19:01:28 <lifeless> #startmeeting tripleo 19:01:29 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jun 17 19:01:28 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is lifeless. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:30 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:01:32 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tripleo' 19:01:38 <rwsu> hi 19:01:39 <lsmola> hello 19:01:40 <SpamapS> o/ 19:01:41 <rbrady> o/ 19:01:49 <giulivo> o/ 19:01:49 <lifeless> first post 19:01:50 <bnemec> \o 19:01:51 * giulivo just in case 19:01:55 <SpamapS> giulivo: it is a head, and an arm raised to wave 19:02:01 <lifeless> #topic agenda 19:02:05 <lifeless> bugs 19:02:06 <lifeless> reviews 19:02:06 <lifeless> Projects needing releases 19:02:06 <lifeless> CD Cloud status 19:02:06 <lifeless> CI 19:02:08 <giulivo> \o/ I see that now! 19:02:08 <lifeless> Tuskar 19:02:10 <lifeless> Insert one-off agenda items here 19:02:13 <lifeless> open discussion 19:02:24 <dprince> hello 19:02:25 <lifeless> 'morning' everyone 19:02:30 <slagle> hi 19:02:31 <GheRivero> o/ 19:02:33 <devananda> o/ 19:04:53 <lifeless> #topic bugs 19:05:04 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/ 19:05:04 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/diskimage-builder/ 19:05:04 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-refresh-config 19:05:04 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-apply-config 19:05:04 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-collect-config 19:05:06 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/os-cloud-config 19:05:09 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tuskar 19:05:11 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-tuskarclient 19:06:58 <lifeless> wall of red criticals 19:07:15 <lifeless> is michael kerrin here? 19:07:28 <lifeless> slagle: any word on 1287453 ? 19:07:38 <lifeless> tchaypo: 1290486 ? 19:07:46 <lifeless> derekh is on leave 19:07:55 <lifeless> SpamapS: any word on 1315474 ? 19:08:04 <lifeless> SpamapS: and bug 1316309 ? 19:08:06 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1316309 in tripleo "User requested by parameter RabbitUserName is not managed on the RabbitMQ servers." [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1316309 19:08:20 <lifeless> adam_g: what about bug 1316475 ? 19:08:21 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1316475 in cloud-init "[SRU] CloudSigma DS for causes hangs when serial console present" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1316475 19:08:36 <lifeless> GheRivero: you have bug 1316985 under your wing ? 19:08:42 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1316985 in tripleo "set -eu may spuriously break dkms module" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1316985 19:09:22 <adam_g> lifeless, 1316475 is fixed elsewhere, marking invalid for tripleo 19:09:42 <lifeless> GheRivero: also bug 1319979 19:09:47 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1319979 in tripleo "rabbitmq-server fails to restart in check-tripleo-overcloud-precise" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1319979 19:10:02 <lifeless> and the last one is dprince's fix committed. yayayayayyayayyay 19:10:27 <bnemec> Looks like the deps for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/95151/ have merged, so I'll drop WIP from it. Maybe that will get it moving again. 19:10:28 <SpamapS> lifeless: re bug 1315474 .. it looks to be a bit stalled. 19:10:29 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1315474 in tripleo "rabbit.username is not consumed in most elements" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1315474 19:10:47 <bnemec> ^Kept failing ci IIRC. 19:11:03 <GheRivero> lifeless: yes. The dkms is waiting for a couple of reviews 19:11:03 <lifeless> slicknik has bug 1329068 in dib 19:11:04 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1329068 in trove-integration "The trove guest-image is unable to publish the guest-config via cloud-init" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1329068 19:11:08 <slagle> lifeless: i'm going to drop 1287453 down to High, since Heat added a workaround 19:11:21 <lifeless> ok, lets get #links here for the reviews folk need 19:11:30 <lifeless> criticals stalled ==bad 19:11:39 <slagle> there is a patch up for it, so we don't have to rely on the workaround, but it needs an update. 