15:00:31 <therve> #startmeeting heat
15:00:32 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jul  6 15:00:31 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is therve. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:33 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'heat'
15:00:37 <therve> #topic Roll call
15:00:44 <prazumovsky> hi!
15:00:45 <shardy> o/
15:00:52 <duvarenkov> hi
15:01:00 <ochuprykov> hi
15:01:00 <jdob> o/
15:01:08 <Drago> o/
15:01:57 <skraynev> hi all
15:02:02 <skraynev> o/
15:02:36 <therve> Awesome
15:02:51 <therve> #topic Adding items to agenda
15:03:06 <therve> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/HeatAgenda#Agenda_.282016-07-06_1500_UTC.29
15:03:13 <therve> Could be a short one
15:03:36 <shardy> therve: I added https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1592374 to last weeks agenda by mistake, would be good to get an update on that
15:03:36 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1592374 in heat "deleting in_progress stack with nested stacks fails with convergence enabled" [High,Confirmed]
15:03:48 <therve> shardy, Sure thing
15:04:34 <therve> Okay
15:04:40 <therve> #topic Gate failures
15:04:54 <therve> So our success rate is still pretty abysmal in my experience
15:05:04 <therve> Recent culprit: https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1534026
15:05:05 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1534026 in heat "Fail heat_integrationtests.scenario.test_server_cfn_init.CfnInitIntegrationTest.test_server_cfn_init due to Nova error" [Medium,Confirmed]
15:05:26 <therve> It seems that qcow conversion is failing in that one test where we boot a server
15:06:29 <therve> skraynev, Remember a bit about that one, or you just got that error once?
15:07:19 <skraynev> therve: once
15:07:23 <therve> It started to happen a lot in the past 2 days (about 40 failures from what I can tell from logstack)
15:07:30 <skraynev> so I am not sure
15:08:12 <therve> Unfortunately we're the only project affected :/
15:08:26 <therve> I wonder if other projects test real qcow images though
15:08:55 <skraynev> I don't think so, probably it because we support old aws style
15:09:29 <therve> ?
15:09:31 <skraynev> I don't think, that somebody else who try to check such cases with this staff on th gates
15:09:40 <therve> AFAICT it has nothing to do with the CFN API, but I may be wrong
15:10:40 <therve> Anyway, I'll see with infra after the meeting if they have a clue, unless someone has another idea
15:10:47 <jaimguer> o/
15:10:58 <therve> #topic Status of fixing delete/cancel behaviour for convergence
15:11:23 <therve> So
15:11:31 <therve> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/279406/ may get in some day...
15:11:46 <therve> Then https://review.openstack.org/#/c/301483/ needs to be rebased
15:12:12 <skraynev> therve: yes. I rechecked it. it's only can be related with cfn-init staff. I just was confused by AWS resources in the template for this test
15:12:13 <therve> Anant is not around unfortunately, so I don't have much more new on that front
15:12:46 <therve> skraynev, " it's only can be related" ? Sorry I don't understand
15:13:16 <therve> shardy, I guess you just meant to push the issue some more, no info in particular?
15:13:44 <shardy> therve: Yeah, that bug has been unassigned for a while, and to me it's a critical blocker
15:13:52 <shardy> so I wanted to understand how close we are to fixing it
15:14:09 <shardy> thanks for the update, I'll pull those patches and see if they address the problem I was hitting
15:14:38 <therve> We're moving very slowly, in part because of reviews, in part because of the gate
15:14:39 <skraynev> therve: i thought, that root cause is our Heat resources or API, but now suppose, that it may be something wrong with cfn-init library. anyway don't take in mind ;)
15:15:10 <therve> skraynev, It fails when we boot the server though. We're only calling one nova API here.
15:15:55 <therve> Anyway
15:16:06 <therve> #topic Better place to define properties groups schema
15:16:17 <prazumovsky> It's mine
15:16:38 <prazumovsky> Here is changes for merged spec
15:16:40 <prazumovsky> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333304/
15:16:42 <prazumovsky> *are
15:17:26 <therve> operator=XOR? Oh boy :)
15:17:36 <prazumovsky> My question is - add properties group dict as item of properties schema (like in proposed changes), or create separate properties group schema
15:20:04 <therve> prazumovsky, I'd say separately may be better
15:20:31 <prazumovsky> I think so too
15:20:34 <therve> It feels like a weird fit in the schema directly
15:20:35 <ochuprykov> +1 for separate properties group schema
15:21:03 <therve> I'm not a giant fan of that idea either though, but anyway
15:21:29 <prazumovsky> Ok, thanks for voting:)
15:21:56 <prazumovsky> Anyway, It's allows to improve documentation
15:22:51 <therve> prazumovsky, I'll ask anyway: wouldn't it be better to be part of the property themselves? Do we need that "group" mechanism?
15:23:16 <therve> ie property xxx = Schema(STR, conflicts=[yyy, zzz])
15:24:20 <therve> We can talk about that later
15:24:26 <therve> #topic Open discussions
15:24:29 <therve> Bring it on
15:24:41 <prazumovsky> functional will be the same, but property schema will be too overloaded, I think
15:24:46 <ochuprykov> please take a look on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280836/
15:24:55 <prazumovsky> Sorry, I'm from phone, slowly typing
15:25:06 <ochuprykov> spec was merged already!
15:25:51 <ochuprykov> i've added rpc layer for sfe locking, as we discussed at the last meeting
15:26:13 <therve> ochuprykov, Awesome
15:29:09 <therve> Anything else?
15:29:23 <ochuprykov> not from my side
15:29:54 <therve> 3
15:29:57 <therve> 2
15:30:02 <therve> 1
15:30:10 <therve> #endmeeting