14:04:43 <rosmaita> #startmeeting glance
14:04:44 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr  5 14:04:43 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is rosmaita. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:04:45 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:04:46 <smcginnis> o/
14:04:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'glance'
14:04:52 <abhishekk> o/
14:04:54 <McClymontS> o/
14:05:04 <rosmaita> #chair jokke_
14:05:04 <openstack> Current chairs: jokke_ rosmaita
14:05:56 <rosmaita> hello everyone
14:06:02 <abhishekk> hi
14:06:08 <McClymontS> Hey rosmaita
14:06:31 <rosmaita> kind of want jokke_ around for item #2
14:06:39 <rosmaita> oope
14:06:42 <rosmaita> meaning, oops
14:06:51 <rosmaita> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda
14:06:54 <rosmaita> there's the agenda
14:07:04 <rosmaita> ok, let's skip to item #3
14:07:13 <rosmaita> that's me
14:07:22 <rosmaita> #topic OSSN update proposal
14:07:37 <rosmaita> i have a proposal for updating the OSSNs
14:07:45 <rosmaita> just the ones releate to glance
14:08:20 <rosmaita> would be good to have someone (McClymontS maybe?) go though and update them
14:08:29 <McClymontS> Absolutely
14:08:34 <McClymontS> I'd like to take that item
14:08:35 <rosmaita> check which releases they are applicable to
14:08:43 <rosmaita> (may need to add more recent releases)
14:08:48 <rosmaita> also update the status
14:09:02 <rosmaita> "update" in the sense of i don;t think there's a status field on them
14:09:23 <rosmaita> but indicate whether they've been fixed, and if so what release
14:09:35 <rosmaita> whether they're under discussion, and if so, spec link
14:09:52 <rosmaita> or whether you are on your own as an operator in dealing with it
14:10:01 <rosmaita> anyway, i think that would be helpful
14:10:13 <rosmaita> might need to check with VMT about updating them
14:10:29 <rosmaita> but since they're on the wiki, they should be updatable in principle
14:10:44 <McClymontS> Yeah I will definitely reach out to those teams and go ahead and start looking into what we can update and where
14:10:51 <rosmaita> anyway, scott, you will have to talk to fungi probably about getting write access on the wiki
14:11:10 <rosmaita> (i don't know if they restored it to regular people, there was a spam problem)
14:11:33 <rosmaita> ok, well if McClymontS has accepted taking this on, that's all i've got
14:11:35 <fungi> yeah, can you elaborate on specifically what it's not letting you do?
14:11:56 <McClymontS> Have not even tried yet fungi, just got tasked with it. Will keep you posted if I run into any issues
14:12:04 <rosmaita> McClymontS: you can communicate with fungi directly, i just assumed he won't have write access
14:12:09 <fungi> we've had the spam situation under control for a while now, thankfully
14:12:22 <rosmaita> fungi: excellent news
14:12:32 <fungi> yeah, reach out to me in #openstack-infra if you run into any issues using your wiki account
14:12:39 <fungi> happy to help
14:12:42 <rosmaita> thanks!
14:12:56 <rosmaita> ok, i am item #4 as well
14:13:17 <rosmaita> #topic lack of good error messages due to misconfiguration
14:13:40 <abhishekk> you are everywhere in today's agenda :D
14:13:46 <rosmaita> someone filed a  bug and did really nice job troubleshooting this
14:13:57 <rosmaita> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1761185
14:13:57 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1761185 in Glance "Value errors when configuring 'enabled_import_methods' option" [Medium,Triaged]
14:14:07 <rosmaita> found a fix already sitting there:
14:14:16 <rosmaita> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/514114/1
14:14:37 <rosmaita> which was abandoned after scott asked for a test and i had a backward-compat concern
14:14:49 <smcginnis> rosmaita: So the issue is ValueError would now have a different return_code?
14:15:06 <rosmaita> yeah, and i don;t know if it matters
14:15:21 <rosmaita> when you look at the code, it's someone being a bit too clever with python
14:15:27 <rosmaita> (hopefully it wasn't me!)
14:15:31 <smcginnis> :)
14:15:40 <abhishekk> :)
14:15:55 <rosmaita> anyway, the fix is good, it will just  change the error  code you get b ack
14:16:11 <rosmaita> i don't know if anyone is paying that  close attention
14:16:32 <McClymontS> I liked that one just needed a test
14:16:42 <smcginnis> We could just change that to a list and return the index location (with padding to keep consistent) or make it a dict with explicit return codes.