19:11:42 <GheRivero> lifeless: and the rabbitmq restart dissapeared sometie ago :) Will revise and updated the bug propperly 19:11:45 <slagle> i can work on that soon'ish 19:11:59 <lifeless> slagle: cool 19:12:22 <dprince> CI today is hung up on a bunch of overcloud jobs failing with this issue https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1292105 19:12:23 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1292105 in tripleo "CI failed pinging overcloud instance" [Medium,Triaged] 19:12:39 <dprince> lifeless: should we bump the priority on that ^^ 19:12:43 <lifeless> adam_g: so we caused a regression in bug 1329068 from the data source patch 19:12:44 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1329068 in trove-integration "The trove guest-image is unable to publish the guest-config via cloud-init" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1329068 19:12:52 <lifeless> dprince: do it 19:12:57 <lifeless> dprince: (raise it, I mean) 19:13:14 <lifeless> dprince: what does kibana say about frequency ? 19:13:15 <tchaypo> One moment while I find a browser that works 19:14:12 <bnemec> http://goodsquishy.com/downloads/tripleo-jobs.html is a sea of red for the overcloud job. 19:14:24 <lifeless> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99505/7 for the dib regression 19:14:33 <lifeless> we shouldn't release a new dib until that lands 19:14:34 <dprince> lifeless: I'm seeing like 90% + overcloud jobs fail on that. 19:14:40 <tchaypo> Ah. I saw emails marking 1290486 as fix released, but the tripleo version has been moved back to triaged. 19:14:51 <tchaypo> I'll update it to fix-released in line with e other projects 19:15:11 <dprince> lifeless: I ran check experimental on ben's debug test which should tell us if an Ubuntu overcloud works as well (just in case) 19:16:10 <SpamapS> lifeless: re bug 1316309 .. needed a rebase.. submitted a new one now 19:16:15 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1316309 in tripleo "User requested by parameter RabbitUserName is not managed on the RabbitMQ servers." [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1316309 19:16:20 <lifeless> SpamapS: #linky link the review please 19:17:37 <SpamapS> #link https://review.openstack.org/92204 19:17:54 <lifeless> dprince: its a few hours old 19:17:56 <lifeless> http://logstash.openstack.org/#eyJzZWFyY2giOiJtZXNzYWdlOlwiRGVzdGluYXRpb24gSG9zdCBVbnJlYWNoYWJsZVwiIEFORCBidWlsZF9uYW1lOlwiY2hlY2stdHJpcGxlby1vdmVyY2xvdWQtZjIwXCIiLCJmaWVsZHMiOltdLCJvZmZzZXQiOjAsInRpbWVmcmFtZSI6IjE3MjgwMCIsImdyYXBobW9kZSI6ImNvdW50IiwidGltZSI6eyJ1c2VyX2ludGVydmFsIjowfSwic3RhbXAiOjE0MDMwMzI2MzA3MzR9 19:17:56 <SpamapS> it is marked Critical, btw, because it blocks Debian unstable users. Perhaps we should drop it to High? 19:18:20 <lifeless> SpamapS: we haven't had a group discussion about supporting debian releases at all 19:18:52 <lifeless> SpamapS: is there a group standing up to help support that (or do we think its in the program interest to do that regardless?) 19:19:37 <lifeless> dprince: first occurance in 48 hours was at 7am 19:19:46 <lifeless> dprince: utc I believe. so should be bisectable 19:19:59 <SpamapS> lifeless: I'd imagine our employer is interested in it working. The team using Debian inside HP ran into the bug when they upgraded to RabbitMQ 3.3 19:20:09 <dprince> lifeless: the previous issue may be masking it somewhat too 19:20:15 <lifeless> dprince: nope 19:20:26 <lifeless> dprince: that was fixed closer to 24 hours back 19:20:41 <lifeless> dprince: there are *no* hits of this before 12 hours back from now, over the last 48 hours 19:20:54 <lifeless> dprince: checking 7 days now 19:21:37 <dprince> http://goodsquishy.com/downloads/tripleo-jobs.html 19:21:43 <dprince> lifeless: well derek's report isn't showing a whole lot of overcloud love since the instance_extra_specs thing broke ^^^ 19:21:53 <lifeless> dprince: ack 19:21:59 <lifeless> we may have missed other settings 19:22:17 <dprince> lifeless: I do see one job passed