14:00:17 <mwhahaha> #startmeeting tripleo
14:00:17 <mwhahaha> #topic agenda
14:00:17 <mwhahaha> * Review past action items
14:00:17 <mwhahaha> * One off agenda items
14:00:17 <mwhahaha> * Squad status
14:00:17 <mwhahaha> * Bugs & Blueprints
14:00:18 <mwhahaha> * Projects releases or stable backports
14:00:18 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Mar 13 14:00:17 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mwhahaha. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:18 <mwhahaha> * Specs
14:00:19 <mwhahaha> * open discussion
14:00:19 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:20 <mwhahaha> Anyone can use the #link, #action and #info commands, not just the moderatorǃ
14:00:20 <mwhahaha> Hi everyone! who is around today?
14:00:21 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tripleo'
14:00:29 <trown|ruck> o/
14:00:30 <shardy> o/
14:00:31 <rasca> o/
14:00:36 <jpich> o/
14:00:38 <myoung|rover> o/
14:00:44 <ccamacho> o/ hey
14:00:48 <EmilienM> o/
14:01:14 <cdearborn> \o
14:01:23 <fultonj> o/
14:01:31 <dpeacock> o/
14:01:40 <weshay> o/
14:01:42 <matbu> o/
14:01:43 <chem> o/
14:02:06 <jfrancoa> o/
14:02:06 <gfidente> o/
14:02:17 <mwhahaha> ok looks like we've got a decent number of people
14:02:19 <mwhahaha> let's begin
14:02:25 <beagles> o/
14:02:29 <mwhahaha> #topic review past action items
14:02:41 <mwhahaha> sshnaidm to raise ML post about reducing risk with quickstart and quickstart-extras patches
14:02:46 <bogdando> o/
14:02:46 <marios> o/
14:02:49 <holser__> \o
14:02:57 <mwhahaha> would be nice to get that on the CI squad agenda maybe
14:03:01 <sshnaidm> mwhahaha, let's cancel it for now
14:03:04 <mwhahaha> k
14:03:06 <pradk> o/
14:03:18 <mwhahaha> EmilienM & mwhahaha to sync with ccamacho about patch missing from queens? - DONE was figured out last meeting as tripleoclient had been branched earlier than everything else. I believe the patches have been backported.
14:03:38 <EmilienM> yes
14:03:38 <mwhahaha> ccamacho: are we missing anymore patches or have they all merged?
14:04:04 <ccamacho> mwhahaha I think most of them are +2 +A
14:04:08 <mwhahaha> k
14:04:10 <ccamacho> just pending for merge
14:04:22 <marios> mwhahaha: i was doing that and there a re still a few to go as ccamacho said
14:04:25 <marios> mwhahaha: sec
14:04:43 <panda> o/
14:04:45 <ccamacho> marios jistr matbu, any other
14:04:45 <marios> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/branch:stable/queens+topic:update/workflow-stable/queens mwhahaha here
14:05:03 <marios> mwhahaha: (also linked in upgrade squad status fyi)
14:05:11 <mwhahaha> marios: cool thanks
14:05:21 <radeks> o/
14:05:22 <mwhahaha> EmilienM to release stable tripleo this week - DONE
14:05:39 <mwhahaha> mwhahaha to send a note about blueprints & owners to the ML - DONE
14:05:39 <mwhahaha> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128217.html
14:05:50 <mwhahaha> Please note that there is a due date on blueprints
14:06:14 <mwhahaha> April 3, 2018
14:06:29 <mwhahaha> any blueprint not updated with an assignee and not approved will be moved out
14:06:36 <EmilienM> ++
14:06:39 <EmilienM> sounds reasonable
14:06:48 <mwhahaha> that's ~3 weeks before Rocky-1
14:06:57 <mwhahaha> so we should have a good idea  what we're working on
14:07:25 <mwhahaha> EmilienM & and others to send ML posts about PTG
14:07:26 <mwhahaha> Seen some notes about the sessions. Please make sure that if you have some notes that you send them to the ML.
14:07:41 <panda> is the due date for policies too ?
14:08:02 <EmilienM> panda: no
14:08:07 <mwhahaha> panda: not specs, just blueprints
14:08:12 <panda> ok
14:08:28 <mwhahaha> panda: no specific due date on policies
14:08:51 <mwhahaha> moving on to the one off items which it appears we have some this week
14:08:54 <mwhahaha> #topic one off agenda items
14:08:54 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-meeting-items
14:09:00 <mwhahaha> (gfidente) can we enable Ceph testing in OVB? featureset001?
