16:00:42 <xarses> #startmeeting fuel
16:00:42 <xarses> #chair xarses
16:00:42 <xarses> Todays Agenda:
16:00:42 <xarses> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-weekly-meeting-agenda
16:00:43 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr  7 16:00:42 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is xarses. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:44 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:44 <xarses> Who's here?
16:00:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'fuel'
16:00:48 <openstack> Current chairs: xarses
16:00:48 <monester> hi
16:00:50 <maximov> Hi
16:00:50 <rlu> hi
16:00:54 <akislitsky_> hi
16:01:01 <mwhahaha> hi
16:01:05 <ashtokolov> hi
16:01:22 <evgenyl> hi
16:01:55 <fzhadaev> Hi!
16:01:58 <dpyzhov> hi
16:02:00 <holser_> \o/
16:02:25 <xarses> #topic action items from last meeting
16:02:33 <xarses> mwhahaha alex_didenko zynzel will document remaining gaps in idempotency coverage
16:02:48 <xarses> #chair kozhukalov
16:02:50 <openstack> Current chairs: kozhukalov xarses
16:04:15 <mwhahaha> i'm not aware of any movement ont hat
16:04:32 <xarses> mwhahaha: thanks
16:05:02 <xarses> on to the main event,
16:05:10 <xarses> #topic Mixed team status (rlu/mrelewicz)
16:05:17 <rlu> Hi, for the last week, Mixed team was working on bugfixing. That’s all.
16:05:29 * twm2016_ is lurking
16:05:56 <xarses> have you started planning what you will address in newton?
16:06:26 <rlu> not yet
16:06:30 <xarses> ok
16:06:36 <xarses> #topic UI Team status (vkramskikh)
16:06:43 <vkramskikh> Hi! Since the last week we had 8 outgoing and 6 incoming bugs. Currently we have 26 bugs (-10 since the last week), 5 of them are High (-2 since the last week). The remaining High bugs are mostly related to unlock-settings-tab and and NFV, we plan to fix them in the next few days.
16:06:43 <vkramskikh> We also promoted a few medium bugs to High to be able to fix them after SCF, because all the fixes were ready, but on Tuesday there was incident with NPM registry, so all npm-run jobs for all OpenStack projects were failing. Here is the bug: https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/12196 - it's still not fixed. For fuel-ui this job was made non-voting. For other projects this issue was solved by upgrading nodejs to 4.x LTS and NPM to
16:06:43 <vkramskikh> 3.x on OpenStack infra. This change broke our linting job (even though it's non-voting) - this seems to be a new Critical bug for us, we'll investigate.
16:06:46 <vkramskikh> Questions?
16:07:46 <mihgen> vkramskikh: have you done with unlocked settings tab.. ?
16:08:14 <vkramskikh> mihgen: yes, but there are still some bugs. like inability to rollback to deployed settings from the dashboard
16:08:44 <mihgen> ok. I assume we plan to fix those before HCF..
16:09:08 <vkramskikh> yes, both backend and UI patches are on review
16:09:27 <vkramskikh> BTW, when is HCF?
16:09:34 <vkramskikh> for 9.0
16:09:48 <vkramskikh> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/9.0_Release_Schedule here is only HCF for 9.0.1 mentioned
16:10:21 <xarses> next week then?
16:10:35 <vkramskikh> I think yes
16:10:45 <mihgen> well I hope that it can be fixed by 9.0 community release
16:11:09 <vkramskikh> yes, but nailgun patch is also needed - I can't make any guarantee on that
16:11:18 <vkramskikh> UI patch is pretty simple
16:11:26 <vkramskikh> so there shouldn't be any problems
16:12:10 <xarses> moving?
