12:00:00 #startmeeting requirements 12:00:01 Meeting started Wed Oct 5 12:00:00 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tonyb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 12:00:02 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 12:00:04 The meeting name has been set to 'requirements' 12:00:09 #topic rollcall 12:00:32 coolsvap_: wont make it ... or may be 30mins late 12:01:01 o/ 12:01:07 o/ 12:02:04 I'd just like to point out "Meeting started Wed Oct 5 12:00:00 2016 UTC" can't really get more on time that that ;P 12:02:22 * tonyb doesn;t want to think about nanosecond timestamps;p 12:02:36 hft :P 12:03:09 Let's get started .... 12:03:15 #topic Any controversies in the Queue? 12:03:39 2 minor once that I can think of 12:03:39 the check-uc changes 12:03:59 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/382232/ 12:04:11 any objections to making check-uc voting appreciated.. 12:04:15 (will fix AJ's comment) 12:04:55 dirk: Oh right yeah fix the gate pipeline and I 12:04:58 ll +1 it 12:05:07 I'm all for not regressin this 12:05:30 the xfail stuff *may* proove to be a pain but only doing it will tell us that ... 12:05:42 tonyb: well, hopefully it remains empty 12:05:56 ya 12:06:01 dirk: true. 12:06:04 it was sort of painful to get it to a green state as we broke it already two times in the last week or so 12:06:17 tonyb: +1 it 12:06:53 When we merged https://review.openstack.org/#/c/381780/ we upset Yuriy Taraday 12:07:10 ya, I'm in favor of it 12:07:20 Do people feel like we made the right call there? 12:07:41 * dirk thinks yes in case that isn't obvious ;) 12:08:06 dirk: :) 12:08:09 tonyb: if not, we can revert :P 12:08:21 prometheanfire: ;P 12:09:17 and the other one? 12:09:22 the other one is really minor .... dirk which pymod2pkg change do you want? 12:09:57 0.6.1 probably wont happen this week and that review will conflict if we merge the 0.6.0 review 12:10:29 https://review.openstack.org/374432 ? 12:11:49 tonyb: is https://review.openstack.org/374713 good now? 12:12:05 prometheanfire: I feel liek the -1's have been addressed but those reviewers haven't had time to revisit 12:12:53 prometheanfire: that one needs to be abandoned, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/374712/2 is good but needs tests befoer we merge it 12:13:17 k 12:13:28 tonyb: we want 0.6.1 12:13:30 tonyb: but this has time 12:13:55 ez test with grep :P 12:14:02 * coolsvap sneaks in 12:14:20 prometheanfire: actually I'm wront the chnage you pointed at need to be included but not in it's current form clearly 12:14:38 prometheanfire: sure but mock would be better ;P 12:14:42 coolsvap: o/ 12:14:51 :D 12:14:55 dirk: okay 12:15:04 anything else? 12:15:23 https://review.openstack.org/381890 dnspython 12:15:34 ah, right 12:15:39 We shoudl kee an eye on that one. 12:16:02 it'll be nearly impossible to revert once we take it so we need to have extra care there 12:16:13 ah 12:16:25 notmyname: is questioning why the minimum bump which is reasonable 12:16:56 * tonyb waves and smiles at notmyname ;P 12:17:00 lol 12:17:32 moving on? 12:18:15 #topic py27-with-upper-constraints nee py27-check-uc 12:18:36 dirk: Thanks for jumping on that last week. You've made great progress 12:18:55 dirk: how'd you would out it was the path length that was the problem? 12:21:00 we might come back to that when dirk is active again .... 12:21:12 #topic PTG 12:21:18 tonyb: I asked on #infra, and somebody suggested that I should try the path locally that is used in jenkins as they found this issue already elsewhere 12:21:33 dirk: Ahh ok 12:21:40 #undo 12:21:40 Removing item from minutes: 12:22:28 dirk: while that spins (they take a while to run) anythong you want to say about what's next ? 12:23:35 .... oh well 12:23:40 #topic PTG 12:24:01 So we're planning the design summit ... and now we need to know about the PTG 12:24:11 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/requirements-pike-PTG_ideas 12:24:33 includes a snippet form the email I got about this 12:24:59 so the main question is do we wnat/need a space for the requirements team at the PTG in Feb? 12:25:20 with a follow-up who's likely to be there? 12:25:33 noting the travel is waaay out and could chnage 12:25:53 the PTG will be for planning what we're going to do in pike 12:26:15 I'll be in atl 12:26:45 its bit early to predict 12:26:52 if I will be there 12:26:52 tonyb: I'M sort of undecided on this. I would like to go, but the week is just terrible for me for private reasons 12:27:00 prometheanfire: Are you going to be able to "requirements" or will you need to "openstack-ansible"? 12:27:15 aat the moment, requirements 12:27:21 dirk: okay Thanks for that. 12:27:24 prometheanfire: cool 12:27:39 I can't guarantee anything, but my upstream osa work is minimal 12:27:51 prometheanfire: okay 12:27:57 though... by then maybe I can start adding gentoo support to osa 12:28:00 hard to tell 12:28:43 So we have until the 16th to reply so thnk abotu it and fill in the etherpad 12:28:58 * tonyb looks at coolsvap and others ;P 12:28:59 * dirk thinks we should do a countermeeting in europe :) 12:29:17 lol 12:29:30 dirk: Well the PTG is s'posed to move but not next year :( 12:29:37 if they could send me :P 12:29:42 tonyb: sure dirk :-D 12:29:54 dirk: and skipping the PTG for a project-speciifc event would be bad karma ;p 12:30:15 #topic Barcelona Design Summit 12:30:23 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/requirements-ocata-summit_ideas 12:30:30 no real updates here. 12:30:45 we need to flesh out what we'll talk about. 