18:01:23 <krtaylor> #startmeeting third-party
18:01:24 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Dec 22 18:01:23 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is krtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:01:25 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:01:27 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'third_party'
18:01:48 <sweston> o/
18:01:48 <krtaylor> anyone around for third-party work?
18:01:53 <krtaylor> hey sweston
18:01:57 <asselin> o/
18:02:02 <sweston> hello krtaylor
18:02:05 <krtaylor> hi asselin
18:02:07 <asselin> hi
18:02:24 <krtaylor> didn't know if we'd have anyone today  :)
18:02:41 <dougwig> o/
18:02:42 <sweston> yup, should be a quiet week
18:02:53 <asselin> I checked the agenda and saw we had one, so here I am :)
18:03:03 <krtaylor> I did create an agenda, but I'm not actively driving things this week
18:03:11 <krtaylor> yeah, I debated calling this one
18:03:51 <krtaylor> so welcome everyone, this might be a quick one
18:04:01 <dougwig> i've got one announcement/item.
18:04:07 <krtaylor> cool, one sec
18:04:22 <krtaylor> get the meeting agenda underway
18:04:25 <krtaylor> #topic Welcome & Reminder of OpenStack Mission
18:04:34 <krtaylor> #info The OpenStack Open Source Cloud Mission: to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being simple to implement and massively scalable.
18:04:51 <krtaylor> although, this grew is prob very aware of the OpenSTack Mission
18:05:15 <krtaylor> and here is the agenda for completeness
18:05:17 <krtaylor> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#12.2F22.2F14
18:06:02 <krtaylor> #topic Review of previous week's open action items
18:06:08 <krtaylor> no previous action items
18:06:17 <krtaylor> #topic Announcements
18:06:30 <krtaylor> so on to you dougwig
18:06:35 <dougwig> heya
18:06:55 <dougwig> the neutron services split broke a lot of CIs. that work is now complete, and if your CI hasn't recovered, it'll need manual intervention. contact me if you have any trouble.
18:07:06 <dougwig> that's it from me.
18:07:11 <krtaylor> yeah, saw that
18:07:16 <krtaylor> thanks dougwig
18:07:25 <krtaylor> any questions from anyone?
18:07:28 <patrickeast> dougwig: what were the symptoms of the problems?
18:07:28 <ja_> I have a question on the community CI system: is its current sizing/config info listed anywhere on the wiki/etc?  I'm trying to rough-size one for z/VM.
18:07:58 <krtaylor> ja_, why don't we table that for the open discussion
18:08:15 <dougwig> they use 8GB/4 cores for slaves, though if you're not testing swift, you can get away with 4GB/1 core.
18:08:17 <dougwig> oops. :)
18:08:26 <ja_> ah; I took the 'any questions' to mean we were there; np to wait
18:08:30 <krtaylor> heh, np
18:08:41 <krtaylor> yes, I should have been specific
18:09:44 <krtaylor> dougwig, did you see patrickeast 's question?
18:10:50 <dougwig> no, thank you.  patrickeast: tempest tests related to services will bomb.  if you're using devstack or devstack-gate, it should auto-recover, else you need to manually install the three new repos.
18:10:59 <krtaylor> it was problems testing LBaaS FWaaS and VPNaaS
18:11:13 <patrickeast> ah ok, thanks
18:11:36 <krtaylor> there was a patch too 140864
18:12:20 <dougwig> the final devstack patch is still out: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141873/
18:12:32 <dougwig> though since no one has new db models yet, it's not fatal.
18:12:43 <krtaylor> good info
18:13:06 <krtaylor> anything else for dougwig?
18:13:35 <krtaylor> ok, next announcement was just a reminder that service account creation is now self service
18:13:47 <krtaylor> the description is here:
18:13:51 <krtaylor> link# http://ci.openstack.org/third_party.html#creating-a-service-account
18:14:25 <krtaylor> I have not heard any grumblings about that, it seems to be a great success
18:15:03 <krtaylor> #topic OpenStack Program items
18:15:52 <krtaylor> next was just a reminder for the forming of the CI doc subgroup
18:16:10 <krtaylor> sign up here:
18:16:15 <krtaylor> #link  https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/third-party-ci-documentation
18:16:34 <krtaylor> I'll get that going after the new year
18:18:12 <krtaylor> also wanted to mention that omrim_  and nuritv have pushed out a FAQ patch to kick it off
18:18:26 <sweston> woot
18:18:27 <krtaylor> #link  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141817
18:18:36 <krtaylor> reviews please
18:19:14 <krtaylor> next is the monitoring dashboard spec, lots of activity there
18:19:24 <krtaylor> #link  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135170
18:19:43 <sweston> yup, thanks everyone for your reviews
18:19:44 <krtaylor> sweston, did you want to comment on that
18:20:07 <sweston> if we have time during open discussion, I'd like to discuss a few of the issues
18:20:23 <krtaylor> sweston, will do
18:20:25 <sweston> also, an update .. I've been busy refactoring the application to split out the api service from the web client.