14:16:52 <abhishekk> I guess it will not be a concern
14:16:57 <rosmaita> but as a general note, when you introduce KNOWN_EXCEPTIONS into code, you need to have a plan for what to do with unknown exceptions
14:17:01 <rosmaita> :)
14:17:14 <abhishekk> but dict is a good idea
14:17:16 <rosmaita> yeah, jokke_ is very strong on not breaking backward compat
14:17:26 <smcginnis> Anyway, seems like it would not be too difficult to keep it backward compat.
14:17:33 <smcginnis> Just need some tweaks.
14:17:41 <rosmaita> to address smcginnis i think maintaining a map of error codes is the way to do it
14:17:52 <rosmaita> maybe return 99 for unknown code
14:17:53 <abhishekk> ++
14:17:53 <smcginnis> Explicit is better than implicit. ;)
14:18:14 <rosmaita> agreed
14:18:22 <abhishekk> always
14:18:22 <rosmaita> ok, i will assign myself to this one
14:18:49 <rosmaita> i just worked with a bunch of exit tests on glanceclient, hopefullly a similar test is easy here
14:18:52 <abhishekk> I am sure you will add sufficient tests as well ;)
14:19:04 <rosmaita> will preserve backward compat with a map of exit codes
14:19:10 <rosmaita> cool!
14:19:27 <rosmaita> this is a really bad bug becasue we rely heavily on the oslo_config stuff to validate the config file
14:19:42 <rosmaita> and no one can see the messages!
14:19:53 <rosmaita> ok, thanks for the feedback
14:20:08 <rosmaita> ok, let's go  back to #1
14:20:19 <rosmaita> forum proposals
14:20:31 <rosmaita> #topic updates -forum proposals
14:20:45 <rosmaita> my fingers were not ready for so much typing today
14:20:50 <McClymontS> lol
14:20:58 <rosmaita> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-glance-brainstorming
14:21:10 <McClymontS> Love the airport code
14:21:22 <rosmaita> everyone was doing that, i just copied it
14:21:34 <rosmaita> ok, please put some topics on there
14:21:47 <smcginnis> We did it last time in Vancouver too. I'm surprised we haven't mixed up old etherpads yet.
14:22:06 <rosmaita> my thought is that if people can't make the summit, we can use them for a virtual operator mid-cycle meeting
14:22:11 <smcginnis> I know the official forum topic submission is now open. Not sure when that closes.
14:22:20 <smcginnis> rosmaita: ++
14:22:26 <rosmaita> we did that in pre-summit days, and was usually attended pretty well
14:22:35 <rosmaita> topic submission closes 15 april
14:22:40 <rosmaita> at midnight
14:22:52 <McClymontS> Are my updates reflecting correctly rosmaita?
14:22:53 <smcginnis> rosmaita: Thanks!
14:22:56 <McClymontS> is my name on there?
14:23:04 <smcginnis> yep
14:23:05 <rosmaita> which i do not know if it is 00:00 on 15 april or 23:59 on 15 april
14:23:16 <McClymontS> Perfect, I'll add some comments on those two OSSNs
14:23:21 <smcginnis> Probably safer to go with the earlier one.
14:23:29 <rosmaita> smcginnis agreed
14:24:08 <rosmaita> anyway, just some awareness ... if you have something you would like operator feedback on, or if your company is giving you operator feedback on something, please add it to the pad
14:24:49 <rosmaita> also McClymontS as you said, if you come across old OSSNs that you would like to find out operator impact, or how they are handling them, please add
14:25:13 <McClymontS> Will do, I've been doing some research on that already so I'll toss that on there
14:25:13 <rosmaita> key point is we can use this as an area for both Forum proposals and running our own virtual operator midcycle
14:25:28 <rosmaita> great
14:25:34 <rosmaita> #topic release update
14:26:08 <rosmaita> got 2 releases we'd like to do, the image immport stuff for glanceclient
14:26:17 <rosmaita> and some bugfixes to stable/queens
14:26:23 <rosmaita> glanceclient
14:26:26 <rosmaita> first
14:26:40 <rosmaita> #link https://launchpad.net/python-glanceclient/+milestone/2.10.0
14:27:32 <rosmaita> would be good to get the inprogess stuff done by tomorrow so we cna have a patch ready for stable maint team for their monday meetinbg
14:27:55 <rosmaita> that means jokke_ and smcginnis since i am author of these
14:28:08 <smcginnis> I'll take a look!