16:12:17 <vkramskikh> yes
16:12:19 <xarses> #topic Fuel network team status (alex_didenko)
16:12:52 <alex_didenko> Right now we're working on bugs for Fuel-9.0. At the moment there are 17 unfixed network related bugs (among them: 3 sr-iov, 5 dpdk):
16:12:52 <alex_didenko> 7 bugs unassigned
16:12:52 <alex_didenko> 7 bugs in progress
16:12:52 <alex_didenko> 9 bugs fixed during this week by the team
16:13:17 <alex_didenko> That's all
16:13:43 <holser_> pretty quick :)
16:14:01 <dpyzhov> sounds like you need two more weeks to fix them all
16:14:01 <holser_> you may refer to broken noop framework ;)
16:14:05 <dpyzhov> right? )
16:14:28 <alex_didenko> can't provide any eta, some bugs are pretty tricky, also we keep getting new ones
16:14:42 <mihgen> I'm worried to see low number of bugs, frankly
16:14:57 <mihgen> usually it means that we have not yet started thorough testing...
16:14:59 <alex_didenko> about noop - it's better to proceed in ML ;)
16:15:23 <alex_didenko> 17 critical/high bugs is not low
16:15:55 <alex_didenko> those are bygs with team-network tag (i.e. network related)
16:15:59 <alex_didenko> *bugs
16:16:23 <alex_didenko> we have plenty of others :)
16:16:41 <mihgen> ok)
16:17:46 <xarses> #topic Bugfix status (dpyzhov) // need to leave at 16:30 UTC
16:17:58 <dpyzhov> and about 'plenty of other bugs' )
16:18:00 <dpyzhov> Bugfix status. We passed SCF and here some numbers for medium/low/wishlist priority bugs in python and library.
16:18:05 <dpyzhov> We have fixed 138 bugs. We’ve fixed 199 of them in 8.0
16:18:10 <dpyzhov> We invalidated 44 bugs. In 8.0 we invalidated 100 bugs.
16:18:15 <dpyzhov> We have 109 open bugs. We had 139 at the SCF of 8.0
16:18:23 <dpyzhov> We have 50 unassigned bugs without tags of feature teams in python and 7 in library.
16:18:28 <dpyzhov> 11 of them are related to small components: client and fuelmenu.
16:18:33 <dpyzhov> So we have 39 unassigned bugs in python and most of them are tricky.
16:18:38 <dpyzhov> For me it looks like great progress with bugfixing. Our current scope for old issues is tricky, but observable. Good job, team.
16:18:53 <dpyzhov> of course it all depends on new findings
16:19:08 <dpyzhov> thats all for SCF in bugfixing
16:19:10 <dpyzhov> questions?
16:19:23 <xarses> wow, nice breakdown
16:19:37 <mihgen> +1 great job, especially in the light of major code changes and so many FFEs !
16:19:54 <holser_> +1
16:19:58 <dpyzhov> new features helped to get rid of some old issues )
16:20:00 <mihgen> dpyzhov: and thanks for great report, very clear
16:20:30 <mihgen> dpyzhov: and this is super awesome :)
16:20:59 <angdraug> +1, nice way to show progress since 8.0
16:22:06 <xarses> #topic Bulk movement of bugs to the Newton release (dpyzhov)
16:22:10 <dpyzhov> We created branches for Mitaka backports and we passed Mitaka SCF. Our master branches of all repos are switched to Newton release.
16:22:17 <dpyzhov> It means that we should move all product bugs to Newton and target high priority bugs for backport to Mitaka.
16:22:24 <dpyzhov> I know that each team has own flow for it’s bugs. For example, in python/library/ui we don’t want to backport bugs with ‘feature’, ‘tech-debt’, ‘covered-by-bp’ and ‘need-bp’ tags.
16:22:32 <dpyzhov> I’m not sure about rules in other teams.
16:22:36 <dpyzhov> So I’m asking a question. Are we ok to move all bugs to Newton release and target high priority bugs for backport to Mitaka and let each team to update bugs manually according to their internal rules?
16:23:18 <ogelbukh> I'm OK with that
16:23:39 <dpyzhov> what about infra/qa/other teams?
