21:00:18 <mriedem> #startmeeting stable
21:00:19 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Mar 28 21:00:18 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mriedem. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:20 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:00:22 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'stable'
21:00:26 <tonyb> o/
21:00:31 <mriedem> yo
21:00:36 <mriedem> #link agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/StableTeam
21:01:01 <mriedem> this should be a fast one, but can wait a minute for stragglers
21:01:07 <tonyb> cool.
21:03:08 <mriedem> alright let's go
21:03:16 <mriedem> #topic status
21:03:26 <mriedem> #link stable-tracker known issues https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stable-tracker
21:03:38 <mriedem> new thing in there was the httpretty bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-gate/+bug/1560808
21:03:38 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1560808 in OpenStack-Gate "stable/liberty: gate-requirements-integration-dsvm fails with due to UnicodeDecodeError in httpretty" [Undecided,Confirmed]
21:03:41 <mriedem> tonyb: you were working that
21:04:09 <tonyb> mriedem: Yeah I think it's ready to close but I need to check tha fallout form the w/e first
21:04:28 <tonyb> mriedem: basically the switch from devstack-trusty -> ubuntu-trusty was a little wonky
21:05:23 <mriedem> ok, there wasn't anything else that's new that i'm aware of
21:05:34 <mriedem> some of the periodic-stable jobs have been failing on git clone issues
21:05:45 <mriedem> which sucks since we only have one of those run per day per project
21:05:54 <bknudson> we switched keystone away from httpretty some time ago
21:06:18 <tonyb> Ah.  I'll talk to infra about it as I *thought* we had a retry around git clone (well zuul-clone)
21:06:43 <tonyb> bknudson: Yeah but while there is still any user it needs to stay in g-r
21:07:06 <tonyb> bknudson: it wasn't really a httpretty ussie it's just that was the project that showed the problem
21:07:27 <mriedem> hmm, looks like nova failed on kilo b/c of a mox3 release http://logs.openstack.org/periodic-stable/periodic-nova-python27-db-kilo/f1de22c/console.html#_2016-03-28_06_14_28_792
21:08:10 <mriedem> nvm, that's just a mirror issue
21:08:18 <tonyb> "Network is unreachable" ?
21:09:11 <mriedem> infra issues
21:09:19 <tonyb> mriedem: okay.
21:09:19 <mriedem> let's move on
21:09:28 <mriedem> #topic action items from previous meeting
21:09:34 <mriedem> 1. mriedem to cleanup stable-tracker etherpad - done?!
21:09:48 <bknudson> I don't think anything uses httpretty
21:09:49 <mriedem> did some spring cleaning in the liberty section
21:10:21 <mriedem> 2. jroll and company to work the kilo failures for ironic and come back next week with results - done
21:10:30 <mriedem> ironic on kilo got all sorted out last week
21:10:40 <mriedem> dropped some jobs that were busted
21:10:44 <mriedem> capped diskimage-builder in kilo g-r
21:11:02 <mriedem> 3. ihrachys to add tool that removes -backport-potential tag from bugs merged in corresponding branch to release-tools
21:11:09 <mriedem> In review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/295993
21:11:23 <mriedem> #topic release news
21:11:36 <mriedem> not really much here, ironic has a liberty release coming up
21:11:48 <tonyb> mriedem: 4.2.3?
21:11:52 <mriedem> i think so
21:12:06 <tonyb> okay, just checking we're talkign about the same thing:)
21:12:06 <mriedem> yeah https://review.openstack.org/#/c/295966/
21:12:14 <mriedem> that was the one with the optional dep min version updates
21:12:24 <mriedem> jroll and dhellmann and i talked through that one today
21:12:29 <mriedem> my comments are in there with my +1
21:12:42 <tonyb> Yeah I'll +1 it today I was reading the scrollback :)
21:13:02 <mriedem> #topic tagging
21:13:22 <mriedem> there are 2 changes up in the governance repo for adding the stable:follows-policy tag
21:13:25 <mriedem> 1. trove https://review.openstack.org/#/c/295733/
21:13:40 <mriedem> #link trove stable:follows-policy tag patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/295733/
21:13:50 <mriedem> 2. keystone https://review.openstack.org/#/c/296075/
21:13:57 <mriedem> #link keystone stable:follows-policy tag patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/296075/
21:14:23 * tonyb needs to get comfortable with +1'ing those reviews
21:14:25 <mriedem> i just haven't gotten back to those yet, but i'm more comfortable with the keystone one
21:14:33 <mriedem> yeah, the trove one, i'm a bit uneasy on
21:14:58 * tonyb too
21:15:37 <tonyb> trove is trying to do the right thing now but we (I) will need to watch carefully
21:15:50 <mriedem> yup
21:15:59 <tonyb> I think the keystone one is probably fine but I want to do the review properly
21:16:08 <mriedem> bknudson: anything you want to share with us about keystone stable policy stuff?
21:16:30 <mriedem> bknudson: this is a safe place
21:16:42 <bknudson> we try to follow stable policy
21:16:56 <mriedem> there was some ldap thing recently that broke godaddy
21:17:03 <mriedem> those changes all got reverted from what i remember
21:17:32 <mriedem> and was it ksa or ksm that dropped memcache for tokens or something and the neutron jobs all started timing out?
