17:00:55 #startmeeting charms 17:00:55 Meeting started Mon Oct 17 17:00:55 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tinwood. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:56 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:59 The meeting name has been set to 'charms' 17:01:05 o/ 17:01:13 Welcome all! 17:01:29 So the first topic on the agenda (at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-charms-weekly-meeting-20160317) is: 17:01:41 is it just me or is the date bit on that link wonky? 17:01:54 #topic Review ACTION points from previous meeting 17:01:57 o/ 17:01:58 shouldn't it be 20161017 17:02:09 yeah, thats my fault 17:02:09 thedac, yes it should. 17:02:10 ack on the date 17:02:20 cool, we can fix it after the meeting 17:02:37 #action tinwood to fix the date on the agenda for this meeting after the meeting. 17:03:07 is beisner around or still travelling? 17:03:24 swap day 17:03:40 okay, we'll carry over his action. 17:03:54 next up is action: tinwood Bug #1629624 17:03:56 bug 1629624 in OpenStack Barbican SoftHSM Charm "amulet test fails with barbican-softhsm blocking on 'Charm installed and token store configured'" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1629624 - Assigned to Alex Kavanagh (ajkavanagh) 17:04:11 This was fixed committed and so we can close it. 17:04:36 The next two actions are for jamespage but I don't think he is present? 17:05:01 I'll take that as a no. 17:05:16 next action is: gnuoy update charm guide with refactored charms_openstack bits (carried forward) 17:05:20 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/387238/ 17:05:35 ^ the more eyes the better. english is hard 17:05:49 I'll take a read through today 17:05:50 I agree. I'll take another look at it. 17:05:56 thanks 17:06:05 Shall we carry the action over to the next meeting just to top and tail it? 17:06:18 no, Ithink we can close it tbh 17:06:30 okay, that's good. 17:06:45 #topic State of Development for next Charm Release 17:06:53 So we released! 17:06:55 o/ 17:06:58 17.01 ftw! 17:07:15 apologies for tardyness 17:07:30 jamespage, we skipped over some of your actions. Does the meeting mind if we go back? 17:07:41 +1 17:07:44 go for it 17:07:44 pls 17:07:45 #link http://docs.openstack.org/developer/charm-guide/1610.html 17:07:57 fine by me 17:07:59 #topic re-review action points ... 17:08:11 so we have: jamespage review current newton specs against plan (carried forward) 17:08:16 done 17:08:34 http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/charm-specs/ 17:08:36 ^^ 17:08:47 That's great! 17:08:48 I pushed anything incomplete to ocata 17:09:02 tip top 17:09:21 Are there any actions we should be taking from those specs (in general)? 17:09:50 the backlog ones for ocata need a look 17:09:57 federation and charm charm layering 17:10:06 I can take look 17:10:39 ta 17:10:45 how about a general action for all to read through the specs before the next meeting and add comments to the next agenda? 17:10:54 Or is that too formal? 17:10:56 tinwood, I think thats good idea 17:11:04 we're bound to have some stuff coming out of the summit next week 17:11:20 some of the cross charm initiatives will need specs methinks 17:11:39 #action all to read through the charm specs: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/charm-specs/ 17:11:41 ack on cross charm initiatives 17:12:17 do we need to account the review queue also? 17:12:21 how do we want to collect comments? 17:12:33 let's take cargonza question first. 17:13:38 thoughts on review queue? 17:13:52 I'm not quite sure on the context of the question? 17:13:55 I don;t think the review queue needs a spec if I've ubndersttod the question correctly 17:14:06 cargonza, ? 17:14:07 ^^ like gnuoy if that's the case 17:14:08 no spec needed for the review queue 17:14:21 specs are for new features of significant changes ot the charms 17:14:24 or new charms 17:14:25 lets go back to the spec - capturing comments 17:14:37 review queue is another topic - apologize 17:14:47 gerrit is used for charm-specs comments as well right? 17:14:55 cargonza, I'll add it to the topics list 17:14:56 wolsen, yes - for a proposed change 17:15:02 (review queue) 17:15:04 ack tx 17:15:10 jamespage: ah the issue is for carry over? getting comments on that? 17:15:38 not sure - cargonza would you like to frame your questions specifically? 