16:23:40 <angdraug> isn't it going to be less work to leave the bugs in Mitaka and expect each team to clean up their low priority bugs?
16:23:52 <ogelbukh> we handle all bugs via master branch anyways
16:24:10 <angdraug> I'm worried that we're placing the human factor risk in the wrong place
16:24:15 <ogelbukh> angdraug: I guess that move is somewhat automated?
16:24:42 <angdraug> ogelbukh: somewhat. it will mess things up in many cases
16:25:06 <ogelbukh> got it
16:25:14 <angdraug> my point is, it's safer to leave some low priority bugs in Mitaka than accidentally move some high priority bugs to Newton and forget about them
16:25:17 <dpyzhov> angdraug: as for python/library we reviewed our bugs and ready to move them to Newton automatically
16:25:47 <dpyzhov> angdraug: we are in tricky position now
16:26:03 <dpyzhov> bugs are targeted to 9.0 and fixes are merged in newton
16:26:25 <angdraug> good point
16:26:39 <dpyzhov> so we need to check every bug before merge manually in order to be sure that the bug is in right milestone
16:27:28 <bookwar> dpyzhov: if we change development focus on LP it will be ok
16:27:41 <bookwar> as default series will be newton
16:28:02 <dpyzhov> bookwar: you mean that bugs will not be marked as 'fix committed' automatically?
16:28:15 <dpyzhov> looks like a quick solution
16:28:24 <bookwar> they won't be marked as fix-commited in mitaka series
16:28:42 <dpyzhov> I guess we should do it
16:29:00 <bookwar> but then all bugs which are not currently targeted to mitaka explicitly, will be targeted to newton only
16:29:21 <dpyzhov> it is acceptable, I guess
16:29:40 <dpyzhov> all new medium priority bugs should be targeted to Newton
16:29:43 <bookwar> there will be number of bugs with default series and 9.0 milestone
16:30:40 <xarses> moving on? can I assign an action to follow up?
16:30:55 <dpyzhov> so again, my proposal is to move all bugs to Newton, switch development focus and review bugs in order to backport some of them to Mitaka )
16:31:15 <angdraug> maybe switch development focus first?
16:31:30 <bookwar> xarses: i can take an action for dev focus
16:31:46 <bookwar> and we'll discuss with dpyzhov
16:31:53 <xarses> ok
16:32:23 <xarses> #action bookwar will update dev focus to newton
16:32:51 <xarses> #action bookwar and dpyzhov will collaborate on next steps for moving bugs
16:32:54 <xarses> #topic Tricky bug  with MySQL https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1548271 status and discussion (sgolovatyuk)
16:32:57 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1548271 in Fuel for OpenStack "Access denied for user 'root'@'localhost'/Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock errors during cluster deployment" [Critical,Confirmed] - Assigned to Sergii Golovatiuk (sgolovatiuk)
16:33:07 <holser_> We have a tricky race
16:33:23 <holser_> and it occurs in very rare conditions
16:33:37 <holser_> unfortunately we cannot reproduce it locally.
16:33:56 <holser_> We are making some guesses to fix the bug
16:34:10 <holser_> It requires a little bit more time than expected
16:34:41 <holser_> I have a few ideas I am going to implement some stuff tomorrow
16:34:44 <holser_> to get it done
16:34:50 <holser_> that’s all
16:35:33 <xarses> anything we can do to help?
16:35:55 <holser_> I will work with mwhahaha to get it done faster
16:36:11 <holser_> he will be able to test it tonight
16:36:17 <holser_> so I expect a merge tomorrow
16:36:30 <xarses> ok
16:36:37 <xarses> #topic fuel upgrade status (ogelbukh)
16:37:23 <ogelbukh> ok, let's see
16:37:29 <ogelbukh> fuel upgrade status
16:37:29 <ogelbukh> data-driven upgrade 8 to 9 IN DEVELOPMENT
16:37:29 <ogelbukh> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/fuel-octane+branch:master+topic:upgrade-80-90
16:37:29 <ogelbukh> data-driven upgrade 7 to 8 DONE
16:37:29 <ogelbukh> deliver fuel-octane updated package to 7 and 8 IN REVIEW
16:38:01 <ogelbukh> we're working to make the packages properly available to existing installation
16:38:03 <mihgen> 7->8 great! what happens with plugins in this case?