14:28:24 <rosmaita> smcginnis thanks!
14:28:49 <rosmaita> open question about https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758718 ... that one doesn't have a patch proposed for stable/queens yet
14:28:50 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1758718 in Glance Client queens "image-import needs to fail faster" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Brian Rosmaita (brian-rosmaita)
14:28:58 <rosmaita> has not been merged to master
14:29:14 <rosmaita> i don't know if there's an issue about it or not
14:29:23 <abhishekk> Does it need a rebase or good to go?
14:29:33 <rosmaita> jokke_ has a patch up that abhishekk mentions in the comments to handle some of this on glance side
14:29:43 <rosmaita> but i think we need these changes anyway
14:29:52 <rosmaita> abhishekk i think it is ok, but i will check
14:30:31 <smcginnis> rosmaita: I agree. Even if we improve it on the server side, the client could still be used to talk to a service that does not have that change.
14:30:37 <rosmaita> i don't see the orange dot on the review
14:30:43 <rosmaita> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/556292/
14:30:57 <rosmaita> i have been keeping it rebased on the other patch that just merged into master
14:31:11 <abhishekk> great then,
14:32:06 <rosmaita> i think i addressed all erno's concerns, but would be good for him to review
14:32:09 <rosmaita> jokke_ ^^
14:32:24 <rosmaita> ok, onto glance bugfixes for stable/queens
14:32:38 <abhishekk> ok then jokke and smcginnis can have a look again on those
14:32:39 <rosmaita> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/queens-stable-1
14:33:52 <rosmaita> i marked #1754104 as critical even though it's docs because there are a lot of duplicates being filed on thatone
14:33:54 <smcginnis> abhishekk: We could use your eyes on the patch to master: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/556292/
14:34:06 <smcginnis> That would need to get merged first before we can do anything in queens.
14:34:52 <abhishekk> smcginnis, I have verified that jokke_'s concern has been addressed and checked functionally as well
14:35:02 <smcginnis> Great!
14:35:21 <rosmaita> smcginnis and abhishekk : here's the doc patch to master: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/558932/
14:35:37 <rosmaita> would like to backport that to queens becasue of that bug i mentioned above
14:36:00 <abhishekk> rosmaita, I have verified that patch and looks good to me
14:36:17 <smcginnis> Yep, looks good.
14:36:36 <rosmaita> cool, i will cherry pick to stable/queens after it merges
14:37:01 <rosmaita> abhishekk i will +2 your https://review.openstack.org/#/c/559073/ as soon as it passes tests
14:37:26 <abhishekk> rosmaita, sounds good
14:37:52 <rosmaita> ok, my question was is there anything else anyone is aware of that should go into queens-stable-1 release?
14:38:02 <abhishekk> between as I said new functional test patch is also working now
14:38:22 <rosmaita> abhishekk : nice
14:38:47 <rosmaita> do you think we should get those tests into stable queens?
14:39:27 <abhishekk> rosmaita, i guess it will be good to have if it fits to stable policies
14:39:40 <rosmaita> smcginnis: ^^
14:40:17 <abhishekk> smcginnis, we are talking about this #link https://review.openstack.org/558187
14:40:19 <rosmaita> abhishekk: i was thinking the same thing, might be good to have as protection against something changing in some library or something
14:40:36 <abhishekk> agree
14:40:46 <McClymontS> Also agreed
14:41:33 <abhishekk> we can move ahead, limited time for next items
14:41:41 <smcginnis> Yeah, good to backport tests.
14:41:43 <rosmaita> sure, abhishek why don'
14:41:52 <rosmaita> t you file a bug for missing functional tests
14:41:55 <abhishekk> i will check other patches if they needs to be backport
14:42:08 <rosmaita> and then we can target it for rocky-1 and stable-queens-1
14:42:08 <abhishekk> rosmaita, sure thing
14:42:15 <abhishekk> I will do that later tonight
14:42:24 <rosmaita> and then jokke_ can un-target it if he disagrees
14:42:30 <rosmaita> ok, great
14:42:37 <abhishekk> (once reach to home)
14:42:45 <rosmaita> don't forget to update the closes-bug tag on your patch
14:42:55 <abhishekk> sure thing
14:42:58 <rosmaita> ty
14:43:12 <rosmaita> #topic open discussion
14:43:31 <rosmaita> just noted the patch that fixed the doc job failures
14:43:47 <rosmaita> it was an order of loading libraries thing
14:44:26 <rosmaita> ok, still need approval on my split the glanceclient functional tests patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/553641/
14:44:28 <abhishekk> i was banging my head to find the reason
14:44:40 <rosmaita> we need it merged before we can pull v1 out of glance
14:44:55 <rosmaita> abhishekk eventlet and monkey-patching have a lot to answer for!