17:16:14 I think tinwood was asking how we should collect comments relating to our review of the specs for next time 17:16:14 we're asked to put effort on the charm review queue... 17:16:28 sorry we're jumping around here 17:16:28 * cargonza finding link 17:16:31 To clarify: topic is charm-specs; comments welcome; where should we collect them? 17:16:42 (sorry for bad chairing there for a minute) 17:16:46 ack lets finish this one 17:17:19 collect them via google doc? 17:17:20 Just propose changes for anything that jumps out at us 17:17:24 ? 17:17:28 gnuoy, +1 17:17:30 gnuoy, +1 17:17:35 via gerrit: +1 17:17:37 if you think a change is appropriate propose a change 17:17:51 or just ask in irc 17:17:53 or on the ML 17:18:00 but lets not start using gdocs pls 17:18:05 +1 17:18:09 +1 17:18:21 tinwood, shall we move on 17:18:22 ? 17:18:24 yes 17:18:40 other action: jamespage to identity alternate week slot and get scheduled (carried forward) 17:18:48 carried forward (again) 17:18:51 sorry apac 17:18:56 np 17:18:56 I will get this sorted out 17:19:01 might be for nov tho 17:19:21 okay, next up: 17:19:29 #topic State of Development for next Charm Release 17:19:43 We're bright eyed and bushy tailed 17:20:16 indeed 17:20:56 So next up is 17.01 17:20:56 master branches are open 17:20:57 Its the start of a new cycle probably not too much else to say 17:21:13 time to get those carried over features landed early 17:21:15 Worth noting there will be lots of discussion at ODS about this 17:21:15 yep, end of Jan I assume we'll go for 17:21:17 so they don't miss the next freeze 17:21:35 bearing in mind it will be just after new year, and christmas always gets in the way :-) 17:21:44 so its really 2 months of devtime max 17:21:51 Not long. 17:21:52 thedac, lots of discussion about what? 17:22:03 the next charms release 17:22:03 assuming we're doing a 17.01 which I think is the case until for now 17:22:11 thedac, ack, yes 17:22:18 thedac, yes - we have session wed pm at the end of day 17:22:24 How soon after 17.01 is the 'developer' ODS conf? 17:23:05 its in fedb 17:23:08 openstack.org/ptg 17:23:12 Also is there a cfgmgmtcamp in feb? 17:23:15 yes 17:23:30 actually as a team we need to decided whether we're doing the PTG 17:23:41 my feel is that we should - but maybe only the first couple of days 17:23:48 What does PTG stand for? 17:23:51 which is horizontal rather than vertical 17:23:56 tinwood, go read :) 17:23:59 project teams gathering 17:24:08 (it was for the meeting!) 17:24:11 tinwood, lets move on shall we? 17:24:17 yes. 17:24:25 #topic High Priority Bugs 17:24:49 https://bugs.launchpad.net/charms/+source/ceph/+bug/1424771 17:24:50 Launchpad bug 1424771 in nova-compute (Juju Charms Collection) "Excessive caps for CephX users glance, cinder, nova-compute" [Medium,Triaged] 17:25:13 Also maybe: https://launchpad.net/openstack-charms 17:25:29 cholchombe has the acl part of that inflight; icey and I landed some supporting changes today to restrict things better 17:25:55 just raising as needs focus asap - sensing frustration from original reporter and it is a security concern 17:26:24 ok 17:26:30 jamespage: from inflight, is there a review pending? 17:26:53 wolsen, not at the moment - the original acl design proposed has some awkward limitations 17:26:59 ack 17:27:11 (for the minutes) there are 26 outstanding bugs with 2 marked as critical. 17:27:14 wolsen, cholchombe and I have one that works, but it needs re-implemening 17:27:31 jamespage: I look forward to seeing the new version :-) 17:27:43 tinwood, ack - keep focussed on bugs all 17:27:50 maybe we should have another bug day? 17:27:57 +lots 17:27:58 I like bug days 17:28:03 yes 17:28:10 I think one or two a month would be good 17:28:13 I think I'm going to don my bug trousers at ODS 17:28:23 * tinwood gasp 17:28:26 tinwood, can you action me with that 17:28:35 ok we're tight on time 17:28:47 tinwood, what's left on the agenda 17:28:49 #action jamespage allocate days in month for bug squashing. 17:28:49 ? 17:28:58 #topic Openstack Events 17:29:03 ODS! 17:29:16 indeed next week be there 17:29:18 \o/ 17:29:23 (if you can) 17:29:35 okay and finally 17:29:44 #topic Open Discussion 17:29:51 cargonza, review queue? 17:30:19 ignore tinwood.. 17:30:25 I was corrected already 17:30:29 thanks everybody 17:30:32 :) 17:30:33 please and thank you 17:30:38 thanks tinwood 17:30:41 #endmeeting