14:09:18 <EmilienM> no
14:09:33 <EmilienM> we try to keep OVB jobs strictly minimum
14:09:48 <EmilienM> so they are fast and test what we actually need
14:09:55 <mwhahaha> gfidente: what's the reasoning behind it?
14:09:56 <EmilienM> ceph is already well tested on scenario001 and scenario004
14:10:06 <mwhahaha> EmilienM: i wouldn't call it well tested
14:10:08 <gfidente> EmilienM yeah but to answer mwhahaha's question
14:10:08 <EmilienM> OVB is useful to test ironic/mistral/nova
14:10:15 <ooolpbot> URGENT TRIPLEO TASKS NEED ATTENTION
14:10:15 <ooolpbot> https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1754036
14:10:16 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1754036 in tripleo "fs020, tempest, image corrupted after upload to glance (checksum mismatch)" [Critical,Triaged]
14:10:27 <mwhahaha> it's tested, but not that well
14:10:29 <gfidente> EmilienM exactly, the access.yaml workflow, we only test the codepath which uses "deployed server" right now (multinode)
14:10:34 <EmilienM> mwhahaha: well, it's not that bad
14:10:49 <EmilienM> we test autoscaling on scenario001 with ceph backend for gnocchi, it was a lot of work
14:10:59 <slagle> gfidente: we do test that path on 001 with --config-download
14:11:04 <gfidente> EmilienM mwhahaha in OVB we could test the other part of the workflow enable_ssh_via_nova
14:11:10 <EmilienM> and we test Ceph Radow GW on scenario004 to replace swift, and use it as image backend in glance, same thing, lot of work
14:11:23 <gfidente> slagle yeah what I am saying is that we test only that in scenarios
14:11:48 <weshay> what is the gap you are trying to cover w/ ceph + ovb?
14:11:50 <gfidente> EmilienM mwhahaha slagle yes guys I am pretty happy about scenarios, I am just proposing OVB to extend coverage of access.yaml
14:12:25 <gfidente> let me find a link to the specific piece of code
14:12:27 <EmilienM> you could do like Juan and create another OVB jobs (new featureset) maybe
14:12:50 <gfidente> https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-common/blob/master/workbooks/access.yaml#L89-L144
14:12:54 <EmilienM> but I'm not in favor of adding things on fs001/035. We've spent crazy time on reducing their runtime.
14:13:23 <EmilienM> Juan created an OVB job for testing IPsec, and it's running only when some files are touched, iiuc
14:13:25 <mwhahaha> so maybe a new ovb fs for ceph-anisble & access.yaml?
14:13:36 <openstackgerrit> Jose Luis Franco proposed openstack-infra/tripleo-ci master: Add multinode-overcloud-update playbook to run list  https://review.openstack.org/547058
14:13:37 <slagle> gfidente: tripleoclient calls enable-ssh-admin already, even with ovb
14:13:39 <mwhahaha> gfidente: would that work fo ryou?
14:13:59 <slagle> gfidente: that uses access.yaml
14:14:01 <weshay> gfidente, https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/quickstart-featuresets fyi
14:14:09 <slagle> just saying, that is already tested, what you're missing is ovb+ceph
14:14:15 <gfidente> slagle I know it does, but in access.yaml there are two codepaths for deployed server vs regular nodes https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-common/blob/master/workbooks/access.yaml#L37
14:14:28 <slagle> gfidente: yes. and they're both already tested
14:14:38 <fultonj> create_admin_via_nova vs create_admin_via_ssh
14:14:39 <jrist> o/
14:14:42 <gfidente> slagle oh wait let's go back to this after the meeting then
14:14:49 <openstackgerrit> Marios Andreou proposed openstack/python-tripleoclient master: Wire up a --skip-tags option for the overcloud upgrade run cli  https://review.openstack.org/551976
14:14:50 <openstackgerrit> Marios Andreou proposed openstack/python-tripleoclient master: Remove nargs="+" from --nodes and --roles expect "comma, string"  https://review.openstack.org/552528
14:14:57 <gfidente> if you say both are tested maybe this happens in another configuration and it's still good enough
14:15:07 <gfidente> maybe add as action item for next meeting?
