20:32:10 <prometheanfire> #startmeeting requirements
20:32:11 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Aug 19 20:32:10 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is prometheanfire. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:32:12 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:32:14 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'requirements'
20:32:15 <prometheanfire> #topic rollcall
20:32:21 <prometheanfire> tonyb, prometheanfire, dirk, smcginnis ping
20:32:23 <prometheanfire> o/
20:33:36 <smcginnis> o/
20:33:43 <prometheanfire> #topic Any controversies in the Queue?
20:33:56 <prometheanfire> https://review.opendev.org/746434
20:34:11 <prometheanfire> once that is fixed (move the entry to the unapproved section) I think it's fine
20:34:52 <prometheanfire> I personally don't like adding another config parser and would think that openstack projects would use oslo.config only (for this review https://review.opendev.org/746436 )
20:35:24 <smcginnis> I would hope so too. I saw adjutant was proposing an alternative config package though.
20:35:55 <smcginnis> I would much rather they work with oslo to try to see if they can get what they need in oslo.config rather than adding their own custom library.
20:36:01 <prometheanfire> yep
20:36:10 <smcginnis> FWIW, I agree with your comments on the toml lib thing.
20:36:30 <prometheanfire> anything else before open floor
20:36:43 <smcginnis> No, I think that's it.
20:36:59 <prometheanfire> #topic Open Floor
20:37:59 <smcginnis> There was some discussion earlier about cycle-trailing projects not branching, and therefore testing with the wrong branch requirements.
20:38:17 <smcginnis> Which then causes things to suddenly break when they do branch and start using the correct set of requirements.
20:39:10 <smcginnis> I haven't been able to focus on that yet, but I think we might be able to have some sort of trigger that pre-updates cycle-trailing repos, rather than the post-branching we do for normal things.
20:39:13 <prometheanfire> well... they should branch, or temporarilly change their master to point to what they are deving against
20:39:18 <dirk> o/
20:39:22 <smcginnis> Yeah.
20:39:58 <smcginnis> But I was thinking when they branch, we could probably have a bot proposed patch to update their master to the next branch name. Since we have the redirect in place, that would mean they are testing against master.
20:40:17 <smcginnis> Then when requirements actually does branch, months later, they automatically will still be testing against the right set of constraints.
20:40:19 <prometheanfire> ya
20:40:38 <smcginnis> Then when they branch again, update master to the next series name, rinse, lather, repeat.
20:41:19 <smcginnis> Anyway, just something I was thinking about. If I can focus on it for more than 2 minutes, I might see how much it would take to get something like that in place.
20:41:19 <prometheanfire> anything else?
20:41:23 <prometheanfire> :D
20:41:27 <prometheanfire> ya, focus...
20:41:27 <smcginnis> Hey dirk! o/
20:41:33 <smcginnis> Nothing else from me.
20:41:59 <prometheanfire> #endmeeting