16:02:37 #startmeeting containers 16:02:37 Meeting started Tue Oct 20 16:02:37 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:02:38 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:02:41 The meeting name has been set to 'containers' 16:02:53 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2015-10-20_1600_UTC Our Agneda 16:02:54 o/ 16:02:59 #topic Roll Call 16:03:01 o/ 16:03:02 o/ 16:03:04 o/ 16:03:05 o/ 16:03:07 Ton Ngo 16:03:07 o/ 16:03:07 Adrian Otto 16:03:07 o/ 16:03:08 o/ 16:03:08 o/ Perry Rivera 16:03:09 p/ 16:03:12 o/ 16:03:34 o/ 16:03:35 o/ 16:04:30 o/ 16:05:12 #topic Announcements 16:05:48 1) stable/liberty branch is up 16:06:01 that's what we will be releasing against. 16:06:32 so if you have code up for review that needs to be in the liberty release, it needs to be re-submitted for review against that branch 16:06:36 backported 16:07:30 2) No meeting next tuesday… Tokyo Summit 16:07:44 any other announcements from team members? 16:08:19 #topic Container Networking Subteam Update (daneyon) 16:08:29 thx adrian_otto 16:09:03 we did not have a meeting last week due to a scheduling conflict. Everyone should have seen the notification on the ML 16:09:22 we will not have a meeting this week due to the DS. 16:09:39 ok 16:09:44 We will reconvene on 11/5 16:09:54 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224367/ 16:10:04 I would like to discuss ^ review 16:10:09 and we have DS sessions, including a fishbowl for networking 16:10:24 I have spent a fair bit of time over the last week or so having to rebase and rebase 16:10:35 daneyon: so I will make sure that you have the schedule and invite key contributors to attend 16:10:37 I know it's a big one, but it's well tested 16:10:46 I addressed everyone's comments. 16:10:50 final schedule should be done later today. 16:11:05 If I need to break it apart, then I will... but hoping you can let it slide this time. 16:11:28 adrian_otto great 16:11:50 thanks, daneyon. Ready for the next topic? 16:12:03 adrian_otto you or I need to also respond to gsagie's email about the magnum community joining the kuryr session. 16:12:07 sure 16:12:32 daneyon: I'm drowning a little. Please follow up with me today. 16:12:44 adrian_otto will do 16:12:55 my inbox is a disaster area currently 16:13:01 tx 16:13:26 #topic Magnum UI Subteam Update (bradjones) 16:13:29 thanks 16:13:36 so pretty great progress this week 16:13:50 a couple more people are now working on different bits of the UI 16:14:06 Rob Cresswell has been helping out with the containers views and APIs 16:14:16 and helping get the testing up to scratch before the summit 16:14:27 also Shu Muto has done a great job with the Bay UI 16:14:36 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/235870/ 16:14:53 there is some small feedback that needs to be addressed then I'm happy to merge that 16:15:35 one thing that is blocking a couple of patches is I have included network_driver and labels which are going to be present in the new python client 16:15:56 but currently waiting to merge until the new client is release 16:16:03 do we have an eta on that? 16:16:37 I think the network_driver and labels are already there. Is it? 16:16:53 I couldn't find those labels in 0.2.1 16:17:01 I can release a client today 16:17:27 adrian_otto: that will be great then I can hit go on the relevant patches 16:17:27 tonight actually 16:18:23 ok, next topic? 16:18:36 #topic Review Action Items 16:18:53 that's about all from me 16:19:10 I owe you one deliverable here, which is the ODS schedule. This is the top item on my todo list, and I expect to complete it today. 16:19:25 would you like me to send an update to the ML with a link to the schedule? 