21:17:49 <tonyb> mriedem: ksm from memory
21:18:09 <mriedem> and the ldap regression was (i think) and honest mistake
21:18:14 <mriedem> *an
21:18:25 <mriedem> the ksm thing is tricky because it's a library
21:18:35 <bknudson> I don't see an ldap revert in keystone stable?
21:18:38 <mriedem> it wasn't backporting something that breaks policy, but it was a backward incompatible change
21:19:23 <mriedem> bknudson: it might have been ksa or ksm
21:19:34 <mriedem> there was some big ldap thing that was reverted in a few branches
21:19:44 <tonyb> mriedem: side-note I think we need to consider what "follows-policy" means for libraries but I also don't think it's fair to hold people up wheil that's formulated.
21:19:47 <bknudson> there's no ldap in ksa or ksm
21:20:14 <mriedem> tonyb: yeah, i haven't been
21:20:29 <mriedem> tonyb: i consider the backward compat thing more lifeless' spec
21:20:38 <mriedem> and there would be a separate tag around libs that honor backward compat
21:21:00 <mriedem> bknudson: well gdi, ldap something somewhere :)
21:21:06 <mriedem> i could ask in -ops and i'm sure they could link me quick
21:21:29 <bknudson> here's the only revert I can find in keystone -- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/265023/
21:21:51 <mriedem> bknudson: yeah that looks familiar
21:22:15 <mriedem> and the kilo revert never landed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/265019/
21:22:29 <bknudson> although in that case the change was in master and backported
21:22:46 <bknudson> so it wasn't something we backported and broke something, it was a backport to fix something
21:23:07 <mriedem> right, which is why i'm saying i thought it was an honest mistake
21:23:44 <bknudson> it was on purpose. we're trying to push the envelope
21:23:46 <mriedem> anywho, i think i'm cool with the keystone tag patch
21:24:20 <tonyb> mriedem: Yeah
21:25:18 <mriedem> done
21:25:29 <mriedem> #topic tooling
21:25:49 <mriedem> #info ihar has several tooling changes up to release-tools https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:ihrachys%2540redhat.com+status:open+openstack-infra/release-tools
21:26:07 <mriedem> anything else on tooling?
21:26:14 <tonyb> mriedem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292660/
21:26:35 <tonyb> mriedem: that's my find $release-backport-potential script
21:27:03 <tonyb> mriedem: clearly needs work but it's there ...
21:27:05 <mriedem> tonyb: ok, i added ihar
21:27:14 <mriedem> in case he has a duplicate
21:27:30 <tonyb> passing pep8 would be a good start ;P
21:28:00 <mriedem> #topic open discussion
21:28:06 <tonyb> summit?
21:28:08 <mriedem> #info Stable team fishbowl session is tentatively scheduled for 5pm on Thursday of the Design Summit. This might change.
21:28:13 <mriedem> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/090631.html
21:28:23 <mriedem> i've requested that be moved up a slot if possible
21:28:36 <mriedem> to avoid conflicting with nova's end of day thurs session where we talk priorities and schedule for newton
21:28:46 <tonyb> mriedem: cool.
21:28:54 <mriedem> but nova could also maybe move it's session if needed
21:29:05 <tonyb> mriedem: do you know of a "packaging for stable" discussion?
21:29:13 <mriedem> tonyb: i don't
21:29:27 <tonyb> mriedem: okay I suspects it's a phantom then
21:29:33 <mriedem> spooky
21:29:35 <tonyb> :)
21:30:22 <mriedem> maybe thinking of apevec's pbr thread?
21:30:24 <mriedem> on semver?
21:30:51 <tonyb> perhaps.
21:31:01 <mriedem> i didn't follow it, but there was something in the weekly digest about it, and people talking about waiting to package until stable/x is created from master
21:31:11 <mriedem> which is way too long to wait b/c you have to start building the massive dep list then too
21:31:25 <mriedem> but that doesn't really have anything to do with stable branches as far as i can tell
21:31:58 <tonyb> Yeah.  I'll poke around in the schedule/etherpads and see if I can find it.
21:31:59 <mriedem> anything else for open discussion?
21:32:32 <tonyb> I want to corener you, lifeless and dhellmann to talk about constraints in stable
21:32:38 <tonyb> (at the summit)
21:32:50 <mriedem> tonyb: that should probably be a tuesday thing
21:32:54 <mriedem> since it's a cross-project spec
21:33:00 <tonyb> mriedem: +1
21:33:03 <mriedem> so corner thingee first
21:33:15 <tonyb> mriedem: okay.
21:33:23 * mriedem deftly avoided that one
21:33:28 <tonyb> :)
21:33:39 <mriedem> alright, anything else?
21:34:11 <tonyb> mriedem: yup, but I'm slow ....
21:34:34 <tonyb> I just wanted to thank you for kicking SBM off and do ing a great job as PTL :)
21:34:49 <mriedem> thanks
21:34:55 <mriedem> had to think for a sec what SBM meant
21:35:00 <tonyb> mriedem: clearly you're not goign anywhere but thanks :)
21:35:07 <mriedem> sure
21:35:11 <tonyb> mriedem: ;P
21:35:14 <mriedem> thanks for taking over :)
21:35:21 <tonyb> mriedem: yw
21:35:36 <mriedem> now if we're done bromancing, shall we end early?
21:35:47 <tonyb> Yup
21:35:52 <mriedem> cool, thanks guys
21:35:54 <mriedem> #endmeeting