14:15:40 <slagle> gfidente: what you want is ceph+ovb+config-download, in a new fetureset
14:15:59 <gfidente> slagle oh I was thinking to use scenarios for config-download
14:16:11 <gfidente> not ovb
14:16:33 <slagle> ovb featureset001 already uses config-download
14:16:41 <EmilienM> I think we'll switch scenarios to run config-download very soon, isn't?
14:16:51 <slagle> which is why access.yaml is already covered for create_admin_via_nova
14:16:53 <gfidente> EmilienMyeah so again I am happy about that and scenarios coverage
14:17:04 <gfidente> my goal was extend coverage for the workflows in access.yaml
14:17:33 * EmilienM has to disappear 2 min
14:17:46 <gfidente> slagle oh so you're saying _via_nova is called in featureset001 because it's OVB
14:18:06 <gfidente> ?
14:18:27 <gfidente> (from queens, given the tripleoclient change)
14:18:27 <gfidente> ?
14:18:30 <slagle> this is what i'm saying
14:18:46 <gfidente> ok not worth the effort of another featureset just to cover pike then
14:18:59 <gfidente> works for me
14:19:09 <mwhahaha> ok sounds like we answered that one
14:19:12 <mwhahaha> thanks gfidente
14:19:16 <gfidente> thank you! :D
14:19:27 <mwhahaha> HA on two controllers, any plans to support that by TripleO ? (repeating question)
14:19:31 <mwhahaha> from unknown contributor
14:19:36 <radeks> so yes this is from me
14:19:51 <radeks> I keep seeing that question from customers
14:19:59 <mwhahaha> bandini, rasca, Ng: 2 node HA?
14:20:04 <radeks> and I wonder if there are any plans to implement it
14:20:11 <radeks> yes I know how it sounds, 2 node HA
14:20:30 <rasca> mwhahaha, there's no HA with 2 nodes
14:20:32 <mwhahaha> it's not weird, i've seen it done :D but usually active-passive
14:20:33 <radeks> but maybe some extra monitor on compute ?
14:20:49 <radeks> rasca: I know
14:20:52 <radeks> :)
14:20:54 <openstackgerrit> Merged openstack/instack-undercloud stable/newton: [CVE-2018-1000115] memcached: restrict to TCP & localhost  https://review.openstack.org/551393
14:20:55 <openstackgerrit> Merged openstack/instack-undercloud stable/ocata: [CVE-2018-1000115] memcached: restrict to TCP & localhost  https://review.openstack.org/551390
14:21:10 <mwhahaha> radeks: so sounds like currently no plans
14:21:20 <radeks> understood
14:21:24 <radeks> thanks!
14:21:33 <mwhahaha> (beagles) Neutron agent "side car containers" patches up for review - while the related bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1749209) isn't marked as critical this is a pretty major issue. I want to amp up the visibility here in case others are affected (upgrades, other networking related projects, etc).
14:21:34 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1749209 in tripleo "Stopping neutron agent containers also brings down dataplane services" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Brent Eagles (beagles)
14:21:40 <rasca> mwhahaha, radeks, we've spent some time about that topic, and the outcomes of the discussion needs to be discussed more
14:22:02 <mwhahaha> https://review.openstack.org/549855 Add docker packages to dhcp and l3 agent containers - tripleo-common
14:22:02 <mwhahaha> https://review.openstack.org/550224 Adding wrapper scripts for neutron agent subprocesses - puppet-tripleo
14:22:02 <mwhahaha> https://review.openstack.org/550823 Generate and mount wrappers for dnsmasq and keepalived​ - tripleo-heat-templates​
14:22:06 <beagles> so for those that are interested, this is a case of an openstack component launching it's own containers
14:22:07 <radeks> rasca: I am happy to discuss :)
14:22:20 <beagles> neutron needs to do this to maintain the dataplane
14:22:48 <beagles> it's weird so I'd like any interested/curious to have a look and provide comments
14:22:55 <radeks> rasca: we could probably put Galera monitor and Pacmeaker agent on one of the computes
14:23:10 <rasca> radeks, wow
14:23:16 <radeks> rasca: with the composable roles this is possible
14:23:26 <radeks> just an idea
14:23:27 <rasca> radeks, yes, but let's bring the popcorns then :D
14:23:35 <radeks> :)
14:23:59 <beagles> but seriously the related bug is a pretty big deal so any help with expertise and reviews is definitely welcome
14:24:05 <rasca> radeks, there are a lot of things that a 2 node cluster implies
14:24:09 <openstackgerrit> Hamdy Khader proposed openstack/tripleo-heat-templates master: Add environment file for Mellanox SDN  https://review.openstack.org/550507
14:24:19 <openstackgerrit> Hamdy Khader proposed openstack/puppet-tripleo master: Enable networking-mlnx ml2 drivers  https://review.openstack.org/550505
14:24:30 <rasca> radeks, starting for example on the fence aspect
14:24:39 <mwhahaha> beagles: ok is this something we'll need to backport to queens when it lands?
