22:10:41 #startmeeting containers 22:10:41 sdake: I see the topic as well 22:10:42 Meeting started Tue Jan 13 22:10:41 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:10:43 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 22:10:43 it still says "Solum team meeting" 22:10:45 The meeting name has been set to 'containers' 22:10:47 Looks like I'm back now 22:11:22 ok, this is a continuation of the following meeting:  http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/containers/2015/containers.2015-01-13-22.00.html 22:11:34 attendance in the prior record shall apply. 22:11:47 #topic Announcements 22:11:53 Mid-Cycle Meetup Planning 22:12:04 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054053.html Call for Feedback 22:12:20 please respond to the Doodle poll in the ML thread 22:12:33 to indicate if there is at least an 80% chance you will attend 22:12:54 so far we have 6 respondents, and 5 indicated they will attend on the earlier dates. 22:13:21 so I'm reluctant to call a meeting for 5 of us, but I hope that I'll get more input from you all to help decide 22:13:57 Release Readiness 22:13:59 mabye a followup post to the ml in case people missed the first CFP 22:14:10 good idea 22:14:12 my feedback is already there and I hope that I can attend remotely 22:14:28 #idea post a followup to the ML in case people missed the first CFP 22:14:38 yes, thanks jay-lau-513 22:14:46 we will do our best to accommodate 22:15:09 ok, so on the subject of Release Readiness 22:15:12 adrian_otto great 22:15:27 we have a bunch of bugs that need to be closed prior to tagging a release. 22:15:39 basically the only thing that works is bay create and pod create 22:15:42 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum Our Bugs 22:15:42 everything else is busted 22:15:47 all the delete operations don't work 22:15:55 service create is busted 22:16:00 rc create is busted 22:16:17 I think yuanying has fixed the deleted issues for pod and service 22:16:29 I just tested master - it is still busted 22:16:34 so please take a look at that list today, and let's see if we can make a judgement about whether we can quickly fix, or plan another announce date 22:16:35 but atleast the correct names are passed now 22:16:36 hmm 22:16:54 the port is 192.168.x.z:None" instead of :8080" 22:17:07 I think that is part of the problem 22:17:11 I'd like to resolve all Critical and High bugs 22:17:54 that gives us 10 actionable bugs on hand 22:18:02 in those severity levels 22:18:12 thoguhts? 22:19:16 the bugs probably take 1-2 hours per bug 22:19:48 I am a big fan of releasing on tuesdays, gives people the msot time to look at the code before they forget about it on the weekdn :) 22:20:14 agreed 22:20:43 I'd suggest slipping until the 19th and tag as soon as all the bugs are fixed 22:20:46 and then announce on the 20th 22:21:21 so my ask of all our contributors today id to find one of the criticals that you think you can resolve, if you can earmark time today or tonight to work on it, claim the bug by marking yourself as the assignee 22:21:27 and submitting a patch 22:21:45 tag it with Closes-Bug: NNN in your commit message 22:22:38 maybe we should go through bug assignment in the meeting 22:23:15 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410444 magnum service create fails 22:23:16 Launchpad bug 1410444 in magnum "magnum service-create fails" [Critical,Confirmed] 22:23:39 #topic Blueprint/Task Review 22:23:45 irc://sendak.freenode.net:6667/#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410444 magnum service create fails 22:23:58 all the blueprints are done yay [\o{ 22:24:08 * adrian_otto applauds 22:24:57 symptom is: "No handlers could be found for logger "magnumclient.common.httpclient"" 22:25:46 Sounds like it's trying to log the actual problem, but nothing was there to handle that logging. :P 22:26:10 taht would be a great comment to add to the bug 22:26:19 even if it's just a gut reaction 22:26:30 next we have: #1410447 https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410447 22:26:31 Launchpad bug 1410447 in magnum "replication controller creation fails" [Critical,Confirmed] 22:26:45 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410447 22:27:08 added 22:27:21 