20:02:49 <lifeless> #startmeeting tripleo
20:02:50 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jun 24 20:02:49 2013 UTC.  The chair is lifeless. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:02:51 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:02:51 <dprince> hi
20:02:54 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tripleo'
20:02:56 <jog0> o/
20:03:02 <NobodyCam> morning :)
20:03:31 <lifeless> just digging up the agent
20:03:44 <SpamapS> o/
20:03:45 <lifeless> agenda
20:04:10 <lifeless> bugs
20:04:10 <lifeless> Grizzly test rack status
20:04:10 <lifeless> CI virtualized testing progress
20:04:11 <lifeless> Periods at the end of git commit messages. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33262 (SpamapS, markmc)
20:04:19 <lifeless> this is going to be a fun meeting :)
20:04:22 <lifeless> so bugs
20:04:26 <lifeless> #topic bugs
20:05:04 <SpamapS> I've been awful with my bugs the last week with all of the moving insanity.
20:05:27 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/
20:06:41 <lifeless> ok, so your three are in-progress?
20:07:07 <lifeless> I haven't had any feedback from the quantum folk on https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1189385
20:07:45 <lifeless> salv-orlando is still poking around at https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1184484
20:08:39 <SpamapS> lifeless: the keystone sql backend just needs a +2
20:10:40 <lifeless> ok, done.
20:11:04 <SpamapS> cool
20:11:07 <lifeless> So, we can hopefully start talking about high priority bugs next week; as the upstream quantum ones we are just tracking.
20:11:16 <lifeless> #topic Grizzly test rack status
20:11:20 <lifeless> Still ticking along.
20:11:37 <SpamapS> and this will make it work on fedora: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33604/
20:11:44 <lifeless> I hear word the users of it may want it operational through october, which means we probably need to look at live upgrading it to an upgradeable setup.
20:12:04 <lifeless> e.g. upgrading the control plane image etc.
20:12:42 <lifeless> If/when I get confirmation, we can do the detailed analysis work on how to achieve that.
20:12:53 <lifeless> possibly the answer is 'rip it down and build it up'.
20:13:12 <lifeless> Anything else on the test rack?
20:13:35 <SpamapS> There was some work to get Nagios going in the rack. NobodyCam ?
20:16:06 <NobodyCam> SpamapS: I have not done any work with the raq itself
20:16:15 <lifeless> ok
20:16:24 <lifeless> #topic CI virtualized testing progress
20:16:25 <lifeless> pleia2: ^
20:16:49 <pleia2> no updates this week
20:17:15 <lifeless> ok
20:17:25 <lifeless> #topic Periods at the end of git commit messages. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33262 (SpamapS,
20:17:28 <lifeless> markmc)
20:18:05 <SpamapS> so, I encourage everyone to read markmc's inline response to my comment requesting a period be added.
20:18:19 <SpamapS> I agree with all of the points, and think we should abolish periods at the end fo the first line short commit messages.
20:18:25 <jog0> also https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33789/
20:18:48 * dprince could honestly care less
20:18:59 <devananda> what? no periods? :-D
20:19:07 <SpamapS> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33262/1//COMMIT_MSG
20:19:23 <SpamapS> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GitCommitMessages#Summary_of_GIT_commit_message_structure
20:20:00 <dprince> less and less freedom in this project (to have or not to have a period... that is the question)
20:20:04 <SpamapS> That last link says it all really. OpenStack standard is that it should not end in a period.
20:20:19 <lifeless> SpamapS: it *did not* say that before.
20:21:04 <lifeless> SpamapS: and I haven't seen any list discussion about whether it should or shouldn't; this seems a bit uhm, looking for word
20:21:05 <jog0> lifeless: mark added that
20:21:20 <lifeless> yes, as part of a review that says 'it should be this way' with no prior discussion.
20:21:27 <devananda> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=GitCommitMessages&diff=prev&oldid=24506
20:21:40 <SpamapS> right
20:22:01 <lifeless> I'm just saying that for something which is going to affect multiple projects, a little discussion first would be nice.
20:22:21 <lifeless> FTR - I'm not going to bikeshed this, we can go with poor prose as that seems to be the consensus.
20:22:35 <SpamapS> Yeah since markmc does not seem to be online, perhaps we should defer until he can explain himself?
20:22:41 <lifeless> But it could have been handled much more nicely.
20:23:24 <lifeless> s/poor prose/poor grammar/
20:23:55 <SpamapS> Yeah I didn't check the history of that page, didn't realize markmc changed it basically to support his resistance to periods.
20:24:29 <jog0> I think the arguement is that at least in nova only 6^ of patches have a period at the end of the title
20:24:41 <jog0> 6%*
20:24:48 <SpamapS> lifeless: I tend to think that this short message is quite obviously ended with a newline and thus can live without a period, and would support abolishing, but more to the point, I just want it to be one way and everybody to do it that way so we never have to discuss this.
20:25:14 <jog0> SpamapS: ++ to the second part
20:25:58 <jog0> ' *# In git's own git repo, 1.43% of commit messages in the last year ended in a period
20:26:32 <SpamapS> Ignoring markmc's rather violent wiki changing, can we just decide and move on now?
20:26:50 <SpamapS> I find myself correcting this, and only this issue, in a lot of reviews, and I feel like a total turd.
20:26:53 <lifeless> I have now whinged on the linked review.
20:27:03 <lifeless> I have already said I won't bikeshed here
20:27:23 <lifeless> ... so sure, we'll do what hacking says for this.
20:27:51 <lifeless> However, I am still going to demand clear explanations for /why/ something is being done (vs /what/ is being done) with good grammar, in the commit.
20:28:16 <lifeless> It's easy to do and makes reading commit logs massively more pleasant.
20:28:58 <SpamapS> All lines except the first should be properly punctuated and have understandable grammar, agreed.
20:29:37 <SpamapS> anyway, lets move on?
20:30:24 <lifeless> #topic open discussion
20:31:40 <jog0> having trouble reproducing
20:31:41 <jog0> https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1178529
20:32:01 <jog0> nova-api ratelimiting
20:32:26 <lifeless> ah
20:32:32 <lifeless> so different commands have different defaults
20:32:42 <lifeless> try creating a script to register 40 bare metal nodes
20:32:55 <jog0> lifeless: ahh so that command is special
20:32:57 <lifeless> and then delete them
20:33:18 <jog0> why delete too?
20:33:37 <lifeless> different verb, different defaults.
20:33:57 <jog0> ahh
20:35:58 <dkehn> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/31061/
20:36:19 <dkehn> not sure but probably worth more eyes
20:37:47 <lifeless> dkehn: cool, I will eyeball
20:38:23 <dkehn> note the quantum needs to be there before this
20:38:38 <dkehn> like u I'm waiting on them as well
20:38:51 <dkehn> not sure whats up there
20:39:02 <lifeless> dkehn: whats the full set of reviews you're waiting on ?
20:39:31 <lifeless> I believe there is a quantum meeting after this; it will be late for you - would you like me to advocate for your patches there?
20:39:42 <dkehn> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30441/ then https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30447/
20:39:58 <dkehn> then the 31061, complete
20:40:29 <dkehn> have conversed with markmcclain, but no action yet
20:40:51 <dkehn> have had a considerable number of review, but no core folks
20:41:27 <lifeless> ok
20:41:29 <dkehn> planning on bring it up in the next meeting (qUANTUM)
20:41:34 <lifeless> ok cool
20:41:41 <lifeless> if you need to sleep I can do that for you
20:41:58 <dkehn> naw, just patiences
20:46:17 <lifeless> seems we're done. Last call ?
20:47:00 <lifeless> #endmeeting