16:20:17 adrian_otto please do so. 16:20:20 adrian_otto: that would be great 16:20:26 adrian_otto : ODS ( Design Summit) that will be better IMHO 16:21:29 #action adrian_otto to send a message to our ML detailing our Design Summit sessions for requested attendance 16:21:41 #topic Blueprint/Bug Review 16:21:49 I am going to deviate from the agenda here 16:22:01 do something less formal than usual 16:22:23 I want to give a final call for any reviews that need to be merged for stable/liberty 16:22:51 also, any showstopper bugs that are must-fix for the release 16:23:17 adrian_otto: there is one for TLS. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/232152/6 16:23:33 I'm working on addressing one last comment about trusts 16:23:42 muralia1: thanks for that. Please explain why it 16:23:49 is a must 16:24:07 current we use user auth tokens. they expire after a while 16:24:13 trust token stick around 16:24:15 ok, understood 16:24:43 please submit another identical review against stable/liberty for that. 16:24:48 ^^ muralia1 16:24:56 ok 16:25:04 adrian_otto: I think i hit a show stopper bug: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/236737/ 16:25:04 any others? 16:25:39 Using atomic-5/6 images over the weekend, I could not get docker to start on a k8s minion without this patch. 16:25:50 daneyon: I am not able to reproduce the error you saw on that one 16:25:56 There may be other ways to solve the problem... we would need to dig deeper. 16:26:18 ok, there is a bunch of discussion on this patch 16:26:23 hongbin: Let me try again today and I will update the review with my findings. 16:26:35 daneyon: k 16:26:35 is there a quick fix with a more elegant follow on that we can agree on? 16:26:37 +1 hongbin 16:26:48 adrian_otto there is. I need to test again and then I will provide updates. 16:26:52 +1 hongbin 16:27:14 daneyon: I can help debug if you need a hand 16:27:50 adrian_otto: Not sure why others don;t see this bug. All, the atomic-5/6 image was updated on 10-12-2015. Make sure you are using this image. You may need to download and add to glance. 16:28:05 ok, so daneyon please duplicate the review for stable/liberty 16:28:26 Tango: I fixed the problem, it just sounds like we need to see if that;'s the best fix to the issue 16:28:29 and muralia1 + daneyon be sure the review comment stream has a link to the permalink between each duplicate review 16:28:47 so that reviewers can easily navigate between them 16:28:56 rather than discover them separately 16:28:57 ok 16:29:02 hongbin I assume you are using the 10-12-2015 atomic-5 or 6 image, correct? 16:29:05 tx 16:29:18 daneyon: yes, I am 16:29:21 ok 16:29:44 i used atomic-5 daneyon 16:29:46 if there were a way to have a single patch against two branches at once, that would be a cool trick, but I doubt that's possible 16:31:20 ok, are those our only two must-haves? 16:32:04 when are we going to freeze the branch? 16:32:42 muralia1: as soon as those two patches land, and I have indication from >1 tested that the release has been functionally tested and is known to work 16:32:49 i would love to have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/236737/ in the relase :-) 16:32:54 release 16:33:16 I am seeking volunteers to take the patched stable/liberty code, and deploy it, and use it for everything you can think of looking for problems 16:33:54 going once... 16:34:04 adrian_otto: is that a bug-finding challenge? ;) 16:34:07 going twice... 16:34:17 I will personally hand you cash 16:34:29 ;-) 16:34:38 adrian_otto count me in 16:34:39 leecalcote: yes sir 16:34:45 lol ao 16:34:45 i don;t need the cash though 16:34:47 awesome, thanks daneyon 16:34:57 I'm attempting magnum deployments as well, I can switch that over to liberty 16:34:59 drinks on me at the Cisco party. 16:35:03 adrian_otto: hand up. 16:35:04 i will take a beer or two 16:35:04 I would require the cash though ;) 16:35:08 lol 16:35:11 hahah 16:35:45 adrian_otto can you ping me when the magnum and client code is cut? 16:35:57 in all seriousness, Rackspace and Intel are holding a reception for the OpenStack Innovation Center. I'd love to see you all there. 16:36:12 daneyon: yes. 16:36:18 cool, glad to be there 16:36:23 adrian_otto: I can play/test with stable/liberty when it's ready 16:36:34 i'm there in spirit! 