14:24:44 * mwhahaha assumes yes
14:24:45 <radeks> rasca: I am not going to argue, I know what are the problems
14:24:48 <beagles> mwhahaha, yup
14:24:58 <jistr> beagles: fyi as promised we're exploring the rolling pre-upgrade tasks here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552073
14:25:05 <beagles> jistr, ack thanks!
14:25:20 <radeks> rasca: but you probably see the same kind of question popping up from time to time
14:25:28 * jistr testing it right now
14:25:30 <rasca> radeks, sure. My point is: there are plenty of workaround you can use to have it, but then when it comes to production we need to be careful
14:26:15 <mwhahaha> beagles: what cleans up the containers that get launched?
14:26:20 <rasca> radeks, so if we want to call it HA we need 3 nodes, otherwise it's a workaround HA solution. IMHO unsupportable (too many variables)
14:26:21 <radeks> rasca: I know but if customers are willing to take a risk and there are customer who are willing to take it
14:26:24 <tbarron> beagles: very interested in this: so far this dynamic launch of containers for services is scoped only to controller nodes?
14:26:35 <beagles> tbarron, at the moment
14:26:57 <rasca> radeks, risk == no support?
14:27:11 <radeks> rasca: yeahh it's a good question
14:27:16 <beagles> mwhahaha, ummm... crap that's a good point. Just because the container gets killed doesn't mean it goes away
14:27:16 <radeks> don't know
14:27:23 <openstackgerrit> Matt Young proposed openstack/tripleo-quickstart-extras master: queens: Add failing barbican tempest test to skip list  https://review.openstack.org/552529
14:27:36 <beagles> mwhahaha, I'll see what can be done
14:27:37 <shardy> beagles: we should ensure that any implementation is not tied to the controller role(s), composable roles and composable HA enable a lot of flexibility in that regard so it'd be good to maintain it
14:27:40 <tbarron> beagles: for manila we're looking to scale out services (ganesha gateways, ceph mds daemons) per tenant rather than sharing them among all tenants
14:28:09 <tbarron> beagles: but that means scale *out* -- can't just pile them up on controllers
14:28:19 <mwhahaha> i don't necessarily think it's a good idea to have containers launching more containers
14:28:22 <beagles> shardy, right.. I don't think this will get in the way there but we can test it
14:29:05 <rasca> radeks, I agree. The central discussion is about two questions. Does it works? It can. Should we support? I guess no.
14:29:15 <beagles> tbarron, that's a bigger architectural type consideration - this is just getting the processes out of the agent's so things continue to function as expected
14:29:30 <jistr> beagles, shardy: fwiw the pre_upgrade_rolling_tasks part should support such composable approach. We should probably take the approach of "run these actions on whichever roles have L3 agent".
14:29:32 <beagles> tbarron, when i see that I think "kubernetes?" :)
14:29:42 <tbarron> beagles: ack, and that's what we're thinking too
14:30:06 <shardy> jistr: ack I think with per-service groups in tripleo-ansible-inventory we can already do that pretty easily?
14:30:09 <marios> jistr: we should get that with your https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552073/  and then add the tasks to the specific files
14:30:25 <marios> jistr: i mean for l3agent in this case
14:30:53 <jistr> shardy: yes it's quite a small change as far as the upgrade framework is concerned. Depends how well will that fit on the Neutron side of things.
14:31:21 <jistr> marios: yea
14:31:47 <openstackgerrit> Juan Antonio Osorio Robles proposed openstack/instack-undercloud master: Enable TLS by default  https://review.openstack.org/552382
14:32:09 <mwhahaha> any other thoughts on the neutron container fun? :D
14:32:30 <marios> mwhahaha: link to etherpad with discussion on upgrade status
14:32:51 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-upgrade-squad-status
14:32:52 <mwhahaha> that one?
