14:01:34 <sgordon> #startmeeting telcowg
14:01:35 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Feb 17 14:01:34 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is sgordon. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:01:37 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:01:39 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'telcowg'
14:01:40 <sgordon> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nfv-meeting-agenda
14:01:43 <sgordon> #topic roll call
14:01:44 <sgordon> o/
14:02:12 <cloudon> hi
14:02:16 <sgordon> howdy
14:02:39 <Seryio_NN> Hello
14:02:54 <dronshaw> hey there
14:03:06 <sgordon> so i think there is one main thing to discuss, which is cloudon's use case submission
14:03:16 <sgordon> #link https://review.openstack.org/275712
14:03:22 <sgordon> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278361/
14:03:28 <sgordon> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278433/
14:03:32 <cloudon> And my complete inability to use git and/or understand workflows.
14:03:35 <sgordon> so, cloudon what happened here :)
14:03:41 <sgordon> 275712 is merged
14:03:57 <cloudon> Well... I thought I was following orders.  But it didn't go very well.
14:04:24 <sgordon> yeah
14:04:35 <sgordon> so the thing is i think you want/need to un-abandon https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278361/
14:05:09 <sgordon> i think only you as the patch owner can do this
14:05:23 <cloudon> Abandoned it cos of the comment from Ken about posting it as a new patch set on the original.  Was that wrong?
14:06:15 <sgordon> cloudon, yeah
14:06:27 <sgordon> cloudon, you cant submit it as a new patchset on the original, the original has merged
14:07:08 <cloudon> So is merging only meant to happen once all review comments have been addressed?  As there was that outstanding one from Ken.
14:07:22 <sgordon> cloudon, i believe the best alternative is to mention/link the original in the commit message
14:07:52 <sgordon> cloudon, ken is one of the people who +2'd it
14:10:01 <cloudon> OK, so sounds like I should leave 278433 abandoned, un-abandon 278361 but change the commit message to include a link to 275712?
14:10:58 <sgordon> cloudon, yessir
14:11:32 <sgordon> cloudon, you should be able to un-abandon from the UI
14:11:34 <cloudon> cloudon desparately searches for the un-abandon button on the gerrit UI...
14:11:42 <sgordon> cloudon, yeah i know... lol
14:13:02 <sgordon> cloudon, it's possible that only a core can un-abandon it - not sure
14:13:29 <cloudon> There's a restore button - might that do it?
14:13:54 <sgordon> cloudon, that sounds right
14:14:53 <cloudon> OK, that looks like it's done the trick.
14:15:29 <sgordon> excellent
14:16:27 <cloudon> It seems to have picked up the diffs from 275712 somehow to which is an unexpected bonus.
14:16:47 <sgordon> yes, that is because 275712 is now in trunk/master
14:17:00 <cloudon> Ah, ok
14:17:03 <sgordon> so it is effectively part of the "base"
14:18:26 <sgordon> #topic other discussion
14:18:39 <sgordon> is there anything else folks want to discuss today?
14:18:58 <cloudon> Quick thing on the workflow of that story - what happens next?
14:20:45 <sgordon> cloudon, nominally refer to the diagram on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam/User_Stories
14:21:04 <sgordon> the product working group are were getting together yesterday or today for a mid-cycle meetup though
14:21:14 <sgordon> and some of this was under discussion and thus subject to change
14:21:43 <sgordon> theoretically we are at "content edited based on feedback" in the left swimlane
14:22:12 <cloudon> Right - so still in draft, but at final stage
14:22:58 <sgordon> right
14:23:33 <sgordon> what there is some discussion about atm is exactly how to prioritize and expose these to the community, relative to each other
14:23:49 <sgordon> will be looking for some output from the midcycle on that
14:24:07 <cloudon> makes sense, ta
14:27:44 <sgordon> ok
14:27:55 <sgordon> let's call it and hopefully i can bring more clarity on that for next time
14:27:57 <sgordon> thanks all
14:27:59 <sgordon> #endmeeting