symptom is "ERROR: 'Client' object has no attribute 'rcs'" 22:27:37 It has not implemented yet. 22:28:04 ok, in that case we should pull the feature prior to release 22:28:17 I will try to make replication controller work 22:28:40 jay-lau-513 22:28:42 it's good idea 22:28:46 I will assign you to this one, thanks 22:29:05 done. 22:29:08 Next one is... 22:29:19 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410448 22:29:20 Launchpad bug 1410448 in magnum "replication controller should require a bay id" [Critical,Confirmed] 22:30:01 jay-lau-513: I'm going to give this one to you also if that's ok 22:30:16 we can come back at the end if we have contributors looking for more work 22:30:24 adrian_otto ok 22:30:40 next one is the quickstart, which I will fix. 22:30:50 after that we have: 22:30:52 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410507 22:30:54 Launchpad bug 1410507 in magnum "magnum bay-delete fails with error 400" [Critical,Confirmed] 22:31:18 another symptom surfacing as: No handlers could be found for logger "magnumclient.common.httpclient" 22:31:51 so this one and 1410444 probably get solved with a common fix (my wild guess) 22:32:05 volunteers for this one? 22:32:10 also 22:32:21 why not magnum bay-delete xxx 22:32:33 instead of magnum bay-delete --id xxx 22:32:41 the clinet expect s--id 22:32:43 dont ask me why 22:32:47 its not ideal, but it is what it is 22:32:48 the --id is not necessary 22:32:51 that would be a good tech-debt bug 22:32:52 it is something we can fix later imo :) 22:33:07 k 22:33:08 I will welcome that if you file it, I will put it as a wishlist 22:33:13 next, we have: 22:33:16 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410510 22:33:17 I will fix it. 22:33:18 Launchpad bug 1410510 in magnum "magnum pod-delete fails with error 500" [Critical,Confirmed] 22:33:47 this is another: No handlers could be found for logger "magnumclient.common.httpclient" 22:33:48 I think this issue is caused by old version of code. 22:33:59 so I will check it. 22:34:06 yuanying I pulled master and tried it 22:34:08 with no luck 22:34:10 thanks yuanying-alt 22:34:13 but maybe I had old bits somehow 22:34:44 if these can not be reproduced, then great, we can quickly close them out 22:35:10 that concludes the list of Critical 22:35:54 if you cna't reproduce them, send me a private messag eand I'lll try to reproduce on my end with a fresh master and fresh db 22:36:02 the following few are severity: High 22:36:09 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1405356 22:36:11 Launchpad bug 1405356 in magnum "Tech Debt: Fix endpoint configuration on docker handler" [High,Triaged] 22:36:52 yuanying-alt: comments on this one? 22:37:16 I have no idea. 22:37:29 But I think 22:37:40 docker container is created by bay. 22:37:52 shoud be created by bay. 22:38:01 maybe we can ignore this one for later 22:38:10 do we need it to access the rest api is the question 22:38:19 eg like pod-create, that is something we need 22:39:08 ok, so we have the correct Importance assigned to this one? 22:39:54 I errored on the side of caution with trriage 22:39:59 but I wasn't sure about this one 22:40:25 ok, so unless I hear anything to the contrary, I will leave this one as-is 22:40:31 let's check the next 22:40:45 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1406539 22:40:46 Launchpad bug 1406539 in magnum "Request context is not set correctly" [High,Fix committed] 22:40:57 Ithink we should be challennging high/critical bugs - if they are not really high critical 22:40:58 that one is fixed 22:41:16 next is: 22:41:18 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1410473 22:41:20 Launchpad bug 1410473 in magnum "If Heat templates not found, no reasonable error reported" [High,Confirmed] 22:41:32 conductor implodes 22:41:34 not ideal :) 22:42:25 so some additional checking logic could help here 22:42:55 and that concludes the top 10 22:43:35 so if you can help out, even just sharing your thoughts in comments, that would be very helpful 22:44:43 ok 22:44:55 #topic Discussion of introduction of the specs process to Magnum. 22:45:11 do we want to tackle this today, or defer this one out a week? 22:46:28 I suppose I can take a quick indication if active contributors feel that new contributions are discussed enough in BP or task(bug) tickets prior to submission for review? 