14:33:05 <marios> Last community call Mar 09 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1738768 Dataplane downtime when containers are stopped/restarted https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-upgrade-squad-meeting
14:33:06 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1738768 in tripleo "Dataplane downtime when containers are stopped/restarted" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Brent Eagles (beagles)
14:33:09 <marios> mwhahaha: yeah
14:33:35 <jistr> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-upgrade-squad-meeting
14:33:37 <openstackgerrit> Juan Antonio Osorio Robles proposed openstack/instack-undercloud master: Make user-provided cert take priority over autogenerated one  https://review.openstack.org/552381
14:33:38 <jistr> (meeting vs. status)
14:33:53 <marios> jistr: ;)
14:34:26 <mwhahaha> ok anything else?
14:34:34 <dpeacock> mwhahaha: Can we recheck yet?
14:34:55 * mwhahaha is unsure
14:35:06 <openstackgerrit> Juan Antonio Osorio Robles proposed openstack/instack-undercloud master: Enable TLS by default  https://review.openstack.org/552382
14:35:20 <mwhahaha> dpeacock: i think so, will check after the meeting and let you know
14:35:35 <mwhahaha> last item from the one offs
14:35:36 <mwhahaha> (gcerami) Request for feedback http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128181.html  https://review.openstack.org/548005
14:35:38 <openstackgerrit> Honza Pokorny proposed openstack/tripleo-ui master: Refactor RolesActions to use startWorkflow  https://review.openstack.org/552532
14:36:33 <panda> yep, just wanted to draw attention to the devmode replacement proposal here http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128181.html  , since it's something most of the developers are asking, please understand if this would work for you.
14:37:07 <openstackgerrit> Ronelle Landy proposed openstack/tripleo-quickstart-extras master: Fix overcloud_nodes check failing branch FF  https://review.openstack.org/551369
14:37:47 <mwhahaha> panda: thanks for raising this
14:38:06 <mwhahaha> any questions on the devmode improvements?
14:39:16 <mwhahaha> sounds like nope, ok moving on
14:39:20 <panda> for any question or feedback there's the CI community meeting schedule right after this meeting
14:39:30 <panda> I'll be there, thanks.
14:39:42 <mwhahaha> #topic Squad status
14:39:42 <mwhahaha> ci
14:39:42 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting
14:39:42 <mwhahaha> upgrade
14:39:42 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-upgrade-squad-status
14:39:43 <mwhahaha> containers
14:39:43 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-containers-squad-status
14:39:43 <mwhahaha> config-download
14:39:44 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-config-download-squad-status
14:39:45 <mwhahaha> integration
14:39:45 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-integration-squad-status
14:39:46 <mwhahaha> ui/cli
14:39:46 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ui-cli-squad-status
14:39:47 <mwhahaha> validations
14:39:47 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-validations-squad-status
14:39:47 <mwhahaha> networking
14:39:48 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-networking-squad-status
14:39:49 <mwhahaha> workflows
14:39:49 <mwhahaha> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-workflows-squad-status
14:40:59 <mwhahaha> thanks everyone for updating the status etherpads
14:41:10 <mwhahaha> looks like there's some good info in there, please take a look
14:41:19 <mwhahaha> #topic bugs & blueprints
14:41:19 <mwhahaha> #link https://launchpad.net/tripleo/+milestone/rocky-1
14:41:19 <mwhahaha> For Rocky we currently have 63 (+1) blueprints and about 605 (+19) open bugs.  601 rocky-1, 1 rocky-2, 3 rocky-3.
14:41:40 <mwhahaha> so we appear to continue to be adding more bugs. I know last week was a bit weird due to rdo cloud issues
14:42:11 <mwhahaha> as a reminder about the blueprints from earlier, please see my note about making sure you've properly updated any blueprints you plan on landing
14:42:29 <mwhahaha> We've got 63 right now and we probably can't land them all
14:42:49 <mwhahaha> I'll add in a placeholder for the s cycle since I don't think the name has been decided yet
14:43:06 <mwhahaha> any bugs or blueprints that need attention?
14:43:43 <fultonj> mwhahaha: i have two blueprints we can discuss now or after the meeting if you like
14:43:59 <mwhahaha> fultonj: now should be fine, what's up?