12:31:04 if it looks like we have too much for 1 session I can possibly get us another 12:31:31 which might be good to have a full 40mins to talk about lower-constraints / divergent requirements 12:31:41 with infra and other PTLs in the room 12:32:15 I think extra session would be helpful for topics other than lower constraints 12:32:25 tonyb: do we have a work session as well? 12:32:30 coolsvap: okay 12:32:32 lower-constraints need one session at least 12:32:33 dirk: no 12:32:45 dirk: we have a shared meetup with release and stable 12:32:51 some topics migh tbe better for a work session than a fishbowl 12:32:58 ah, its a meetup 12:32:59 sorry 12:33:11 dirk: I think you were at the one in Austin so you have a good idea of how that goes 12:33:37 dirk: Yeah we can possibly take some things to the meetup 12:33:42 * coolsvap knows :) 12:33:43 in austin iirc I was in a work session, and that was really good 12:34:03 dirk: :) 12:35:08 So I'll see if I can get us an extra session. 12:35:14 #topic Meeting time 12:35:21 Originally this was setup based on the timzones below 12:35:28 #link http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?iso=20160506&p1=43&p2=240&p3=195&p4=166&p5=83&p6=281&p7=141 12:35:37 With the DST shifts it's gettign too late for me (tonyb) and probably too early for those in CST (prometheanfire). Lets sort out what timezones matter and pick a new time 12:35:51 ++ 12:36:08 So we have AEST (tonyb) IST (coolsvap), CST/CDT (prometheanfire) 12:36:12 though not sure how much wiggle room we have 12:36:18 dirk: what TZ are you in? 12:36:23 CEST 12:36:28 CEST 12:36:28 CET then shortly :) 12:36:42 it's still summer! :) 12:36:44 prometheanfire: it's pretty terrible looking at http://everytimezone.com/ 12:37:08 toabctl: :) but you go off DST soon right? 12:37:19 tonyb: so 11am UTC looks good, right? 12:37:33 tonyb: last week in october 12:37:34 dirk: that'd be 5am for prometheanfire 12:37:54 an, so the timeanddate link from above is not correct 12:38:05 honestly, doing after midnight for me isn't the worst 12:38:19 I can do evening meetings as well if its not monday or tuesday 12:38:23 given how late I stay up 12:38:35 dirk: Of that that link is old ... it's from May which doesn't account for the current DST changes 12:39:23 * toabctl wouldn't like to have meetings in the evening. 12:39:24 so I guess I'm confused.. you need the meeting an hour earlier or later ? 12:39:36 an our later ,right? 12:39:39 can we try alternate timings for a change? 12:39:44 so 1200am CST would be 6am CEST? 12:40:14 7am 12:40:44 dirk: and when you switch that'd be .... 12:40:51 tonyb: right.. 6am then 12:41:01 its not entirely terrible for me though 12:41:04 dirk: okay 12:41:08 I usually get up 6:30 12:41:59 okay well that's an option it's the 1500 for me and 1030 for coolsvap 12:42:13 tbh that would be too early for me 12:42:35 toabctl: 7am? 12:43:05 hm. I may be there, but I can't guarantee 12:43:41 okay I'll do a doodle poll or similar and we can vote on it 12:43:52 ++ 12:43:55 +1 12:44:04 +1 12:44:07 but we have more options that I thought 12:44:12 #topic Tasks from Etherpad 12:44:19 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/requirements-tasks 12:44:29 I did a little curating on that list 12:45:01 I don't think there is anything terribly surprising there ... other than the amoutn we've done in the last 6 months :) 12:45:08 :D 12:45:53 tonyb: is there a link / a discussion about docker-py somewhere? 12:45:54 I added some annotation like Ocata priority and Ocata Goal but they're not set in stone until after Barcelona 12:46:06 dirk: No just the comments in the review 12:47:10 oh I see, I didn't see that yet 12:48:17 #topic Open Discussion 12:48:31 anything to cover here? 12:48:40 we have 12mins left 12:50:18 ? 12:50:30 did we have the next steps for dnspython cleared up? 12:50:43 to be honest I'm a bit confused about the state of the test-DNMs 12:51:33 dirk: I think the next steps are to get the designate and swift PTLs to sign off on the direction (converged dnspython) 12:52:24 dirk: the test/DNM chnages showed that for designate the tempest/unit tests work with 1.15.0 and swift py27 does not appear to regress with 1.15.0 12:52:45 ok, thanks for the explanation 12:53:05 they all fail jenkins becuaes I had to force the contents of requirements.txt in a way that doesn't quite gel 12:53:09 I wonder if we want to change g-r to >= 1.15 then as well 12:53:13 but will once we take the offical path 12:53:23 .. in the same review 12:54:21 The problem with the g-r portion is that it's very hard to revert if e need to, but we can flip-flop on the u-c change a bit 12:54:54 so I think we should do it in 2 steps 12:55:23 ok.. I guess I should add that to the commit message 12:56:18 dirk: That wouldn't hurt. 12:56:24 ya 12:57:00 done 12:57:12 I think that from swifts POV it's fine as the don't really run/test dnspython under py3.X and 1.14.0 is fine for what they use it for 12:57:37 it'll really be designate that is likely to find bugs in 1.15.0 and need to go backwards 12:59:20 okay we're nearly outta time 12:59:24 Thanks everyone 12:59:30 Thanks tonyb 12:59:32 nn 12:59:42 end on 59:59 :P 12:59:59 #endmeeting