17:00:01 #startmeeting releaseteam 17:00:02 Meeting started Thu Jan 21 17:00:01 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is hberaud. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:03 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:05 The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam' 17:00:07 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-relmgt-tracking Agenda 17:00:10 Ping list: ttx armstrong elod 17:00:12 o/ 17:00:15 o/ 17:00:19 We're way down on line 261 now. 17:00:38 this cycle has flows by, seems like 17:00:45 Will just wait a couple minutes for folks. 17:01:05 it seems 17:02:11 o/ 17:03:35 ok let's go 17:03:42 #topic Review task completion 17:04:05 Generate a list of all cycle-with-intermediary libraries which did not release since the YYYY-MM-DD date of milestone-1. => done 17:04:17 Nobody complain for now 17:04:35 we don't have any exception for now 17:04:42 I think we can go ahead 17:04:58 ttx do you want to push the final button? https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22w2-c-w-i%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged) 17:05:07 sure looking 17:05:16 thanks 17:05:43 hmm for those missing the PTL+1 we shoudl wait a bit more right 17:06:06 deadline is today but we can wait until tomorrow 17:06:14 or at least monday 17:06:20 any preference? 17:06:26 we usually give them until the Monday and then +2a then 17:06:34 ok sold 17:06:59 Next task 17:07:13 Generate release requests for all cycle-with-intermediary libraries which had changes => ttx the floor is yours 17:08:18 err 17:08:31 nah that's not me 17:08:41 aclissues is me 17:09:23 I see your name/color assigned this is why I asked you 17:09:25 I ran it and it returned nothing to fix 17:09:38 My bullet starts at "To catch" 17:09:38 ok thanks fair enough 17:09:39 Merged openstack/releases master: Release Glance wallaby m-2 (22.0.0.0b2) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/771618 17:09:55 ahah sorry my bad 17:10:03 wrong copy/past 17:10:14 It's exact 17:10:33 So I think we can move on 17:10:44 Handle governance consistency issues => hberaud 17:11:23 so I discussed with the majority of the involved teams 17:12:04 I am available for any task that can help 17:12:31 Concerning barbican, and the ansible roles, I didn't get a definitive response for now, I relaunched this subject this afternoon 17:12:44 armstrong: thanks 17:13:36 Always concerning barbican, they wait for an RFE for barbican ui, so I think we can leave that as it is for now 17:14:12 Merged openstack/releases master: Release sushy 3.6.0 for Wallaby https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/771641 17:14:24 Concerning oslo and etdc3gw osloers agreed with that so I proposed a patch to adopt the independent model 17:14:26 Merged openstack/releases master: Release OpenStack-Ansible Train https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/771448 17:14:43 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/771383 17:15:22 hberaud: yeah, it's ok if they don;t decide right now. It's good to track progress though, since those items can easily fall between the cracks and disappear 17:15:52 Concerning tripleo and opentack tempest skiplist, tripleo chose to abandon it https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/771488 17:16:25 Same thing for OpenStackSDK and js-openstack-lib https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/771789 17:16:48 Same thing for monasca-* https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/771785 17:17:16 I just see that gmann commented on it, I'll follow that 17:17:49 and last but not the least rpm-packaging 17:17:59 We discussed about that today 17:18:53 And I think that either we need governance/SIG model updates or something else 17:19:21 Or our tooling should consider the SIG file too... 17:20:00 well no 17:20:02 To see if projects are present in and then ignore it or give them a special status 17:20:08 since we do not handle releases for SIGs 17:20:47 i think the simplest is just to remove the files 17:20:49 Merged openstack/releases master: Wallaby-2 Release for python-tackerclient https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770903 17:20:57 no need for a special case really 17:21:22 I was thinking to reply on the related ML thread (http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019842.html) and to involve the TC to the discuss too 17:21:30 Oh I was supposed to file those 17:21:34 but if you think that remove is enough then let's go 17:21:36 but did not 17:22:11 the rpm-packaging team don't really care about this so... 17:22:30 removing is the only way to fix it. We can't have all the history since they do not use openstack/releases anymore. So the choice is between partial history (which is blatantly misleading) and no history at all 17:22:48 fire! 17:23:03 ttx: do you want to handle that? 17:23:09 yes yes 17:23:14 ok 17:23:18 I just need to remember to do it. Will do tomorrow 17:23:40 please action me on next week tasks to be sure 17:24:04 done 17:24:23 and that's all for task completion 17:24:32 anything else before moving? 