16:38:29 <ogelbukh> plugins are synced from the previous release as is
16:38:45 <ogelbukh> if they are not compatible with 8, they will break most likely
16:39:05 <mihgen> hmmm this is what I'm not sure if I like )
16:39:13 <xarses> so they should upgrade the plugins first?
16:39:16 <mihgen> can we take a few major ones and see what happens
16:39:22 <ogelbukh> we need more testing on that
16:39:34 <ogelbukh> which is currently beyond our capacity
16:39:40 <mihgen> we can't fully upgrade plugins either, because Fuel 8 will be still running Kilo cloud
16:40:23 <mihgen> ogelbukh: it's not just testing, I'm pretty sure we'd need to do some engineering work there...
16:40:26 <mihgen> ikalnitsky: around?
16:40:34 <akscram> plugins are preserved in the database and their tasks are synced from the filysystem but their still related for their release
16:40:47 <ogelbukh> well, testing is required to understand the effeor
16:40:50 <ogelbukh> *effort
16:40:51 <akscram> it means that after upgrade it is not possible to use them for the new release
16:41:05 <ogelbukh> that's correct
16:41:21 <mihgen> that's fine. I need them to be usable for the old release on Kilo
16:41:26 <akscram> new versions of plugins should be installed manually if you want to use them for the new release
16:41:34 <ogelbukh> yes, we need to test scale out case mostly
16:41:43 <mihgen> ogelbukh: yep
16:41:59 <ogelbukh> and if we manage to deploy Kilo with 8, then that case too
16:42:05 <mihgen> and in Fuel 8-> 9 research about lcm cases too
16:42:16 <ogelbukh> we've done it successfully once by now
16:42:17 <mihgen> ogelbukh: yes
16:42:22 <ogelbukh> with some minor issues
16:42:27 <mihgen> did you need to hack some code?
16:42:36 <mihgen> or it was out of the box?
16:42:40 <akscram> without working lcm it is hard to research anything
16:42:43 <ogelbukh> yes, a bit of hacking and bit of backports
16:42:53 <ogelbukh> nothing exceptional, as I understand
16:43:01 <ikalnitsky> mihgen: sorry, yep, i'm around
16:43:16 <ogelbukh> openstack env upgrade status
16:43:16 <ogelbukh> upgrade 7 to 8 IN REVIEW
16:43:16 <ogelbukh> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/fuel-octane+branch:master+status:open+owner:%22Sergey+Abramov+%253Csabramov%2540mirantis.com%253E%22+topic:%22%22
16:43:19 <mihgen> ogelbukh: if we need to push patches to updates for Fuel 8, then we need to do it...
16:43:48 <mihgen> or it's only about octane? I thought some work on nailgun side is needed
16:43:55 <ogelbukh> we have a bunch of commits in review that adjust octane to be able to upgrade openstack 7 to 8
16:44:04 <mihgen> because by default, Fuel doesn't allow to create new envs of older releases after upgrade
16:44:09 <ogelbukh> no, it's about nailgun too
16:44:25 <ikalnitsky> mihgen: it's artificial limitation. could be changed via api, i believe
16:44:26 <ogelbukh> I will summarize and send an email to openstack-dev
16:44:27 <mihgen> I see only octane patches in the shared link
16:44:35 <mihgen> ogelbukh: ok thanks
16:44:43 <mihgen> sorry folks for holding too long on this
16:44:49 <ogelbukh> this link is about patches to upgrade openstack
16:45:03 <ogelbukh> so it's only octane
16:45:15 <ogelbukh> deployment of old release requires fixes in nailgun
16:45:20 <ogelbukh> let's move on
16:45:54 <xarses> #topic configdb api status (ogelbukh)
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> configdb status
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> API extension is DONE
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> integration with LCM plugin IN TESTING
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> automated functional tests IN REVIEW
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> automated integration tests IN REVIEW
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> fuel2 extension CLI client IN REVIEW
16:46:01 <ogelbukh> still pending a merge of a spec: https://review.openstack.org/284109
16:46:19 <ogelbukh> so we basically done from the functional standpoint
16:46:43 <ogelbukh> except for cli part that slipped a little, expected tomorrow
16:47:07 <mihgen> folks let's land the spec... it can be endless minor fixing. I'll review latest changes..