however: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99250/9 19:22:25 <lifeless> on kibana 19:22:27 <lifeless> search for message:"Destination Host Unreachable" AND build_name:"check-tripleo-overcloud-f20" 19:22:31 <lifeless> over 7d timeframe 19:22:34 <lifeless> may take a couple of attempts 19:22:46 <dprince> lifeless: maybe not 19:22:52 <lifeless> its very clearly new 19:22:59 <lifeless> 12 hours old 19:23:09 <lifeless> nothing at all for the rest of the week 19:23:25 <dprince> lifeless: I'll double check the nova configs again, thing is my local setup works fine 19:23:32 <dprince> lifeless: as did Ben's 19:23:54 <dprince> curious to know if other people are having success w/ devtest (overcloud) today!! 19:24:06 <bnemec> Yeah, I've never been so unhappy to have devtest pass. 19:24:10 <lifeless> first occurance was on 83883 19:24:22 <lifeless> http://logs.openstack.org/83/83883/18/check-tripleo/check-tripleo-overcloud-f20/e95267e/console.html 19:24:23 <SpamapS> lifeless: ok, I dropped both of those to High. 19:24:44 <lifeless> SlickNik: ok so can you talk with SpamapS and/or adam_g about the critical dib bug? there is a review which might fix it in dib 19:24:56 <lifeless> SlickNik: or it might be too-narrow defaults in the new element 19:25:07 <lifeless> SlickNik: we'd like to get it fixed :) 19:25:14 <lifeless> I think we need to move on from bugs though 19:25:25 <SpamapS> I think for precise we may need to default to the exact 0.6 defaults 19:25:34 <SpamapS> which include NoCloud and ConfigDrive 19:25:35 <SlickNik> lifeless: That would be good. I'll take it up with SpamapS after the meeting. 19:25:36 <SlickNik> Thanks! 19:25:38 <SpamapS> guessing the logic changed 19:25:50 <SpamapS> since 0.7 is a _massive_ refactor 19:26:02 <lifeless> #topic reviews 19:26:07 <lifeless> so before I link anything 19:26:15 <lifeless> I'm sorry, I've been trying to get to the metareview 19:26:16 <lifeless> but failing 19:26:39 <lifeless> 30m time slices at the end of days are not suitable for a multi-hour high context problem 19:26:46 <giulivo> after the fix for 1330735 was merged, I'm seeing a different error though and only on f20, on ubuntu overcloud is passing: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93745/ 19:27:34 <giulivo> lifeless, can I also bring back the dicussion on a non-critical bug asking for some feedback? bug 1226310 19:27:36 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1226310 in tripleo "Nova bm operations fail when LIBVIRT_DEFAULT_URI not set" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1226310 19:28:07 <lifeless> giulivo: I think we'll run out of time; perhaps in the free for all at the end 19:28:09 <giulivo> definitely not urgent but not sure how to approach that given that we are probabaly all setting that in the user environment at this point to make that work 19:28:23 <lifeless> giulivo: I don't set it 19:28:43 <lifeless> giulivo: tripleo-ci doesn't set it 19:28:58 <lifeless> giulivo: anyhow end of meeting please 19:29:05 <giulivo> lifeless, ok I checked with debian and it would be needed... I'll make sure to see what ubuntu does and update the bug 19:29:12 <lifeless> #link http://www.nemebean.com/reviewstats/tripleo-open.html 19:29:12 <lifeless> #link http://www.nemebean.com/reviewstats/tripleo-30.txt 19:29:13 <lifeless> #link http://www.nemebean.com/reviewstats/tripleo-90.txt 19:29:50 <lifeless> oh 19:29:55 <lifeless> russelb's instance is back 19:30:07 <bnemec> \o/ 19:30:30 * Ng failing so hard, even accounting for a week off and helion release crunch :( 19:31:07 <SpamapS> We need to do a better job at finding almost-ready patches 19:31:08 <SpamapS> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89860/ 19:31:17 <lifeless> gertty may help 19:31:18 <SpamapS> Been sitting there with my +2, two other +1's, for a week. 19:31:26 <lifeless> I'm having success adding little dashboard patches to it locally 19:31:41 <jdob> SpamapS: there's no good way of querying for that sort of thing, is there? 