17:24:37 nope 17:24:44 #topic [TripleO] moving stable/rocky for tripleo repos to unmaintained (+ then EOL) 17:25:02 c.f http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019860.html 17:25:37 I've replied (a bit late) to the list 17:25:49 yeah I don;t have a strong opinion on that 17:25:51 I think it's OK to go EOL if they want 17:26:07 Tripleo's PTL asked if we can move tripleo repos for rocky to unmaintained and elod and myself proposed to move directly to EOL 17:26:39 well, they can leave the branch in EM for 6 more months, 17:27:00 My goal here is to grab your opinion 17:27:17 it's not a must I mean 17:27:57 You mean that they can't move for now? 17:28:07 it's a team decision if they want to wait or go directly to EOL 17:29:01 they can 17:29:37 Ok let's wait few days for that, I'll rediscuss with Marios soon if needed to see what they chose 17:29:38 it's just a buffer time (6 months - unmaintained), i would say 17:29:43 ok 17:30:20 so they can continue with the steps in the process ( https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#end-of-life ) 17:30:36 I see 17:30:47 elod: thanks for your response/details on the thread and here 17:31:18 Anything else for this topic? 17:31:34 speaking of that... we might need to ask infra to delete the old, already EOL'd branches (like ocata) 17:32:04 ok 17:32:28 elod: do you want to handle that point? 17:32:43 yes, I'll add that to my TODOs :) 17:33:00 and look for EOL'd ocata branches 17:33:07 awesome 17:33:09 thanks 17:33:12 + ask infra to delete them 17:33:15 for a starter 17:33:20 np 17:34:08 I added it to the next week tasks 17:34:19 cool, thanks! 17:34:25 thanks 17:34:43 #topic reenqueue kolla job 17:35:35 I noticed that we surely missed to reenqueue this job and I want to confirm that point with fungi 17:35:48 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019722.html 17:36:25 looking 17:36:40 thanks 17:37:24 You replied on the thread but we didn't discussed together about the reenqueue part of this topic 17:37:58 release-openstack-python succeeded there 17:38:13 Just to be sure to unmiss something 17:38:31 we can't reenqueue the tag, as it will try to upload a new release to pypi 17:39:14 no the problem is not there 17:39:19 Sorry 17:39:27 failures seem to be for kolla-publish-debian-source-aarch64, kolla-publish-ubuntu-source and kolla-publish-ubuntu-binary 17:39:38 which someone would need to build and manually upload i think 17:40:09 The problem was on a docker registry limitation IIRC 17:40:29 Where the job reached the new registry limitation 17:40:40 yeah, i'm not sure what can be done about that other than someone manually creating and uploading those images 17:40:53 ok 17:40:58 I see 17:41:32 someone in the kolla team, in theory, has write access to their dockerhub org 17:41:40 ok 17:41:43 so they could do that if they wanted 17:41:57 Nobody complained since 17:42:19 So I think we can consider this point on their side 17:42:31 Thanks for details 17:43:07 I think we can move on 17:43:13 #topic Assign R-11 tasks 17:43:56 Review any remaining milestone-2 exceptions - I think this is for everybody 17:44:22 Plan the next release cycle schedule based on the number of desired weeks - I'm already on it 17:44:34 want to add my name to #304 with @hberaud 17:44:46 armstrong: sure 17:45:37 I think I'll work on that on Tuesday 17:45:57 armstrong: is it ok for you? 17:45:58 ok 17:46:13 what time? 17:46:40 Around 1:30pm UTC +1 17:46:47 perfect 17:47:04 armstrong: Thanks for your help 17:47:38 @hberaud my pleasure 17:47:39 and the two last item was already discussed previously and assigned so I think we can skip them 17:47:47 s/item/items 17:48:10 #topic Open Discussion 17:48:22 Anything else? 17:48:36 nothing from me 17:50:43 So I think we are done! 17:50:45 Thanks everyone! 17:50:48 #endmeeting