10:00:08 #startmeeting requirements 10:00:09 Meeting started Wed Mar 1 10:00:08 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tonyb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 10:00:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 10:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'requirements' 10:00:51 o/ 10:01:13 hi 10:01:13 #topic rollcall 10:01:19 o/ 10:01:22 hi 10:01:33 sigmavirus, number80, dirk, coolsvap 10:01:42 prometheanfire, toabctl hey 10:03:17 #topic where are we at with requirements reviews .... 10:03:54 fairly caught up :D 10:03:58 So I asked that we wait a little while before we merged stuff that bumped minimes in g-r 10:04:20 I'd like to keep that up for another week for the cycle-trailing projects 10:04:30 but u-c and !='s shoudl be fine 10:04:56 then once the cycle-trailing have branched we're all systems go! 10:05:04 sure 10:05:31 #topic Any controversies in the Queue? 10:06:02 for whatever reason there is a lot of red in the queue but the eventlet and pbr chnages are pretty important 10:06:24 they both mean worhking with other teams to try and get the dependant patches merged 10:06:39 Oh and webob :/ 10:06:45 for eventlet 1/3 have merged when I last looked 10:06:53 prometheanfire: cool. 10:06:57 o/ 10:07:04 hey dirk 10:07:28 yeah, the pbr bump to 2.0 is pretty surprising to me 10:07:42 and has a lot of fallout, since everything on the planet has a pbr < 2.0 in its requirements 10:07:59 can someone summarize the plan or did I miss that email? 10:09:00 dirk: Well PBR's git was broken and if it was released as is it would have blocked the (docs) gate in a way that we (requirements team) couldn't control/fix 10:09:15 dirk: actually, when I updated ocata's packages I didn't notice much <2.0 for pbr 10:09:24 dirk: so the we fixed pbr to $do_the_right_thing 10:09:54 dirk: that got released today and it was decided that it was an API break so we bumped the major version 10:10:23 that decision was preety quick and we (release team) didn't reliase that people had defensive caps in place 10:10:44 dirk: so far I've only seen 5 things in g-r that have the cap 10:10:58 so the fallout was a bit or a surprise 10:11:19 dirk: but the main aim of the release was to unblock/fix the sphinx mess we have ATM 10:11:53 ironically so far all the projects with defensive caps are unaffected by the API break 10:12:32 dirk: the plan to fix it is basically land the fixes in the identified projects and len use pbr 10:13:05 projects that don't use constraints *and* use one of the 5 projects will need a local patch to get by until then 10:15:00 dirk: is that better? tl;dr: you didn't miss anything 10:18:22 next topic? 10:20:15 #topic Community goals 10:20:25 So there are 2 community wide goals 10:20:29 py3 and wsgi 10:21:04 I'm pretty sure the latter doesn't matter for us, as it's my understanding that it's limted to API services 10:21:19 but py3 (well py35) does matter to us 10:22:13 I'd like to get us to the point this cycle where we're testing equally on py3 and pu2 and we set the basepython = python3 in the tox 'venv' 10:22:28 Opinions on how doable that is? 10:23:08 (keeping in mind the tooling rewrite we have to do) 10:23:13 It'll take some work I'm sure, but it's more of a known quantity 10:24:08 Should we focus on testing with the venv thing as a stretch goal? 10:24:34 we are using system libs? 10:24:37 tonyb: thanks, sorry am not fully focused on the meeting 10:24:48 dirk: it's all good 10:24:57 prometheanfire: I don't follow? 10:25:12 what do you mean venvs? 10:25:42 If you run tox venv -- $some_command have it run under py3 10:25:57 most of our docs say that's the way to consume our tools 10:26:24 tonyb: I understand the part of unblocking sphinx, I was the one writing the patch for sphinx enablement and the one unbreaking pbr :) 10:26:35 it is just surprising that we bumped the major version, that is kind of unexpected 10:26:40 ... Oh no they don't strange 10:26:51 but its fine, after such a long time its ok to bump the version 10:27:01 * asettle hears docs 10:27:02 *looks around* 10:27:14 tonyb: ah 10:27:20 dirk: Yeah it was a bit of a surprise but people with more pbr history made that call 10:27:39 asettle: not real docs you can ignore us 10:27:59 tonyb: yeah I saw. 10:28:02 *ignoring* 10:28:38 :D 10:29:20 So python3 ... we need to do some planning and then pick someone to work on it 10:29:36 Who would like to be that person? 10:30:27 my next 2 weeks are more or less booked out 10:30:36 beyond that I may be able to 10:31:09 prometheanfire: undertood 10:32:39 I'll chat to the TC about what best aligns with the goal and then we can decide 10:32:54 #topic Open Discussion 10:33:11 did y'all recover from the PTG? 10:35:07 Anything? 10:35:29 sort of, I'll go on vacation in order to recover :) 10:35:44 did we sort out on whether we go first with eventlet or with webob? 10:35:47 dirk: Oh? when? 10:35:49 I think webob might be less pain 10:35:59 next week 10:36:11 dirk: nice. Have fun 10:36:34 I'm dealing with nova fails right now :( 10:36:49 dirk: I don't think we had an order in mind. I promised to write "all the test webob" changes 10:37:03 so I'll do that tomorrow to get data on how close we are 10:37:37 dirk: or if you have time I can shoot you the script to run and you can do it ... 10:38:38 I think it'll end up being whichver one has the deps merge first 10:38:45 dirk: but we're still blocked on the dependant patches anyway :( 10:39:20 prometheanfire: yeah. 10:39:52 dirk: but yes I agree webob is likley to less challenging 10:41:32 anything else? 10:43:19 If we think of anything else there is always #openstack-requirements 10:43:26 Thanks everyone 10:43:30 #endmeeting