19:31:49 <SpamapS> jdob: I bet there is. 19:31:59 <lifeless> ok so 19:32:00 <lifeless> Stats since the last revision without -1 or -2 : 19:32:01 <lifeless> Average wait time: 8 days, 16 hours, 40 minutes 19:32:01 <lifeless> 1st quartile wait time: 1 days, 8 hours, 50 minutes 19:32:01 <lifeless> Median wait time: 5 days, 6 hours, 20 minutes 19:32:03 <lifeless> 3rd quartile wait time: 13 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes 19:32:06 <lifeless> we're still sitting on ~2 weeks 19:32:22 <Ng> jdob: the search language for it is not awful: https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html 19:32:35 <jdob> never looked at it, but will take a look, thanks Ng 19:32:35 <bnemec> There's a lot waiting on CI passes that is making our stats look worse than they probably are. 19:32:37 <lifeless> one thing folk can do 19:32:41 <tchaypo> There's a link to a tripleo reviews dashboard near the bottom of 19:32:43 <tchaypo> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO#Review_team 19:32:44 <lifeless> is look at http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html 19:32:55 <lifeless> and pick reviews from the Longest waiting reviews (based on oldest rev without -1 or -2): 19:32:58 <lifeless> section 19:33:03 <lifeless> since thats the thing that really ages 19:33:08 <lifeless> its also a convenient todo list 19:33:11 <bnemec> Can we make the CI job leave a negative vote when it fails? 19:33:35 <lifeless> bnemec: I think that infra have refactored things for ironic in a way we could use 19:33:47 <lifeless> bnemec: so in principle, yes, if someone can chase that ? 19:33:51 <tchaypo> That link is generated by gerrit-dash-creator - https://github.com/stackforge/gerrit-dash-creator/blob/master/dashboards/tripleo.dash 19:34:16 <bnemec> lifeless: I'll see what I can find out. 19:34:19 <giulivo> tchaypo, +1 I'm using it too and I think it provides a nice view 19:34:55 <lifeless> so I'm going to propose tht reviewers start their review pass with the 'Longest waiting reviews (based on oldest rev without -1 or -2): 19:34:59 <lifeless> ' section of reviewstats. 19:35:02 <lifeless> what do folk think ? 19:35:18 <greghaynes> +1, We could probably even add that to our new review dashboard 19:35:18 <SpamapS> Yeah that's a good idea. 19:35:23 <jdob> that makes sense, it's different from my normal workflow 19:35:30 <tchaypo> it looks like it shouldn't be too hard to add the things SpamapS was talking about, and it already has sections for "no review in last N days" and "no negative feedback" 19:35:40 <bnemec> That's what I do anyway. 19:35:47 <lifeless> bnemec: <3 19:35:53 <bnemec> :-) 19:35:58 <lifeless> bnemec: so how come 19:36:04 <lifeless> 46 days, 0 hours, 13 minutes https://review.openstack.org/91861 (Use configured RabbitMQ user) is unreviewed since june 11 :) 19:36:04 <bnemec> There's a reason I care about keeping reviewstats working. 19:36:08 * lifeless is mean 19:36:21 <bnemec> I'm pretty sure that hasn't passed CI in that time. 19:36:30 <greghaynes> yea, that one is ready to +A when CI is good 19:36:33 <bnemec> I've rechecked it repeatedly. 19:36:38 <lifeless> actually, lifeless failed to click on the one he looked at before 19:36:49 <slagle> yea, that patch has been +15'd 19:36:55 <slagle> yet shows up as unreviewed? 19:36:56 * lifeless is mean and stupid 19:36:58 <slagle> it's just waiting to pass CI 19:37:00 <jdob> is this the meeting section where we plead for people to review our specs? I didnt see an explicit section for it this time 19:37:13 <lifeless> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96448/ 19:37:34 <lifeless> jdob: I think so, we can add specs to the agenda too I guess 19:37:45 <jdob> i forgot the resolution, if it was going to be separate or not 19:37:53 <lifeless> agenda wasn't updated 19:38:03 <lifeless> so clearly noone cared enough :) 19:38:09 <jdob> regardless, I'd really appreciate eyes on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94720/ to make sure everyone is happy with tuskar's direction so we can get started 19:38:36 <tchaypo> jdob: can you #linky that? 19:38:48 <lifeless> more generally; as the specs process matures - expect folk to be justifiably unhappy at design-issues-caught-in-code-review 19:38:55 <tchaypo> or maybe #info the whole thing so it gets into the logs? 19:39:14 <lifeless> I think we'll find contributors pushing back if we haven't caught it in spec review - double-edged sword 19:39:19 <jdob> lifeless: ya, that's my concern, I don't want to start down a path that gets major disagreement after it's been in code for a few weeks 19:39:35 <jdob> and i'm starting to catch crap from my managers that it still hasnt been started 19:39:43 <lifeless> so please take the time reviewers to review specs; I guess as second priority after super-old-code-reviews 19:39:45 <jdob> tchaypo: that's just pound link and the link right? 