16:36:50 thanks eghobo_ 16:37:03 is their a list of functionality I can test against? 16:37:04 ' OpenStack Innovation Center' is it in SF? 16:37:16 so my plan is to bundle an initial release once we merge those two patches (hopefully today) 16:37:28 daneyon: start with dev quick start 16:37:33 ya 16:37:36 hold off on the announcement. Get input from each of you on confirmed readiness, 16:37:50 iterate if needed, then release based on your guidance 16:37:59 and announce the release 16:38:05 I'll try the dev quick start too 16:38:20 adrian_otto I assume you want our whole test stack to use the L release, correct? 16:38:22 thanks SteveA 16:38:37 daneyon: yes, if possible 16:38:45 got it 16:39:07 it's also imformative to know about others who made it work on previous releases and how, but confirmation on liberty is the first priority 16:39:21 makes sense 16:39:44 ok, let's open it up 16:39:57 #topic Open Dicsussion 16:40:34 Tango: Does the atomic-6 image posted on 10-12-2015 is built from the rpm's in this repo: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/tango/f21-kubernetes-v1/builds/ 16:40:48 of if anyone else has the answer 16:40:56 daneyon: Yes it is 16:41:02 great, thx 16:41:13 I would like to bring more attentions on functional testing stuff, started from this patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/232421/12 16:42:32 dimtruck had ideas about how to transition to tempest and allow the func tests to run in parallel. 16:42:37 eliqiao_home : sure 16:42:43 eliqiao_home: I think we should discuss it at Tokyo 16:42:55 this will be a subject of discussion in a workroom session next week, guaranteed 16:43:09 eghobo_: sure , good to know. 16:43:12 it's big topic and we all should agree how we are going to do func test 16:43:29 and all will folow 16:43:31 absolutely 16:43:39 I have a comment on the magnum-ui depedency 16:44:11 magnum-ui is using master version of magnum, but not master version of magnumclient. Is that correct? 16:44:34 bradjones: ^^ 16:44:59 * eliqiao_home go to sleep 16:45:03 it should be using the released versions of both 16:45:19 I think currently we point at magnum from git is that correct? 16:45:41 I think so. But not for magnumclient 16:45:57 I will put out a patch to change that now 16:46:09 k 16:46:09 we should only be pointing at released packages from the ui 16:46:33 get it 16:48:05 A disadvantage is that pointing ui to release might not pick up the latest features from Magnum 16:48:24 But it is good for stableness 16:48:29 that's probably ok 16:48:42 k 16:48:58 thx bradjones 16:49:02 if we have a compelling new feature, we can just cut a release for it 16:49:12 no problem 16:49:25 and assuming the ui picks the current releases, then we surface that without much effort 16:49:59 sure 16:50:24 perhaps I will wait and change it once the new releases go out later today 16:50:33 then we start completely up to date :) 16:51:14 I just opened up a chunk of time this afternoon to get taht done 16:52:19 ok, should we wrap up a few minutes early for a change? 16:52:34 adrian_otto : is there a common place/etherpad where the design summit discussion will be jotted down for people who won't be able to make it to the summit ? 16:53:38 +1 vilo 16:53:43 last time we had a ref here https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Design_Summit/Liberty/Etherpads#Magnum that was useful if we have something of that sort this time as well it be useful IMHO 16:54:01 vilobhmm11: Yes, I will place it on the Wiki (or find another way to link to it in the main schedule) and email that our on openstack-dev with the [Magnum] topic tag in the subject. 16:54:21 adrian_otto : thanks! that would be nice 16:54:46 ^^AI needed? 16:55:25 juggler: I already recorded that as an action 16:55:40 cool 16:55:58 thanks everyone for attending today. Our next meeting will be Tuesday 2015-11-03 at 1600 UTC. 16:56:10 #endmeeting