evrardjp> so the situation doesn't change?
15:04:11 <dhellmann> smcginnis : yeah, it's a not-well-documented feature
15:04:16 <dhellmann> let me see if it's even mentioned...
15:04:27 <smcginnis> evrardjp: I would think most will not do a milestone release, but they certainly can if they want to.
15:04:44 <dhellmann> it's mentioned here: https://docs.openstack.org/pbr/latest/user/features.html#version
15:05:05 <evrardjp> smcginnis: my point was that for those who were already late in the past and triggered those policy changes HAD to be dealt with in the past too...
15:05:18 <dhellmann> heh, the docs say "Sem-Ver" but the code looked case-insensitive so I used sem-ver I think
15:05:52 <dhellmann> the policy change isn't about adding a new requirement, it's about relaxing one
15:06:12 <dhellmann> so it's not really something we need to make retroactive, if that's what you mean
15:07:01 <smcginnis> Looks like adding that sev-ver bit will be pretty easy to do with your patch for opening up master on branching then.
15:07:05 <evrardjp> not really but let's ignore my comment until I rephrase them correctly
15:07:42 <dhellmann> evrardjp : I'd be happy to try to answer your question. Sorry if I've misunderstood. :-/
15:08:17 <dhellmann> smcginnis : yeah, the only tricky bit will be dealing with stein, since we're well into the cycle
15:08:20 <evrardjp> I am trying to take a few steps back, it's just that :)
15:08:32 <dhellmann> we could just generate empty patches with the semver bump, I guess
15:08:38 <smcginnis> dhellmann: Blast out a trivial update to all repos?
15:08:43 <smcginnis> Yeah
15:08:49 <evrardjp> that sounds an easy fix
15:08:51 <dhellmann> the patch itself can be empty, we just need the commit message
15:08:57 <smcginnis> One time thing, so not too bad.
15:08:58 <evrardjp> what about those who aren't using pbr?
15:09:10 <armstrong> who is responsible for making changes on release model, for example, to drop the milestones ... etc?
15:09:11 <dhellmann> evrardjp : we shouldn't have any official projects in python not using pbr
15:09:40 <dhellmann> armstrong : the release team defines the models, and each project team signs up for the ones they want to use for their deliverables
15:09:45 <smcginnis> armstrong: In this case, the release team would handle switching all stein deliverables over from cycle-with-milestone to cycle-with-rc.
15:09:50 <dhellmann> smcginnis already has a patch up to modify the existing deliverable files for stein
15:10:08 * smcginnis totally forgot he did that :)
15:10:13 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/606860/
15:10:30 <smcginnis> sed for the win
15:10:47 <dhellmann> so true
15:10:53 <evrardjp> :)
15:11:19 <smcginnis> So... any concerns with this approach? It seems good to me.
15:11:41 <smcginnis> And we haven't had any other feedback on that other than the internal RH team.
15:11:55 <dhellmann> we should probably publicize it on openstack-dev
15:11:59 <evrardjp> as long as it has a proper topic in gerrit I am good :)
15:12:01 <dhellmann> I can send an email today
15:12:07 <dhellmann> although I won't be around to answer questions
15:12:07 <evrardjp> and this ^
15:12:25 <smcginnis> dhellmann: Publicize that we are going to have these patches? Or that we are making the -rc switch? Or both?
15:12:40 <dhellmann> the patches
15:12:51 <smcginnis> Yeah. That has potential for a lot of confusion.
15:12:52 <evrardjp> I think it's worth explaining the patches and remind the context
15:12:54 <dhellmann> I think the thread about the rc change already mentions the downstream version issue
15:12:57 <dhellmann> I can reply to that
15:13:20 <evrardjp> that works too
15:13:27 <smcginnis> Did you want to take on generating those patches or should I? Or other volunteers.
15:13:44 <dhellmann> I'm going to be out for a couple of weeks or I would offer to do it
15:13:51 <dhellmann> it seems very scriptable
15:14:02 <smcginnis> dhellmann: Got get your patch count up for the cycle. It's kind of low. :P
15:14:10 <evrardjp> haha
15:14:12 <dhellmann> I should give someone else a chance ;-)
15:14:19 <smcginnis> OK, I can take that action.
