18:00:28 <SlickNik> #startmeeting trove
18:00:28 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Aug 27 18:00:28 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SlickNik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:29 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:00:32 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'trove'
18:00:34 <iccha> o/
18:00:38 <amrith> ./
18:00:39 <esp> o/
18:00:40 <grapex> o/
18:01:07 <SlickNik> Giving trove folks a couple of minutes to trickle in.
18:01:19 <cp16net> hola
18:01:19 <kevinconway> o/
18:02:02 <schang> o/
18:02:20 <tomblank> o/
18:02:38 <dougshelley66> o/
18:03:13 <SlickNik> #topic Juno-3 cut next week
18:03:16 <georgelorch> o/
18:03:18 <mattgriffin> o/
18:03:20 <glucas> o/
18:03:22 <peterstac> o/
18:03:53 <SlickNik> So as all of you folks know, juno-3 is scheduled to be cut on Tuesday next week.
18:04:14 <SlickNik> What this means that that we need to get all of our items BPs / bugs for juno-3 closed out.
18:04:26 <SlickNik> #link https://launchpad.net/trove/+milestone/juno-3
18:04:58 <SlickNik> We've made some fair progress with reviews, and a lot of reviews have one +2, and are waiting on a second.
18:05:32 <vipul> o/
18:05:41 <cp16net> yeah i'll be going over as much as i can this week
18:06:11 <amrith> I have a couple of logging changes that have no +2 ;(
18:06:32 <SlickNik> I've come up with a page that has a link to all the reviews for the BPs that we're prioritizing.
18:06:43 <SlickNik> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/trove-juno3-reviews
18:06:56 <SlickNik> Planning to do a similar one for bugs for juno-3
18:06:59 <vgnbkr> o/
18:07:14 <grapex> SlickNik: btw, nice work on this list
18:07:23 <kevinconway> oh boy. i'm on the list!
18:07:31 <amrith> nice list...
18:07:48 <dougshelley66> SlickNik - should things that are merged be dropped from the list?
18:07:58 <dougshelley66> ah beat me to that... :)
18:08:09 <cp16net> or strike out the review
18:08:12 <SlickNik> dougshelley66: yes, we should probably mark it as such
18:08:15 <SlickNik> I like strike out.
18:08:28 <SlickNik> I'll go through and do it / keep it up to date.
18:08:32 <cp16net> nice
18:08:46 <amrith> SlickNik, the logging audit not on the list, should it be?
18:08:57 <SlickNik> amrith: Is there a BP for it?
18:08:57 <amrith> it is about 15/17 complete at this point.
18:09:13 <amrith> there was an etherpad and a bug
18:09:17 <amrith> don't know if there was a bp
18:09:20 <amrith> let me check
18:09:26 <amrith> dougshelley66, do you recall?
18:09:55 <amrith> SlickNik, there was no BP
18:09:56 <SlickNik> Yes, so this list is only for BPs.
18:09:57 <dougshelley66> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Juno-Trove-audit-logging-levels
18:09:58 <amrith> there was this etherpad
18:09:59 <amrith> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Juno-Trove-audit-logging-levels
18:10:06 <amrith> ok
18:10:16 <amrith> thx dougshelley66
18:10:21 <amcrn> o/
18:10:39 <SlickNik> Like I said earlier, I'm working on coming up with another list for the reviews for bugs for juno-3.
18:11:21 <amrith> understood
18:11:36 <SlickNik> The crux of the issue is that no new features can be proposed after juno-3. Bugfixes can still merge between when juno-3 is cut and when the RC is proposed.
18:11:50 <SlickNik> can be proposed = can merge*
18:11:58 <amrith> ah
18:12:01 <amrith> all clear now
18:12:08 <vipul> so the oslo.rpc stuff.. does that need to merge prior to J-3?
18:12:19 <vipul> or since it's already approved, it can merge prior to RC?
18:13:47 <SlickNik> vipul: ideally — although I suspect we might be able to get a FeatureFreeze exception for that, since that is something that's not a new feature that we _have_ to do.
18:14:09 <SlickNik> that's not a new feature, and is something we _have_ to do*
18:14:17 <kevinconway> is that an actual python error that gets thrown?