18:20:40 <krtaylor> oh, good
18:20:48 <sweston> I have implemented the web client in angularjs, and implemented the rest api with pecan/wsme.
18:21:00 <sweston> I will be finished with that this week.
18:21:30 <sweston> I am still waiting on review permissions on the stackforge repo, however.
18:21:35 <krtaylor> ok, I'll hit the review again and read about it
18:21:45 <krtaylor> sweston, for radar?
18:21:52 <sweston> yes
18:22:26 <krtaylor> hm, ok, well, maybe it is time for a new project, or split into parts like jhesketh suggested
18:22:30 <sweston> so until I have the proper permissions, I will continue to update the github repo
18:22:54 <krtaylor> maybe part of the solution could use radar, I'd hate to block this dropping
18:23:18 <sweston> mikal did get back to me last week with an answer, saying that I could use the repo
18:23:38 <krtaylor> sweston, hopefully it is just a holiday thing, we'll make faster progress after the new year I expect
18:23:57 <sweston> krtaylor: ok, fingers crossed
18:24:15 <sweston> I will ping him again next week if I haven't heard anything
18:24:23 <sweston> that's all I have
18:24:29 <krtaylor> he may be on holiday
18:24:36 <krtaylor> ok, thanks again sweston
18:24:44 <sweston> krtaylor: you're welcome :-)
18:25:18 <krtaylor> next up is starting to socialize the idea of dividing up the meeting times into a Mentoring time for new CI teams
18:25:39 <krtaylor> and a work group time for getting patches reviewed, and docs and other work done
18:25:47 <krtaylor> kinda what I have been doing here
18:26:09 <krtaylor> there is a need for both, and our mission has included both
18:26:17 <krtaylor> might be time to split that up
18:26:26 <dougwig> i think the division is great, but do we really have three hours of content per week?
18:27:01 <asselin> the mentoring times is really for ppl to get together online and ask questions
18:27:03 <krtaylor> dougwig, short answer is no, at least not for the work group part
18:27:35 <asselin> (the way I understand it)
18:27:41 <krtaylor> yes as asselin said, the idea of the Mentoring time is like for office hours, open questions
18:28:02 <krtaylor> helping teams get started, bootstrapping CI is difficult
18:28:35 <krtaylor> it is times when infra folks will be available for questions about infra components and how it all works
18:28:42 <dougwig> is that something we could setup on-demand somehow? i'm happy to help people setup, but the current proposal is a larger meeting time commitment than active devs give even to neutron itself.
18:28:56 <asselin> any reason why this current time is not kept for the workgroup?
18:29:28 <krtaylor> asselin, the feedback I got was that the curent Monday time doesnt work for several people
18:29:57 <krtaylor> and, we want to make the work group time accessible for more people world wide
18:30:15 <krtaylor> the mid-day time is really only good for US
18:30:49 <krtaylor> dougwig, to your point, there is not enough content for the working group
18:31:09 <krtaylor> only one weekly meeting, at alternating times
18:31:36 <krtaylor> those times are being decided in an online poll at:
18:31:48 <krtaylor> #link  https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=21b93c
18:33:13 <krtaylor> dougwig, the other Mentoring times are for on-demand questions from new teams and operators
18:33:36 <krtaylor> I will edit the wiki in the next week or so and make this more clear
18:33:57 <krtaylor> we'll try this new format in the new year
18:34:22 <krtaylor> starting it now doesnt make much sense, we'll just confuse a lot of folks
18:34:45 <krtaylor> but I want to give everyone a heads up that it is coming
18:35:14 <ja__> thinking out loud: will there be some place where mentoring questions could be added (e.g. another mtg agenda)?  if so, people could also put (the beginnings of) answers there.
18:35:36 <ja__> ...I'm thinking of a question queue for the mentoring mtg
18:35:52 <asselin> ja__ +1
18:35:56 <krtaylor> ja_, that's a great idea
18:36:06 <ja__> ... my assumption would be, if there's a chair, that they'd chunk together adjacent topics
18:36:12 <krtaylor> I'll add that to the agenda
18:36:38 <krtaylor> ja_, yes and it will help infra folks assemble the right people to answer the question
18:36:50 <ja__> is there a specific cutover date for the new mtg schedule?