14:44:05 <fultonj> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/bluestore https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/osds-by-rule
14:44:18 <fultonj> mwhahaha: i talked to EmilienM about them
14:44:51 <fultonj> i basically wanted to get them approved
14:45:08 <mwhahaha> fultonj: ok are they just some basic changes to expose support via ceph-ansible?
14:45:10 <fultonj> they're somewhat simple as it's a matter of enabling tripleo to use a ceph-ansible feature
14:45:16 <fultonj> mwhahaha: yes
14:45:34 <fultonj> but those changes to expose that support would reference the blueprints and we'd know why
14:45:42 <fultonj> e.g. new tht params
14:45:53 <mwhahaha> fultonj: fair enough, i don't see any reason not to approve these
14:45:58 <mwhahaha> fultonj: i'll update them after the meeting
14:46:00 <fultonj> mwhahaha: ok, thanks
14:46:32 <mwhahaha> fultonj: speaking of ceph ansible have we moved it to an external task yet?
14:46:42 <fultonj> mwhahaha: not yet
14:46:53 <fultonj> there's a review up that we're debugging
14:46:56 * fultonj gets review
14:47:06 <openstackgerrit> Jose Luis Franco proposed openstack/tripleo-upgrade master: New major upgrade workflow implementation.  https://review.openstack.org/548336
14:47:07 <openstackgerrit> Jose Luis Franco proposed openstack/tripleo-upgrade master: [DNM]: Apply workaround for P->Q upgrades.  https://review.openstack.org/549220
14:47:07 <fultonj> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/546966/
14:47:29 <mwhahaha> ok if i remember correctly that's an issue for switching to config-download by default
14:47:40 <mwhahaha> please let us know if you need any help
14:47:40 <fultonj> i think we're pretty close might be done in a week or two depending in interupts
14:47:47 <mwhahaha> sounds good
14:47:55 <fultonj> mwhahaha: thanks we want to land it asap
14:48:13 <mwhahaha> cool moving on
14:48:14 <mwhahaha> #topic projects releases or stable backports
14:48:22 <mwhahaha> any backports people need eyes on?
14:48:35 <mwhahaha> we just did a stable release last week so we're not due for one yet
14:48:37 <openstackgerrit> Jose Luis Franco proposed openstack/tripleo-upgrade stable/queens: New major upgrade workflow implementation.  https://review.openstack.org/552082
14:48:38 <openstackgerrit> Jose Luis Franco proposed openstack/tripleo-upgrade stable/queens: [DNM]: Apply workaround for P->Q upgrades.  https://review.openstack.org/552084
14:48:47 <openstackgerrit> Brent Eagles proposed openstack/puppet-tripleo master: Adding wrapper scripts for neutron agent subprocesses  https://review.openstack.org/550224
14:49:02 <fultonj> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552018/
14:49:08 <fultonj> queens backport ^
14:49:59 <openstackgerrit> Dan Prince proposed openstack/tripleo-heat-templates master: Configure firewall rules for Congress  https://review.openstack.org/552535
14:49:59 * mwhahaha adds to the list
14:50:05 <mwhahaha> i'll take a look when the recheck comes back
14:50:19 <fultonj> thanks
14:50:29 <mwhahaha> moving on
14:50:32 <mwhahaha> #topic specs
14:50:33 <mwhahaha> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/tripleo-specs+status:open
14:50:50 <mwhahaha> probably a similar thing to the blueprints, we need to review/land them
14:51:09 <mwhahaha> please take a look at the open ones when you have time
14:51:18 <mwhahaha> anyone have any spec questions/issues?
14:52:18 <mwhahaha> sounds like nope
14:52:20 <mwhahaha> #topic open discussion
14:52:23 <mwhahaha> any other business?
14:52:29 <Ng> mwhahaha: radeks: </lag> (and apologies if someone answered in the mean time) - 2 node HA has some solutions, but it's likely >1yr away given our current roadmap
14:53:16 <arxcruz> mwhahaha: we will have a tripleo community meeting today in 7 minutes
14:53:19 <mwhahaha> Ng thanks. sounds like radeks , rasca & company should chat about some options
14:53:23 <arxcruz> https://bluejeans.com/7071866728
14:53:29 <arxcruz> for whoever is interested
14:53:37 * mwhahaha can make it today, yay daylight savings
14:53:56 <mwhahaha> alright thanks everyone
14:53:59 <mwhahaha> #endmeeting