20:01:55 <SpamapS> #startmeeting TripleO
20:01:56 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Sep 23 20:01:55 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SpamapS. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:01:57 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:01:59 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tripleo'
20:02:33 <SpamapS> Agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TripleO
20:02:54 <SpamapS> #topic roll call!
20:03:03 <SpamapS> o/
20:03:15 <lifeless> kinda-here-but-dealing-with-baby
20:03:18 <dkehn> hi
20:03:23 <slagle> howdy
20:03:34 <rushiagr> hi
20:03:56 <rushiagr> new guy here
20:04:11 <stevebaker> o/
20:04:21 <bnemec> o/
20:04:35 <SpamapS> fantastic
20:04:38 <SpamapS> #topic bugs
20:04:39 <dprince> hi
20:04:51 <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/
20:04:51 <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/diskimage-builder/
20:04:51 <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-refresh-config
20:04:51 <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-apply-config
20:04:52 <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-collect-config
20:05:22 <SpamapS> For those who weren't in Seattle, we did go over bugs briefly while in the room.
20:05:29 <SpamapS> the end result: hey we have a lot of bugs!
20:06:51 <SpamapS> the Critical bugs are all blocked on needing more data or some other external issues, so focus should be on High bugs.
20:07:23 <SpamapS> there was also a desire to perhaps set some short term goals to finish before the havana release of OpenStack, so that TripleO has something to show off at that time.
20:08:26 <SpamapS> Since there are so many, does anybody have specific ones they'd like to bring up?
20:09:23 <slagle> are we going to have havana branches in the seperate repos, so that we can work torwards something stable?
20:09:27 <SpamapS> no
20:09:45 <SpamapS> If we were going to do that I think we'd have needed to do that through the cycle.
20:10:04 <SpamapS> The interfaces should be stable in all of the component pieces.
20:10:11 <SpamapS> incubator is a moving target by definition
20:10:22 <slagle> ok. i'm just concerned about new stuff going in that breaks the stable-ness
20:10:34 <SpamapS> slagle: we have a policy of never breaking the interfaces.
20:10:45 <SpamapS> so breaking the interfaces means reverting immediately.
20:11:17 <SpamapS> hence no desire to "freeze"
20:11:39 <SpamapS> Of course, we'll all feel a lot more confident about that when all of the pieces are functionally tested in the gate. :)
20:12:41 <SpamapS> anyway, no specific bugs, so we'll move on.
20:13:09 <SpamapS> #topic Grizzly test rack status
20:13:34 <SpamapS> no change AFAIK
20:13:57 <SpamapS> #topic CI virtualized testing progress
20:14:06 <SpamapS> pleia2: you here today?
20:14:49 <SpamapS> We hit a wall with lxc last week at the sprint. It appears that there are deep problems using iscsi from inside LXC containers.
20:15:38 <SpamapS> anyway, I don't think there is much more to say there.
20:15:44 <SpamapS> #topic open discussion
20:16:14 <ccrouch> are there specific upstream bugs around the LXC + iscsi stuff?
20:16:29 <SpamapS> ccrouch: we dug them out, but I think pleia2 has them in her notes.
20:16:38 <SpamapS> ccrouch: I was mostly just chatting with the LXC authors
20:16:47 <SpamapS> there are multiple reasons it is problematic
20:17:37 <SpamapS> netlink socket is used to talk to the control portion of the kernel, and that is not namespaced. probably some other bits inside iscsi that would need to be made namespace aware since they make outgoing connections.
20:17:49 <lifeless> I mailed the openstack-infra list last night about the new plan
20:18:16 <lifeless> 'Plan for testing nova baremetal and TripleO
20:18:16 <lifeless> '
20:19:11 <ccrouch> SpamapS: ok great, sounds like its moving along
20:19:41 <SpamapS> ccrouch: you do remind me though that we should consider tracking those bugs so that we can return to the issue when they're addressed (and/or put resources on them if none are available)
20:19:48 <lifeless> So once we get buy-in from infra-core on that, we'll have a few things folk can push on in parallel.
20:20:43 <SpamapS> just to bring this up.. I thought the sprint was extremely successful in moving the community forward on the tripleo program.
20:21:03 <ccrouch> i've heard nothing but good things about it :-)
20:21:31 <SpamapS> Bumps and bruises and cleared /dev trees aside, we all got things done through the week. :)
20:21:32 <dprince> lifeless: is there a public diagram that shows the proposed CI workflow in a bit more detail?
20:21:54 <dprince> lifeless: if not should we make one?
20:22:10 <slagle> SpamapS: agreed, thanks for hosting :)
20:22:18 <lifeless> dprince: just the prose in the etherpad; turning that into a dia or whatever sounds good
20:25:02 <SpamapS> Alright well if there's nothing else...
20:25:05 <lifeless> well
20:25:12 <lifeless> Tuskar have said they want to move ahead on the merge
20:25:37 <lifeless> so perhaps we should add sections for tuskar-api and tuskar-ui to the meeting agenda I think
20:25:43 <lifeless> or review how we structure the agenda
20:25:51 <lifeless> [Lynne has C now, so I'm more here]
20:25:54 <SpamapS> Oh definitely I wasn't aware of that. :)
20:26:16 <ccrouch> SpamapS: did we propose the meeting time change? apologies if i missed that, I joined late
20:26:23 <SpamapS> we did not
20:26:45 <SpamapS> IIRC some people wanted to move the meeting back to 19:00 UTC?
20:26:57 <lifeless> the proposal from the face to face meeting was to use the current tuskar slot
20:27:03 <SpamapS> ahhhh
20:27:20 <lifeless> which is 23h later than this one, so slightly friendlier to east europeans
20:27:55 <SpamapS> well then I propose we all attend that meeting tomorrow, and discuss there?
20:28:18 <SpamapS> and add that to the agenda
20:28:26 <lifeless> seconded
20:28:27 <bnemec> +1
20:29:05 <SpamapS> Ok I've added it to the agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Tuskar
20:29:49 <SpamapS> With that, I think we can adjourn.
20:29:58 <SpamapS> thanks everyone!
20:30:05 <SpamapS> #endmeeting