15:14:20 <elbragstad> lol
15:14:27 <evrardjp> I think the one sending the email should do it
15:14:29 <evrardjp> it's clearer
15:14:37 <smcginnis> dhellmann: If you want to announce it on the ML, I can work on generating the patches.
15:14:54 <dhellmann> ok, I'll mention that you're going to be submitting the patches on behalf of the release team
15:15:04 <dhellmann> that should avoid any confusion, as evrardjp points out
15:15:19 <smcginnis> Either way. If we think it would cause any confusion I can also post the info the ML.
15:15:30 <dhellmann> do we want to wait and get ttx's input on this?
15:15:33 <smcginnis> But saying to watch for patches from me should be OK.
15:15:35 <evrardjp> yup that should be good. I mean not everyone has followed what's going on, and a few would be surprised, so the ML mail will be important IMO
15:16:01 <smcginnis> It will be important to have enough info in the commit message to explain this too.
15:16:22 <dhellmann> having the ML thread out there ahead of the patches means the commit messages can link to it, too
15:16:23 <dhellmann> but yeah
15:16:23 <smcginnis> Not sure if we want to wait for ttx since he's globetrotting right now.
15:16:30 <smcginnis> dhellmann: True
15:16:33 <dhellmann> "git commit --allow-empty" is the thing you want
15:16:44 <smcginnis> Thanks, was going to confirm that. ;)
15:17:28 <dhellmann> we should probably include all of the deliverables that haven't been released for stein but that were released in rocky
15:17:28 <smcginnis> OK, anything more on cycle-with-rc?
15:18:12 <smcginnis> Yeah, anything released in rocky would be a good basis. Not sure if we've had anything in stein that was not also released in rocky.
15:18:16 <dhellmann> not from me
15:18:32 <dhellmann> I think we had 1-2 things added as new, but I can't think of the names
15:18:41 <smcginnis> I'll double check.
15:18:42 <dhellmann> it's not the end of the world if those get the patches anyway
15:18:44 <dhellmann> yeah
15:18:59 <smcginnis> True, if they are new in stein, then it doesn't really matter in this case.
15:19:09 <smcginnis> Nothing to upgrade from.
15:19:11 <dhellmann> right
15:19:30 <smcginnis> #topic cycle-with-intermediary lib changes
15:19:47 <smcginnis> I posted to the ML yesterday about these changes.
15:19:56 <smcginnis> So far one positive feedback from searchlight for it.
15:20:26 <dhellmann> it would be good to have some more feedback, since it's going to hit mostly client libraries
15:20:33 <smcginnis> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-October/135689.html
15:20:51 <smcginnis> Yeah, I think this one will have a bigger impact than the -rc change.
15:21:04 <smcginnis> So we should probably wait a bit before taking any action.
15:21:13 <smcginnis> Though stein-1 is coming up soon.
15:21:46 <dhellmann> yeah, it might be worth forwarding that email to the ptls or liaisons directly
15:22:05 <dhellmann> this is a bigger than usual sort of change, since it means releases they may not be expecting
15:23:06 <smcginnis> I'll look at doing that. Last time I tried contacting all PTLs I think I almost had my account shut down.
15:24:31 <smcginnis> Did you want to remove your -2 from that sem-ver patch?
15:24:37 <smcginnis> I suppose there's no rush on that one though.
15:24:58 <smcginnis> Just thinking with you being out the next two weeks.
15:24:59 <dhellmann> I'll fix the case issue and submit it again and not WIP it
15:25:05 <smcginnis> OK
15:25:12 <smcginnis> Anything more to discuss on lib changes?
15:25:27 <dhellmann> we should test that after it lands before submitting the patches to the projects to make sure I got the semver thing right :-)
15:25:45 <dhellmann> we can make a branch in  the release-test repo
15:26:05 <smcginnis> OK, good. That should be a quick test.
15:27:02 <smcginnis> #topic Open discussion
15:27:08 <smcginnis> Anything else for today?
15:27:47 <dhellmann> nothing from mee
15:27:56 * elbragstad doesn't have anything
15:28:08 <evrardjp> nothing
15:28:21 <smcginnis> OK, thanks everyone.
15:28:29 <armstrong> thanks
15:28:32 <smcginnis> #endmeeting