20:01:15 #startmeeting tripleo 20:01:16 Meeting started Mon Jul 1 20:01:15 2013 UTC. The chair is lifeless. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:01:17 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 20:01:19 The meeting name has been set to 'tripleo' 20:01:29 o/ 20:02:14 hi 20:02:20 #topic agenda 20:02:26 bugs 20:02:27 Grizzly test rack status 20:02:27 CI virtualized testing progress 20:02:27 Periods at the end of git commit messages. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33262 (SpamapS, markmc) 20:02:29 open discussion 20:02:43 Any last minute agenda items? 20:03:18 * SpamapS draws a blank 20:03:55 #topic bugs 20:04:16 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/ 20:04:41 We're down to 4 on tripleo itself 20:04:51 we probably need a better way to view cross code base 20:05:22 the two quantum ones are still limboing 20:05:29 SpamapS: has the two others 20:05:53 I think the other two need to be revisited, they may not still apply. 20:09:12 ok 20:09:18 so lets look at some highs 20:09:39 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1174151 20:09:53 right, good choice 20:09:54 IIRC, we have to do that work in Ironic, correct? 20:10:03 nope 20:10:22 we kindof need two answers to all of these 20:10:53 we need a workaround answer: vendor raid tools in the deploy ramdisk and some hack to tunnel settings through (e.g. via flavor attributes) 20:11:02 and we need a clean answer in Ironic 20:11:48 where clean for this one probably means a cinder Ironic driver, to communicate raid levels 20:12:16 or perhaps flavors for ephemeral config (e.g. same as nova bare-metal) and cinder for volume raid levels 20:12:45 I think https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1178088 is fixed, no ? 20:13:08 Yeah long time ago 20:13:14 I think the gerrit plumbing wasn't working then 20:13:32 no thats incubator 20:14:00 hmmm patch might not be landed 20:14:03 I will check for that 20:14:35 I will do a scan of the high bugs for things that aren't high, later today. 20:15:00 we have a couple of F19 related from kashyap on d-i-b 20:15:03 Or it might be in diskimage-builder actually 20:15:21 load-image is in incubator 20:15:43 Date: Mon Jun 10 22:09:29 2013 +0000 20:15:43 Merge "Add RedHat support for disk-image-get-kernel." 20:15:51 lifeless: yes but it calls disk-image-get-kernel :) 20:16:09 oh 20:16:12 so yeah, fixed? 20:16:25 yes, already closed 20:16:33 thanks 20:17:02 ok so 20:17:11 lifeless: fwiw load-image has worked for me on fedora, I can take a look at that bug if it is still and issue 20:17:21 rwsu: nah it is closed now 20:17:26 rwsu: thanks, we're pretty sure its good 20:17:32 cool 20:17:37 rwsu: more of a worry is kashyap's bugs on f19 20:17:50 rwsu: one looks like a process getting killed ('Bad Address' from losetup) 20:18:04 rwsu: and the other one udevd seems to have changed it's firmware handling 20:18:33 I haven't looked at f19 yet, pblaho has been working on that, I can take a look though 20:18:45 let me grab te bug numbers for you 20:19:54 rwsu: https://bugs.launchpad.net/diskimage-builder/+bug/1195264 20:20:34 rwsu: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1196409 20:20:43 ok, any other bug stuff ? 20:21:47 lifeless: I will take a look at those two 20:21:51 tanks! 20:21:56 erm, *thanks* 20:22:14 #topic Grizzly test rack status 20:22:20 ok, so good news everybody. 20:22:43 The user we're doing the rack for w/in HP wants to keep using it for another 3 months or so 20:23:15 When we brought it up, we cut corners because it was a short term thing. 20:23:34 Do we need to revisit those things? Like 'should it run newer builds of everything' ? 20:23:48 if by cut corners you mean we made a square into a triangle, then agreed. ;) 20:24:08 Specifically it's not running random creds for everything 20:24:18 and its not l4 firewalled etc 20:24:29 Right it is just not production hardened at all. 20:24:29 someone malicious could be rather malicious if they wanted to. 20:24:42 And we have no update facility for the code on it. 20:25:07 We can update the horizontally scaled bits fairly easily 20:25:11 nothing clean 20:25:35 we can update all of it .. just not cleanly/efficiently/without entropy bombs. 