19:39:52 <lifeless> jdob: aye 19:39:57 <jdob> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94720/ 19:40:15 <jdob> thanks in advance :) 19:40:24 <jdob> unless you -1 it, then i'd have rathered you didn't bother looking 19:40:30 <tchaypo> I'm hoping that using it in the middle of a sentence doesn't matc the regex 19:40:30 <lifeless> hah 19:40:54 <lifeless> #topic Projects needing releases 19:40:54 <jdob> tchaypo: me too, that's why I was careful to type out "pound"... I don't want to be "that guy" :) 19:41:04 <lifeless> do we have a 'volunteer' ? 19:41:07 <jdob> i'm willing to take a stab at it 19:41:26 <lifeless> #action jdob to wear the release cape 19:41:42 <bnemec> So I want to note that we need a dib-utils release. 19:41:51 <bnemec> Otherwise we can't start using it in diskimage-builder. 19:41:56 <lifeless> bnemec: is it in the releasemgmt wiki page as a thing ? 19:42:05 <bnemec> I _think_ all the permissions should be okay. 19:42:06 <slagle> bnemec: can you add that to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO/ReleaseManagement ? 19:42:17 <bnemec> Yeah, will do. 19:42:23 * bnemec didn't know about that 19:42:29 <lifeless> jdob: since dib had a regression you might want to see if the regression was released or not; if it wasn't, we should fix it before releasing 19:42:44 <jdob> kk 19:42:56 <lifeless> #topic CD Cloud status 19:43:08 <lifeless> dprince: can you speak to rh1 while I grab my notes for hp1 ? :) 19:44:11 <lifeless> ... or not :) 19:44:13 <dprince> lifeless: sure, rh1 is fine 19:44:21 <lifeless> ok so AFAIK therh... damn race conditions 19:44:37 <lifeless> ok so hp1 is still down 19:44:50 <lifeless> #info help still needed on hp1.tripleo.org 19:44:54 <lifeless> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-hp1-rebuild 19:45:33 <lifeless> and #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1325114 <-title is wrong, affects overcloud too 19:45:34 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1325114 in tripleo "can't deploy underclouds with VLAN API endpoints" [High,Triaged] 19:45:41 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1325114 <-title is wrong, affects overcloud too 19:45:44 <lifeless> and 19:46:00 <lifeless> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100151/ 19:46:19 <lifeless> basically, we didn't have test coverage of the (primitive) vlan support, and it bitrotted 19:46:52 <lifeless> I think the simple 'get a vlan up on an IP' bit is nearly fixed, but we need to glue it in more than that, because we now have non-wildcard binds for services 19:47:24 <lifeless> so reviewing dan's networking spec is key, as is reviewing the 100151 public service VIP spec, and helping implement both 19:47:38 <lifeless> We also have hp2.tripleo.org spinning up 19:47:42 <lifeless> its going to have the same issue 19:47:56 <lifeless> its a new region, currently 20 recycled machines 19:48:00 <tchaypo> Could we get a summary of this hash-infoed for the logs? 19:48:02 <lifeless> decent specs just not new 19:48:33 <lifeless> #info please help with restoring vlan and public endpoint support so that we can get hp1.tripleo.orgback online and > double our CI capacity 19:48:56 <lifeless> which leads to #topic CI 19:49:04 <lifeless> #topic CI 19:49:13 <lifeless> everything is red 19:49:32 <dprince> lifeless: not everything, just the overcloud 19:49:47 <lifeless> bnemec: hah. http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt 19:49:58 <lifeless> bnemec: so I'd like to keep your copy running, if you're willing :) 19:50:05 <lifeless> bnemec: seems simplest 19:50:30 <lifeless> dprince: yes, but since we need it to pass :) 19:50:34 <bnemec> lifeless: Yeah, no problem 19:51:16 * slagle still doesnt know what "Emails" means in stackalytics 19:51:26 <slagle> regardless, i'm glad i'm Emails=0. 