18:14:17 <vipul> got it
18:15:06 <SlickNik> kevinconway: nope - but this should clarify https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Juno_Release_Schedule
18:15:24 <kevinconway> awe, so no catch FeatureFreeze: pass ?
18:16:06 <grapex> kevinconway: I think my IRC client just raised a CornyJokeException
18:17:05 <SlickNik> Another thing to keep in mind is that the gate is going to get pretty hairy in the next couple of days, since all the projects will be trying to get their changes in.
18:17:58 <SlickNik> So anything we can do to review early and "beat the rush" so to speak is appreciated.
18:18:12 <grapex> SlickNik: Will do
18:18:27 <amrith> wilco
18:19:47 <SlickNik> Another point of clarification. If you have any bugs that you know are not going to make it to juno-3 on the list at https://launchpad.net/trove/+milestone/juno-3, please let me know so I can move it out of juno-3.
18:19:52 <SlickNik> Thanks!
18:20:17 <SlickNik> That's all about juno-3, keep them reviews rolling!
18:20:40 <SlickNik> Any questions?
18:21:03 <SlickNik> .
18:21:18 <SlickNik> #topic Clusters
18:22:35 <SlickNik> I think this was just an informational note left over from the last round.
18:23:12 <SlickNik> amcrn / mat-lowery: did you want to add anything else?
18:23:27 <amcrn> SlickNik: nope, mat-lowery?
18:23:37 <SlickNik> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Trove/Clusters-MongoDB
18:23:56 <mat-lowery> nothing from me
18:24:00 <SlickNik> Reviews needed, and appreciated!
18:24:40 <SlickNik> #topic Open Discussion
18:24:57 <dougshelley66> i have 1
18:25:24 <SlickNik> go for it dougshelley66
18:25:58 <dougshelley66> given the discussion at mid-cycle about review etiquette and the fact that we are trying to get more reviews done, seems like we should ratify (if appropriate) the proposal from amrith on review guidelines
18:26:00 <dougshelley66> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115778/
18:26:16 <amrith> +1
18:26:26 <robertmyers> +1
18:26:59 <peterstac> dougshelley66 +1
18:27:03 <dougshelley66> so if I add those together is that +3?
18:27:11 <schang> +1
18:27:16 <peterstac> ah, so it's merged ;)
18:27:28 <grapex> "The subject matter of the change (not the commit message)  violates some well understood OpenStack procedure(s),"
18:27:34 <amrith> save the coins, we need bills.
18:27:36 <amrith> i.e. +2's
18:27:48 <cp16net> jenkin's didnt like the change :-P
18:28:00 <esmute> lol
18:28:01 <kevinconway> where are the +/- 2 guidelines?
18:28:02 <grapex> I wonder if this clause will lead to kind of the same stuff we're worried about, since what is and is not a well understood OS procedure can veer into opinion territory. :p
18:28:22 <dougshelley66> grapex, good point
18:28:41 <dougshelley66> ok so we need to get the change to pass the build and then if anyone has any concerns please comment on the reveiw
18:29:22 <SlickNik> +1 to kevinconway's comment about adding +2, and -2 on the list to set expectations for what those mean as well.
18:29:44 <SlickNik> for the sake of completeness.
18:29:47 <iccha> yeah +1
18:29:58 <robertmyers> SlickNik: +2
18:30:00 <iccha> also maybe some specifics and examples to state,ents like "     * The change contains content that is demonstrably inappropriate,"
18:30:08 <amrith> ok, will address those.
18:30:20 <iccha> thanks amrith for taking the initiative
18:30:35 <amrith> iccha, that's a risky thing. How do I provide a list of inappropriate things (without this commit becoming inappropriate?) ;)
18:31:17 <kevinconway> amrith: once you update the review just +2 workflow it to show us why we need the guidelines
18:31:38 <grapex> amrith: Just link to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npf-tENjwFU
18:31:59 * SlickNik wonders if he wants to click on that.
18:32:02 <cp16net> omg
18:32:10 <grapex> SlickNik: It is inappropriate
18:32:12 <iccha> lol grapex you just violated the rule
18:32:30 <SlickNik> lol, anything else for open discussion?
18:32:53 <amrith> I don't usually take rides with strangers, I don't usually click on links, but when I do I certainly don't click on links that go to YouTube ;)
18:33:17 <SlickNik> #endmeeting