18:37:14 <krtaylor> ja_, I am thinking I'll get it started the first week of Jan
18:37:19 <reed> ja__, one place to ask question is https://ask.openstack.org, we can build FAQs there
18:37:29 <krtaylor> voting has slowed down, so that seems like a good time
18:37:35 <dougwig> i wonder if a third-party discuss mailing list wouldn't fill a lot of this need without another meeting.  right now we have -announce or the infra mailing list, neither of which is terribly friendly to newbie questions.
18:38:06 <krtaylor> re: FAQ, yes, and we will have a section in the new third-party ci doc too
18:38:08 <reed> dougwig, what's unfriendly about those?
18:38:33 <dougwig> heh, i knew someone would call me on using that word. :)
18:38:42 <krtaylor> dougwig, typically we have wanted to use -infra
18:38:44 <reed> krtaylor, I encourage you to experiment with ask.openstack.org because that place gets lots of search engine traffic
18:38:47 <dougwig> not unfriendly, per se, just the wrong forum, which is always pointed out.
18:38:58 <ja__> dougwig, by a [new] list do you mean a [third-party] or similar subject tag?
18:39:21 <reed> dougwig, I'm just curious :)
18:39:28 <asselin> +1 for an 'official' tag and use -dev mailing list
18:39:42 <dougwig> new ML or a standardized tag, sure.
18:39:44 <krtaylor> dougwig, -announce isnt the place for questions, it is for letting ci accounts know something from infra core
18:39:46 <reed> ja__, tags assume that new people know a) tags exist b) they know/learn how to use them
18:40:10 <krtaylor> the official tag is [third-party]
18:40:20 <krtaylor> we agreed to that a long time ago
18:40:30 <asselin> krtaylor, link?
18:40:43 <dougwig> is there a reason that isn't getting the setup question traffic, then?
18:40:56 <krtaylor> asselin, not within reach atm
18:41:19 <reed> asselin, http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev
18:41:20 <ja__> reed, fair enough.  I'm not yet sure of the temp in this community.  In some I've been in the answer would be "smack 'm until they use the right tag" i.e. untagged questions would be largely ignored if only because "everyone" filters on them programmatically in their email clients.
18:41:20 <asselin> krtaylor, perhaps an action then to make sure it's easy to find
18:41:38 <krtaylor> asselin, agreed, good for doc patch
18:42:09 <reed> ja__, that's why I suggest using Ask OpenStack also, in addition to email which requires a steeper learning curve
18:42:42 <ja__> fwiw I spent much of last half of last week scouring pages and never ran into the [third-party] ... which surprised me
18:42:52 <reed> asselin, the topics on mailing lists are hard to find, it's a fact of (mailman) life
18:42:54 <asselin> reed, didn't find the tags there...and don't remember my pw
18:43:06 <reed> asselin, that's your answer then :)
18:43:16 <asselin> :)
18:43:30 <reed> the official topics for the mailing lists are in the mailman options page
18:44:20 <krtaylor> re: tags, I added a mention to the doc etherpad
18:44:33 <krtaylor> asselin, I agree, we can make that more clear
18:45:08 <krtaylor> ja_, your input on how to fix this as you are coming up to speed will be invaluable
18:45:16 <ja__> @reed, try google on "openstack mailman options" and see if it's in the first result page - I'm not seeing it
18:46:15 <krtaylor> I think a FAQ in ci docs would get a lot of use
18:46:30 <ja__> krtaylor, you'll find I'm a good tester.  lots of jokes about that in my old groups.  former officemate used to call me into her new office to watch her screen so things would start working (rather than failing in front of me so I could debug them)
18:46:45 <reed> ja__, I put a link before: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev
18:46:52 <asselin> btw, I got in and there's no tag for thrid party
18:46:59 <krtaylor> ja_, hehheh
18:47:33 <krtaylor> asselin, you got in where?
18:47:36 <reed> ah! krtaylor there is no topic for [third-party] on openstack-dev
18:47:47 <asselin> krtaylor, http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev
18:47:59 <reed> which confirms the kumbersomeness of those things :)
18:48:06 * reed invents words
18:48:08 <ja__> reed, then I misunderstood what you meant.  I thought you were saying that your link showed the valid [tags]... not a login screen.
18:48:15 <krtaylor> not formalized ever, convention
18:48:32 <asselin> krtaylor, ok, convention :)
18:48:49 <krtaylor> if someone wants to formalize that, get after it!
