15:00:13 <anteaya> #startmeeting third-party
15:00:15 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Mar 28 15:00:13 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is anteaya. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:16 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:19 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'third_party'
15:00:51 <anteaya> hello
15:00:55 <lennyb> hi
15:01:10 <Swanson> hi
15:01:30 <anteaya> hey folks
15:01:43 <anteaya> so first things first, I will be offline next week
15:01:58 <anteaya> and am looking for a volunteer willing to chair this meeting slot next week
15:02:23 <anteaya> if either of you are willing to take it, I'm grateful
15:02:33 <anteaya> second
15:02:37 <anteaya> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/296825/
15:02:47 <anteaya> I have a patch up the the meetings repo
15:03:00 <anteaya> which includes some dates I want to skip for this meeting
15:03:13 <Swanson> neat
15:03:23 <anteaya> the skip_dates syntax change hasn't landed yet, which is why the patch isn't merged yet
15:03:29 <anteaya> but it is forthcoming
15:03:32 <anteaya> so heads up
15:03:35 <lennyb> anteaya: no problem, I can take both meetings
15:03:41 <anteaya> lennyb: awesome thank you
15:04:07 <anteaya> #info lennyb will chair both third party meeting next week: Monday at 15:00 utc and Tuesday at 08:00 utc
15:04:12 <anteaya> thanks lennyb
15:04:36 <anteaya> so take a look at the dates of skipped meetings in the patch above
15:04:44 <anteaya> the first set is due to summit
15:05:02 <anteaya> I have an item I would like to discuss
15:05:17 <anteaya> does anyone else have an item they would like to discuss today?
15:05:43 <Swanson> I do not.
15:05:49 <anteaya> thanks Swanson
15:05:50 <lennyb> nope
15:05:56 <anteaya> okay thanks lennyb
15:06:00 <anteaya> I'll proceed
15:06:22 <anteaya> #topic nova ci's missed a regression
15:06:30 <anteaya> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/090345.html
15:06:38 <anteaya> so mostly this is for lennyb
15:06:51 <anteaya> lennyb: had you seen this email thread prior to now?
15:06:54 <asselin> o/
15:06:59 * lennyb checking
15:07:00 <anteaya> hey asselin
15:07:10 <anteaya> asselin: nice to see you :)
15:07:43 * asselin is back from vacation
15:07:51 <anteaya> asselin: how was vacation?
15:07:59 <lennyb> anteaya: yes, I've seen it.
15:07:59 <anteaya> asselin: I was missing you
15:08:03 <anteaya> lennyb: great
15:08:10 <asselin> awesome :)
15:08:23 <anteaya> so the item I'm curious about it the question the first post asks
15:08:46 <anteaya> how did it transpire that a patch was merged that ci's were saying it would break them
15:08:52 <anteaya> asselin: glad to hear it
15:08:57 <anteaya> lennyb: have you any thoughts?
15:09:14 <anteaya> lennyb: did your ci say the patch would break you?
15:10:40 <lennyb> anteaya: I probably overlooked this failure.
15:10:54 <anteaya> okay that would be good to state on the mailing list
15:11:29 <anteaya> as the rest of the thread goes on to suggest the remedy is to build a lab of quite extensive hardware and human resource needs
15:12:07 <anteaya> when in actual fact if the testing is already in place and what we need is more human awareness, admitting that might be a good place to begin
15:12:42 <anteaya> lennyb: are you comfortable going into the nova channel and having a discussion with matt about this?
15:13:23 <lennyb> anteaya: I need to discuss this with my colleagues first.
15:13:34 <anteaya> lennyb: understandable
15:13:52 <anteaya> can you work with them to compose a response to the email thread?
15:14:02 <anteaya> let me know if you encounter an obstacle
15:14:08 <lennyb> anteaya: sure
15:14:13 <anteaya> thank you
15:14:29 <anteaya> because I do think we already have considerable testing structure in place
15:14:52 <anteaya> and if what we need is more human activity then the direction the thread has taken won't be the solution anyway
15:15:08 <anteaya> but I think you are one of only two groups that can say so
15:15:27 <anteaya> the other being the intel group
15:15:52 <lennyb> agreed
15:15:55 <anteaya> does anyone have any more to say about this topic?
15:16:30 <anteaya> does anyone have any other topic they would like to discuss?
15:16:46 <anteaya> #topic open discussion
15:17:02 <anteaya> does anyone have any objection to me closing the meeting?
15:17:28 <asselin> I have something I'd like to discuss
15:17:36 <anteaya> asselin: please go ahead
15:18:32 <asselin> for 3rd party ci, to help increase stability of these systems, I'd like to propose having these use released versions of the tools (e.g. zuul, nodepool, jjb)
15:18:42 <asselin> currently they're all on master
15:19:33 <anteaya> I have no objection
15:19:47 <anteaya> since we don't have any way of monitoring or enforcing this
15:20:04 <anteaya> how about we say something to the effect of released versions are supported
15:20:15 <anteaya> then it isn't a requirement
15:20:34 <Swanson> asselin, That would be good.  I've found being on master makes ones life a living hell.  (Relatively speaking.)
15:20:38 <anteaya> but simply our expectation should they come into channels with support expectations
15:21:01 <anteaya> asselin: where would you like to propose this?
15:21:03 <asselin> currently, the instructions and setup are using master. I'd thinking the 'default' should be latest released version, with option to use master.
15:21:36 <asselin> I can write a spec, but wanted to get some initial feedback
15:21:39 <anteaya> asselin: that sounds reasonable to me
15:21:49 <anteaya> I don't know as a spec is necessary
15:22:00 <anteaya> do others feel a spec is necessary?
15:22:30 <anteaya> I think offering patches to documentation and the defaults should be sufficient
15:22:39 <Swanson> anteaya, +1
15:22:41 <anteaya> and we can post the infra mailing list once the patches are up
15:22:53 <anteaya> so if folks feel strongly they can express themselves in review
15:22:54 <asselin> ok, let's do that first.
15:23:08 <anteaya> I think that is the more expedious way to go
15:23:31 <asselin> ok, thanks for the feedback.
15:23:37 <anteaya> I don't think we have any developer agreement here that we might potentially be breaking by making latest the default
15:23:50 <anteaya> thanks for offering the topic
15:24:01 <anteaya> I think it will certainly help with support
15:24:30 <anteaya> any more comments on this item?
15:24:53 <anteaya> any objection to me closing the meeting?
15:25:01 <asselin> thanks anteaya
15:25:12 <Swanson> nope.
15:25:19 <anteaya> thank you
15:25:31 <anteaya> I appreciate your kind attendance and participation
15:25:43 <anteaya> lennyb: will be chairing this slot next week, thanks again lennyb
15:25:48 <anteaya> #endmeeting