20:31:32 <prometheanfire> #startmeeting requirements
20:31:33 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jan 30 20:31:32 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is prometheanfire. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:31:34 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:31:37 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'requirements'
20:31:38 <prometheanfire> #topic rollcall
20:31:40 <tonyb> \o
20:31:45 <prometheanfire> tonyb, prometheanfire, number80, dirk, coolsvap, toabctl, smcginnis, dhellmann ping
20:31:48 <prometheanfire> o/
20:31:52 <smcginnis> o/
20:32:57 <prometheanfire> #topic Any controversies in the Queue?
20:33:08 <prometheanfire> tonyb: sql-migrate?
20:33:21 <tonyb> prometheanfire: I commented here and on the bug
20:33:46 <tonyb> in general a u-c bump is fine as long as we do it carefully
20:34:06 <tonyb> but I don't think there is anything really stopping us from realease 0.11.1
20:34:08 <prometheanfire> ya
20:34:17 <smcginnis> That would be my preference.
20:34:49 <prometheanfire> same, if it's not possible we could do 0.12.0
20:35:14 <tonyb> my gut says take 0.12.0 now, get all the appropriate sqlalchemy-migrate releases done from stable branches and then we can go back to them
20:35:31 <smcginnis> Raise it then lower it?
20:36:07 <tonyb> smcginnis: Yeah, it's a bit 'gross' but it isn't any different than what we'd do if we found a 'bug' in 0.12.0
20:36:20 <smcginnis> Oh, I suppose.
20:36:55 <prometheanfire> true, though I'd like to know how long 0.11.1 could be
20:37:05 <tonyb> smcginnis: it sqlalchemy-migrate isn't an offical project so we can't do the branch+release in openstack/releases so it'll be a manual process
20:37:51 <tonyb> prometheanfire: given they don't do that thing currently I'd say it could take 1-2 weeks unless we get really lucky and are really motivated
20:38:15 <prometheanfire> ya, in that timeframe going forward then back is ok
20:38:54 <tonyb> prometheanfire: We just need to review that 0.12.0 is generally okay for rocky
20:39:02 <prometheanfire> I'll comment, but require a bug for us to track first
20:39:10 <prometheanfire> I have a compare link in the review iirc
20:39:29 * tonyb is worried about removing the cap on PBR
20:39:54 <prometheanfire> it's for rocky, iirc rocky was good with pbr
20:41:27 <prometheanfire> anything else?
20:41:49 <tonyb> Okay, still need to do the requirements compatibility check ... esp if we want this to go back to ocata
20:42:06 <tonyb> greenlet
20:42:16 <tonyb> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/633472/
20:42:23 <openstackgerrit> Merged openstack/requirements stable/rocky: update constraint for ironic-lib to new release 2.14.1  https://review.openstack.org/633636
20:42:24 <openstackgerrit> Merged openstack/requirements stable/rocky: update constraint for python-ironicclient to new release 2.5.1  https://review.openstack.org/633642
20:43:34 <smcginnis> tonyb: Did you see dirk's last response on that greenlet one?
20:44:04 <tonyb> As I've said on the review I'm preety sure it's wrong but dirk says without it ppc64le fails badly
20:44:50 <prometheanfire> if I had an easy way to run tests I have a ppc64le I could test on
20:45:10 <tonyb> Oh wait I was readin the __asm__ wrong
20:45:53 * tonyb will git remote update and see what it looks like in vim
20:46:28 <prometheanfire> kk
20:46:31 <prometheanfire> #open floor
20:46:36 <prometheanfire> #topic open floor
20:47:07 <tonyb> Denver ...
20:47:22 <prometheanfire> I haven't been approved yet
20:47:35 <smcginnis> Approved by your wife? :)
20:47:46 <prometheanfire> but the topic I have for it is https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/requirements-libs
20:47:49 <prometheanfire> ya
20:47:55 <tonyb> Assuming the OSF offers project updates do we need/want one for requirements? will prometheanfire be at the summit (as opposed to PTG) to present it
20:48:12 <prometheanfire> I will not be at summit
20:48:18 <tonyb> prometheanfire: Okay
20:48:25 <smcginnis> The Berlin update was good, but is there much new since then?
20:48:26 <tonyb> prometheanfire: that's what I thought
20:48:36 <prometheanfire> but if anyone else wants they can volunteer
20:48:40 <prometheanfire> not much new I think too
20:49:19 <tonyb> Okay, I can't really think of anything to talk about for a project update
20:49:29 <smcginnis> That reminds me - what's the latest with having an upper-constraints link that doesn't need to be updated lock-step with stable branch creation?
20:49:35 <tonyb> but for the forum I think the requirements-libs thing is a great idea
20:49:54 <tonyb> smcginnis: It's blocked on me
20:50:20 <prometheanfire> I updated the bug with some info I got from infra iirc
20:50:26 <prometheanfire> haven't looked at it recently
20:50:37 <smcginnis> Oh, we have a bug for tracking that?
20:50:41 <tonyb> smcginnis: We need a bunch of AFS work done in infra and it's been forgotten IIUC so I need to kick that off again
20:51:21 <tonyb> https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/1719006
20:51:51 <smcginnis> Thanks.
20:52:04 <tonyb> Okay some of that is wrong based on the desigen discussions we had in Dublin
20:52:52 <tonyb> smcginnis: I think the tl;dr is it wont be there for the stein -> train transition
20:53:12 <tonyb> smcginnis: but I *will* fire off an email today to see what we can do
20:53:19 <prometheanfire> ya, not likely, thanks
20:53:22 <smcginnis> That would be great to keep that going.
20:53:32 <tonyb> y'all can pester me daily until I do ;P
20:53:43 <smcginnis> :)
20:53:59 <prometheanfire> I'll add a repeating todoist item :P
20:54:04 * tonyb has 7mins until I need to leave ;P
20:54:11 <prometheanfire> anything else?
20:54:14 <smcginnis> Nope
20:54:28 <prometheanfire> #endmeeting