18:48:55 <krtaylor> that would be extremely cool
18:49:10 <krtaylor> and I am not married to third-party either
18:49:18 <krtaylor> but it is what we have been using
18:49:48 <asselin> I'm fine with convention. Let's just make it more visible in docs, meeting page, etc
18:49:49 <krtaylor> external testing, 3rd party, lots of options were discussed
18:49:49 <reed> I have added [third-party] as a topic
18:50:03 <krtaylor> excellent
18:50:14 <reed> #info [third-party] is now a topic on openstack-dev mailing list. http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev
18:50:19 <asselin> reed, awesome!
18:50:35 <krtaylor> that is fantastic, thanks reed !
18:50:50 <reed> asselin, don't get too excited: topics are hard to use, I don't know how many people use them.
18:50:55 <asselin> ok, now that's it's official, we still need to make it more visible :)
18:51:06 <krtaylor> every little bit helps
18:51:06 <asselin> reed, don't worry, I get that very well :)
18:51:11 <sweston> asselin: +100
18:51:15 <reed> it will help people who sign up for the first time, they may see third-party in the full list of topics... that's it
18:51:29 <krtaylor> we can keep chipping away at it, someday we'll have an easy button  :)
18:51:36 <ja__> ala the old dilbert: [the code is done] TPHB: Now all we need is that Plan.
18:51:53 <krtaylor> hehheh
18:52:28 <krtaylor> anything else on that?
18:52:33 <krtaylor> 8 minutes
18:52:47 <asselin> well...I'm interested int he ask.openstack.org idea
18:53:13 <krtaylor> and links to and from that in the doc
18:53:59 <krtaylor> noted in doc etherpad
18:54:01 <reed> asselin, https://ask.openstack.org/en/questions/ :)
18:54:25 <reed> anyone with high enough karma can edit questions and re-tag them
18:54:32 <asselin> might be a good tool for these kind of questions
18:55:02 <reed> so if you have a pool of people moderating and adding tags you can crate a live FAQ
18:55:23 <reed> s/crate/create
18:55:27 <krtaylor> ok, I'm going to skip protocol and jump to Open Discussion, we are there anyway :)
18:55:41 <krtaylor> #topic Open Discussion
18:55:43 <asselin> I can start to monitor. play around with it.
18:55:55 <krtaylor> me too
18:56:02 <asselin> I have 1 karma :)
18:56:10 <reed> asselin, https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Community/AskModerators to get started
18:56:21 <krtaylor> nice
18:56:32 <reed> #info to get started with Ask OpenStack https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Community/AskModerators and https://ask.openstack.org/faq
18:56:56 <ja__> bookmark to get back to sizing question we tabled earlier
18:57:11 <reed> #info the idea is for moderators to be brutal and edit questions radically so that they can be re-used in the future by others with similar issues
18:57:25 <krtaylor> ja_, sure, we can mix topics, what was the question
18:57:28 <sweston> interesting
18:57:40 <reed> #info edit the questions and answers down so that they represent 1 single problem with at least 1 possible correct solution
18:58:00 <reed> that's the basic :)
18:58:01 <krtaylor> reed, and used in docs FAQ
18:58:28 <reed> krtaylor, exactly, the principle should be so that you can re-use the content
18:58:29 * krtaylor needs to go play around with this
18:58:38 <ja__> I'm trying to rough-size a 3rd party CI sys for zvm.  The more I know about the size/shape of what the community system (realizing it's x86) is using, since that meets the wg's SLA, more accurate I can be.
18:58:42 <reed> ideally embedding the live documents, not copying it over (too much work)
18:59:24 <ja__> ...earlier dougwig said [with swift] 8GB+4 cores, [without] 4+1 ... how much disk, and how many slaves do you average (or set, if it's constrained)
18:59:39 <krtaylor> ja_, we have similar problem with PowerKVM
19:00:00 <notmyname> questions around thrid party swift QA testing?
19:00:08 <krtaylor> ja_, its a tough question because we are a new environment, not just testing a driver
19:00:14 <dougwig> i use 40GB disks on slaves (steady state is 20GB, much more with cinder), and I have 2 slaves during off-times, 3-4 during crunch.
19:00:27 <krtaylor> we can move this discussion, we are out of time
19:00:36 <krtaylor> move to -infra or -dev?
19:00:37 <ja__> krtaylor, figured that.  that's why I call mine a rough sizing.
19:00:56 <dougwig> ja__: for neutron, plan on running ~12 jobs/hour during crunch time.
19:00:56 <krtaylor> thanks everyone, another great meeting!
19:00:59 <dougwig> bye
19:01:03 <sweston> thanks everyone
19:01:13 <krtaylor> #endmeeting