16:47:13 <ogelbukh> we still can't collect all required reviews for spec, so I will appreciate if you all could help
16:47:32 <ogelbukh> we merged smaller one just today though
16:47:54 <ogelbukh> currently it is mostly testing, testing automation and cli
16:48:17 <ogelbukh> and we started desiging the next iteration, I will come up with proposals early next week
16:48:45 <ogelbukh> that's all on my side, if no question, then we can move on
16:49:04 <xarses> #topic Enhancements Team status (ashtokolov)
16:49:11 <ashtokolov> Hi folks
16:49:14 <ashtokolov> We are working on High and Critical bugs:
16:49:20 <ashtokolov> Total - 26
16:49:25 <ashtokolov> In progress - 11
16:49:29 <ashtokolov> Incomplete - 3
16:49:42 <ashtokolov> That's all
16:50:11 <xarses> #topic Telco Team Status (fzhadaev)
16:50:19 <fzhadaev> As on previous week our main activity during this week was fixing bugs:
16:50:19 <fzhadaev> Done 9
16:50:19 <fzhadaev> In progress (in development and on review) 14
16:50:19 <fzhadaev> Any questions?
16:51:35 <xarses> thanks
16:51:36 <xarses> #topic Design Summit in Austin - agenda
16:51:47 <xarses> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-newton-summit-planning
16:52:26 <xarses> xarses: mwhahaha ashtokolov aglarendil have topics that still need agenda's
16:52:38 <mwhahaha> i do?
16:52:48 <xarses> you did as of a few min ago
16:53:03 <aglarendil> Okay, gimme one day to fill it in
16:53:04 <mwhahaha> the link has been there for a few weeks now
16:53:13 <mwhahaha> but i can copy-pasta if so required
16:53:13 <xarses> holser_: , bookwar
16:53:20 <xarses> mwhahaha: I may be blind
16:53:37 <mihgen> yeah we need to fill it in, I've heard folks from att are interested, and other. Ideally self-explanatory so those who don't do daily work with fuel features can understand, join and provide feedback at sessions
16:53:38 <holser_> I have a discussion with Topic Leaders
16:53:50 <holser_> I asked to update agenda as we need to send it to community
16:54:08 <mwhahaha> i shall copy paste
16:54:15 <holser_> so Topic leaders should do it today
16:54:19 <holser_> by the way xarses
16:54:29 <xarses> mwhahaha: there is a link on yours at this point, thanks
16:54:29 <holser_> you’ve not put agenda for your tracks :)
16:54:53 <xarses> yes, I called my self on it too
16:55:08 <holser_> I’ll continue working with Leads on agenda details
16:55:29 <holser_> kozhukalov: wants to announce agenda on next week
16:55:39 <holser_> so it will be visible to community
16:55:52 <holser_> guys will be able to plan their agenda accordingly
16:55:56 <xarses> ok
16:56:40 <xarses> #topic open discuss
16:57:00 <xarses> anything else to raise? otherwise I will close the meeting shortly
16:58:02 <xarses> thanks everyone, have a good rest of your day.
16:58:06 <xarses> #endmeeting