20:25:51 So : what do we need to do; what could we do; what impact on tripleo will it have to do it (is it things we need to do anyway, or new work...) 20:27:34 I think random credentials, and perhaps getting Heat Metadata updates working (which would help facilitate the random creds), would help a lot. 20:28:05 lifeless: really though, what would help the most would be to have a second (even much smaller..) rack that we can use for CD 20:29:08 SpamapS: ok, so we ahve a have dozen machines in that rack in principle 20:29:15 SpamapS: that we can recover if someone wants to spend the time 20:29:25 SpamapS: they are available immediately. 20:30:10 SpamapS: I will ask for a dedicated test rack soon, but I want the story through to the POC level actually scripted (it's not yet) so that we're actually able to /use/ a rack vs just being able to boot a VM 20:30:46 SpamapS: which is what https://review.openstack.org/35090 is all about 20:31:15 lifeless: ahh lovely 20:32:09 SpamapS: if you want to join me on pushing automation for up to the POC level, we might get there sooner 20:32:19 SpamapS: I am going to have to context switch this week for pyconau anyhow 20:32:28 (or someone else might want to?) :) 20:32:31 lifeless: yeah I am nearly done with a first-cut of os-collect-config then I should be able to push on that 20:34:52 ok so - SpamapS can I ask you to create bugs on tripleo for the work items we need to do asap, to get the POC 'safe' for a 3 month running period ? 20:35:04 SpamapS: critical importance, I think. 20:35:14 lifeless: most are already there, just not critical 20:35:35 SpamapS: rephrasing: we need to do the changes in trunk, and we need to deploy them into the POC. 20:35:43 SpamapS: so for any one thing there are two items. 20:35:50 Right. :) 20:36:19 SpamapS: the 'get it in the rack' is higher priority I think, and whomever is doing it can choose whether to achieve that by doing the trunk work first or second. 20:36:26 SpamapS: what do you think? 20:38:18 lifeless: +1 I was thinking the same thing. 20:38:44 As some things will need to be a little duct-tape-ish on the POC rack but will need to be clean in trunk. 20:39:30 yup 20:39:53 #action Spamaps to create POC specific bugs in tripleo for a 3 month lifespan 20:40:06 #topic CI virtual testing status 20:40:08 pleia2: ^ 20:40:26 I was out of town most of last week so no real updates from me 20:40:41 diving back into it this week though, spent some time this morning getting back up to speed with the most recent changes 20:45:55 ok 20:46:08 #topic periods redux 20:46:17 This was all on the list and in various reviews but... 20:46:31 periods on the end of commit messages are now not a subject for review debate 20:46:39 present or not, up to the author. 20:46:55 s/commit messages/first line of commit messages/ 20:47:10 Good grammar is still needed :) 20:47:18 #topic open discussion 20:47:31 * lifeless opens the floor 20:48:56 crap I had something and then forgot 20:49:03 Oh, right 20:49:36 I was wondering if anybody would be interested in a mid-cycle sprint to tie some of the themes from havana summit together into reality somewhere around "2 weeks before h3" ? 20:50:16 SpamapS: can you put actual dates on that ? 20:50:17 I'm sure lifeless will vote that it be held in .nz .. and I'd be open to that if everybody's corporate overlords were on board with that. 20:51:10 H3 is 9/5 20:51:32 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Havana_Release_Schedule 20:51:33 btw 20:52:39 is that 20130905 ? 20:52:43 yes 20:53:07 ok 20:53:18 I suggest you send a mail out to -dev proposing this 20:53:26 just gauge interest 20:53:28 sec 20:53:34 so week of 20130812 - 20130816 or 20130819 - 20130823 would probably be ideal 20:53:53 lifeless: yeah good idea. Its a thought that just came to me this morning. 20:54:27 so if there is interest we can sort out venues and exact dates then 20:54:42 like, I need to check vs pyconnz etc 20:54:54 and perhaps OSDC 20:55:25 right it may not work out just because we're late in proposing it. :P 20:56:02 any other business? 20:58:24 dhellmann: Couple questions on your response to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/34834/3/openstack/common/local.py. Your main concern is the test coverage given there are two implementations? 20:58:43 Thanks everyone 20:58:49 #endmeeting