14:45:19 <abhishekk> agree
14:45:32 <rosmaita> ok, i may put up a patch to remove our non-voting functional-identity-v3 gate job
14:45:52 <rosmaita> our "regualr" job is actually using identity-v3
14:45:57 <rosmaita> (default value changed in devstack)
14:46:09 <abhishekk> makes sense then
14:46:23 <rosmaita> yeah, i don'tlknow why i put it on the agenda
14:46:36 <rosmaita> ok one last thing and then i will shut up
14:46:45 <rosmaita> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468179/
14:47:09 <rosmaita> that's my "fix 00sn-0075" spec ... i just want to see from our team if the proposal is ok
14:47:19 <rosmaita> before i send out to the operators list again
14:47:32 <abhishekk> will take a look
14:47:40 <rosmaita> they are probably sick of hearing about it as well!
14:47:52 <rosmaita> abhishekk thanks
14:47:56 <rosmaita> smcginnis could probably use your opinion too
14:48:12 <rosmaita> each of the prior proposals has basically become an alternative on the spec
14:48:44 <rosmaita> that's all from me ... anyone else got anything?
14:48:51 <abhishekk> I have a review request for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529083/
14:49:16 <abhishekk> rosmaita, smcginnis, McClymontS ^^^ when you get some spare time
14:49:33 <rosmaita> will do
14:49:41 <abhishekk> thank you
14:49:44 <McClymontS> Ack, will go take a look soon
14:49:56 <abhishekk> thank you
14:51:06 <rosmaita> yeah, it would be good to get that fixed soon, and that patch has been sitting for quite a while
14:51:28 <abhishekk> May be next week we can revisit rocky-1 priorities to keep track?
14:51:58 <rosmaita> we have 8 moinutes, maybe we should do it now
14:52:06 <rosmaita> rocky-1 is week of 16 april
14:52:12 <abhishekk> ok
14:52:13 <rosmaita> so next thursday will be  a bit late!
14:52:26 <rosmaita> #topic rocky-1 priority review
14:52:48 <abhishekk> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-rocky-priorities
14:52:52 <rosmaita> ty
14:53:52 <rosmaita> i got nothin' for tempest import tests
14:53:58 <abhishekk> May be we can shift tempest tests to rocky-2?
14:54:11 <rosmaita> probably
14:54:33 <smcginnis> Those might be tricky.
14:54:41 <rosmaita> i would like to review the multihash stuff for glance_store
14:55:21 <McClymontS> Multihash will definitely need another sitdown
14:55:38 <rosmaita> i may have some partial discovery stuff, need to review bhagyashri's member-schema change first though
14:56:03 <rosmaita> McClymontS do you have a patch up for glance_Store
14:56:13 <McClymontS> Its dated at this point
14:56:17 <McClymontS> we can look at it together
14:56:28 <abhishekk> ok, so we still have 10 working days in hand (what we can do in it)
14:56:44 <rosmaita> that's ok, let me make it a point to to read it tomorrow and let's meet monday to discuss, if that works for you
14:56:53 <McClymontS> yeah we can talk about it then
14:56:57 <rosmaita> cool
14:57:12 <smcginnis> Has anyone put up a WIP for the API v1 removal to see if tests pass?
14:57:14 <rosmaita> i don't feel too bad about the tempest tests since we are getting in some functional and unit tests for image import
14:57:15 <abhishekk> shuffle of items, i guess scrubber pending delete restore is ready so we can target it to r-1?
14:57:41 <rosmaita> abhishekk : good point, i have lost track of those patches
14:58:06 <abhishekk> may be in r-2 i will have a look on tempests tests
14:59:05 <smcginnis> 1 minute warning
14:59:06 <abhishekk> lets revisit it again in next week
14:59:22 <abhishekk> thank you all :)
14:59:32 <rosmaita> ok, well jokke_ can send out info on priorities email
14:59:38 <rosmaita> thanks everyone
14:59:44 <McClymontS> Thanks guys
14:59:46 <smcginnis> Thanks!
14:59:56 <rosmaita> #dndmeeting
15:00:04 <rosmaita> #endmeeting