19:51:42 <lifeless> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1292105 19:51:44 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1292105 in tripleo "CI failed pinging overcloud instance" [Critical,Triaged] 19:51:55 <lifeless> #info that bug needs fixing to resume landing patches 19:52:05 <lifeless> #topic Tuskar 19:52:28 <lifeless> anything tuskar specific to address? 19:53:11 <jdob> for my part, just the review I linked earlier 19:53:14 <lifeless> ok 19:53:27 <lifeless> #topic open discussion 19:53:37 <lifeless> Can folk please sign up on the mid cycle etherpad if you're going 19:53:51 <lifeless> RH are finding a block of rooms at discount rate and they need room count asap 19:54:14 <lifeless> On support and backwards compat and so on 19:54:20 <lifeless> this came up from a review I did 19:54:22 <Ng> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-midcycle-meetup if anyone needs the link 19:54:29 <lifeless> but I realise we really haven't spoken much about it 19:54:43 <lifeless> other than the fact we're reserving the right to break things in most of our projects 19:55:02 <lifeless> I think we may be being too conservative - most of our projects are split out of incubator *to enable us to give guarantees* 19:55:09 <lifeless> discuss 19:55:15 <tchaypo> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-midcycle-meetup 19:55:23 <tchaypo> #info please sign up if you're going 19:55:40 <bnemec> lifeless: Too conservative in incubator or the split out projects? 19:55:49 <bnemec> I thought this arose from one of the latter. 19:55:53 <lifeless> split out 19:56:19 <lifeless> we have a minimum requirement of cross-project backwards compat on *every* change we land, because gerrit. 19:56:33 <lifeless> We don't have any requirement on upgrades (yet, but we will once thats tested) 19:56:50 <slagle> personally, i'd like to see the split out projects be able to deploy any supported version of openstack 19:56:55 <lifeless> and we don't have any requirement on derived-work (and that will be hard to test, even if we wanted that as a desired thing) 19:57:01 <lifeless> slagle: yes! me too 19:57:09 <lifeless> slagle: thats always been the intent in my head, at least. 19:57:20 <lifeless> slagle: and its yet another dimension of compatibility 19:57:22 <slagle> lifeless: right, we don't always code and review that way though 19:57:22 <bnemec> Until we're testing that I'm not sure it's a realistic goal. 19:57:38 <lifeless> bnemec: it could be an aspiration 19:57:45 <lifeless> so concretely, I propose to: 19:57:56 <lifeless> - write up a spec about the various dimensions of backwards compat 19:58:01 <lifeless> - with strawman positions 19:58:08 <lifeless> - get everyone to review it over this next week 19:58:19 <lifeless> - land it ~ 7 days from now. 19:58:23 <lifeless> What do you all think ? 19:58:30 <jdob> +1 to spec and timeboxing the spec 19:58:46 <bnemec> Sure, seems reasonable. 19:58:49 <jdob> the spec process is still new enough to us that I dont think its getting the attention it ultimately should 19:58:55 <jdob> so setting a deadline helps that 19:59:26 <lifeless> #info there will be a spec on backwards compat and tripleo and stuff; we're timeboxing it to ~1 week so be sure to watch out for it 19:59:35 <lifeless> giulivo: btw this is your time for that bug :) 19:59:37 <lifeless> 60s 19:59:51 <jdob> tick tock... 19:59:54 <SpamapS> slagle: it's not realy how we code and review that matters. It is really how we test that determines if we "support" something. 20:00:38 <lifeless> SpamapS: testing is a backstop to culture, but it doesn't define the vision 20:00:38 <SpamapS> I suggest giulivo take that discussion to #tripleo 20:00:46 <giulivo> lifeless, well I really don't know yet why/if on ubuntu a regular user gets qemu:///system by default as libvirt uri 20:00:48 <lifeless> SpamapS: there's always going to be resource limits, for instance 20:00:54 <SpamapS> lifeless: if it isn't happening, the culture is built on sand. :( 20:01:02 <giulivo> I'm sure that is not the case on debian though as I checked that personally 20:01:15 <lifeless> SpamapS: what can I say, we're living in anhk-morpork? 20:01:21 <lifeless> #endmeeting