22:46:41 If not, then a specs process could be a good way to address that concern 22:46:49 Thoughts? 22:46:55 I have been using specs with different openstack projects 22:46:56 about all I can add is specs would be helpful for those new to the project to begin assisting in feature development 22:47:02 I find it really heavyweight for where we are inthe project's development 22:47:38 I think ML would be better place to discuss use cases and whatnot 22:47:43 I agree with sdake's sentiment on this 22:47:45 though blueprints are just as helpful 22:48:02 we have not leveraged the ML very much, and it would be a great place to have those discussions 22:48:02 I think 6 mo down the road to specs make sense? probably 22:48:07 do they make sense today, not so much :) 22:48:23 any alternate viewpoints to consider on this subject? 22:48:38 I'm happy to revisit it again as often as we need to 22:49:04 cool we made a decision yay :) 22:49:35 #agreed We will use the ML to discuss new feature ideas, and implementation options rather than a formalized specs process for now. 22:49:55 you are always welcome to use a WIP review as a discussion instrument as well 22:50:04 as long as you consider that work as displosable 22:50:37 #topic Open DIscussion 22:51:12 I know I haven't been able to contribute much to Magnum since late december 22:51:18 that will change starting feb 1st 22:51:23 enjoy :) 22:51:49 nice sdake! i've been lax a bit as well, hopefully get going again in a week or so 22:51:52 thanks sdake 22:52:13 have you all been happy with the velocity of review approvals. 22:52:15 ? 22:52:26 review queue is moving fast imo :) 22:52:26 from my perspective they seem to be moving through pretty well 22:52:41 yep! 22:52:47 agree 22:52:56 I've been voting for merging imperfect code with tech debt tracking 22:53:06 pretty fast! 22:53:19 recent remarks I have left in place of #TODO comments… a request for a wishlist bug as well. 22:53:34 you *are* welcome to submit bugs against code that's not merged yet 22:53:45 I will just not mark that as triaged until after merge 22:53:48 I think what magnum milestone #1 is is pretty sweet 22:53:57 I think we are going to be challenged coming up with improvements from here on out 22:54:09 so if you have ideas for improvements please file a blueprint 22:54:10 and if we end up abandoning a review, we can do the same for related bug tickets. 22:54:18 +1 22:54:58 I think we should take a moment to recognize the team's efforts. 22:55:16 progress here has been remarkable. Thanks so much for everything you have done to help us. 22:55:29 ya this team rocks ! 22:55:35 reminds me of the heat team early on 22:55:57 We need to attract more 22:56:04 it's one thing to have big ideas, and it's another to make them come to life. 22:56:06 ^_^ 22:56:18 jay-lau-513: our planned announcement will do that 22:56:24 I actually would like to share one thing 22:56:34 Someone is asking me how to contribute, how to ramp up ;) 22:56:34 and I don't think he would mind if he were here 22:57:13 but Vish sent me an email this week recognizing our progress, and admitting that his position voiced in Paris was wrong, and that he is now wishing us the best for success. 22:57:13 we need more blueprints for devs to take a crack at 22:57:34 and I think that's a huge testament to how well this team is performing. 22:57:34 nice 22:57:39 who is this vish cat 22:57:41 the ironic ptl? 22:57:49 cool! 22:57:54 :-) 22:58:14 so just a few minute left 22:58:29 I want to remind everyone that we have a critically important election underway 22:58:53 so if you ahve not yet voted, please leek for the reminder email in your inbox and use your personalized ballot link to vote 22:59:06 adrian_otto I see you are a candidate board member :) 22:59:20 if we don't get a 25% turnout of the electorate, we can't make the bylaws amendments, which we really need 22:59:25 jay-lau-513: yes, sir. 22:59:37 so please take time to vote, we really need your participation in this one. 23:00:09 Our next meeting is 2015-01-20 at 1600 UTC. I'll see you all then. Watch the ML in the mean time. 23:00:17 #endmeeting