15:00:58 <anteaya> #startmeeting third-party
15:00:58 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jun 13 15:00:58 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is anteaya. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:59 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:01:01 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'third_party'
15:01:05 <anteaya> hello
15:01:09 <lennyb> hey
15:01:22 <anteaya> hey lennyb
15:01:25 <anteaya> how are you today?
15:02:20 <lennyb> I am still ok :). How are you?
15:02:43 <anteaya> glad to hear it
15:02:45 <asselin_> good morning
15:02:45 <anteaya> good thanks
15:02:49 <anteaya> morning asselin_
15:02:53 <mmedvede> o/
15:03:12 <mmedvede> morning all
15:03:14 <anteaya> hey mmedvede
15:03:36 <anteaya> does anyone have anything they would like to discuss today?
15:04:09 <mmedvede> everyone aware of new recommended recheck syntax for third-party CIs?
15:04:18 * mmedvede looking for doc patch
15:04:33 <anteaya> there is no recommended syntax
15:05:19 <mmedvede> #link third-party recheck syntax recommendation https://review.openstack.org/#/c/327065/
15:05:59 <anteaya> thanks for letting me know, I will follow up on this
15:06:19 <mmedvede> there was no recommended syntax I think, so every CI came up with their own. So this should allow to have sanity
15:06:59 <clarkb> the recommendation was to honor 'recheck'
15:07:06 <anteaya> clarkb: thank you
15:07:20 <anteaya> mmedvede: as clarkb says we did have a recommendation
15:07:27 <mmedvede> every third-party CI should trigger recheck on "recheck", and restrict CI-specific recheck to a namespace
15:07:32 <anteaya> third party ididn't want to impliment that
15:07:49 <anteaya> mmedvede: no, our recomendation did not include a resitrition
15:08:20 <mmedvede> anteaya: I am talking about the new recommendation.
15:08:36 <anteaya> mmedvede: yes I'm saying that infra had a recommendation
15:08:43 <anteaya> and that is still our recommendation
15:09:05 <anteaya> this patch, merged without my knowledge does not reflect infra concencsous on the topic
15:09:27 <lennyb> mmedvede: by <system>: recheck you mean ci system name as it documented on #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems/ ?
15:09:28 <mmedvede> ok. It was not enough, because it did not specify a uniform way to only trigger a specific CI system
15:10:09 <anteaya> mmedvede: right because triggering a specificy ci system is not a good idea
15:10:43 <mmedvede> lennyb: that I do not know. I think it is just some keyword for a CI system that could be specified in that CI's comment
15:11:24 <mmedvede> anteaya: I think there was a discussion on why it is not a good idea?
15:11:29 <mmedvede> I remember something
15:11:38 <anteaya> yes
15:11:49 <anteaya> long ago when we tried to work on this
15:11:57 <mmedvede> anteaya: our usecase - our CI fails, but jenkins does not, so we want only recheck ours
15:12:50 <anteaya> right
15:12:52 <anteaya> recheck
15:12:58 <lennyb> mmedvede: you can run zuul enqueue for this case
15:13:19 <mmedvede> lennyb: you can, but then your CI would comment twice for now apparent reason
15:13:27 <mmedvede> I thought that was against recommedations
15:13:37 <mmedvede> *no apparent reason
15:13:48 <anteaya> this is the first I am aware of this patch
15:14:04 <anteaya> so I will consult with other folks in infra and ask them to comment on the patch
15:14:17 <anteaya> sorry I wasn't aware of it prior to it being merged
15:14:24 <anteaya> thanks for bringing it up
15:14:41 <lennyb> mmedvede: p.s. I have also a small python script to rerun a specific job if you are interested
15:15:18 <mmedvede> I do not remember what is the downside of standardizing the syntax. I understand that it is bad when a CI not triggered on "recheck". The patch is more about standard for CI-only recheck
15:16:14 <mmedvede> lennyb: nice, I can probably use it. I've been using zuul enqueue myself
15:16:14 <anteaya> that's okay I'll get some of the original rationale down in a form we can reference with a url
15:16:17 <anteaya> or find it
15:16:24 <mmedvede> anteaya: thank you
15:16:27 <anteaya> sorry this wasn't clear earlier
15:16:36 <anteaya> I'll do what I can to fix
15:16:47 <anteaya> thanks again for bringing it to my attention
15:17:29 <mmedvede> to make it clear, I like the patch for common syntax
15:17:46 <anteaya> mmedvede: I understand, thanks for stating your position clearly
15:17:57 <anteaya> does anyone have anything more on this topic?
15:19:03 <anteaya> does anyone have any other topic they would like to discuss?
15:20:12 <lennyb> mmedvede: #link http://paste.openstack.org/show/515748/
15:20:25 <lennyb> anteaya: i have nothing to discuss
15:20:32 <mmedvede> nothing from me
15:20:34 <anteaya> lennyb: thank you
15:20:35 <mmedvede> thanks lennyb
15:20:37 <anteaya> mmedvede: thanks
15:20:47 <anteaya> any objection to me closing today's meeting?
15:25:50 <anteaya> thank you all for your kind attendance and participation, I appreciate it
15:25:55 <anteaya> see you next week
15:25:58 <anteaya> #endmeeting