17:00:12 <jroll> #startmeeting ironic
17:00:12 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Nov 14 17:00:12 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jroll. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:13 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:00:14 <JayF> o/
17:00:15 <vdrok> o/
17:00:16 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ironic'
17:00:19 <mariojv> o/
17:00:22 <HoloIRCUser3> o/
17:00:24 <jroll> as always, agenda:
17:00:24 <lucasagomes> o/
17:00:25 <dtantsur> o/
17:00:26 <rpioso> o/
17:00:28 <mgould> o/
17:00:32 <rloo> o/
17:00:36 <jroll> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic#Agenda_for_next_meeting
17:00:39 <jroll> let's jump in
17:00:48 <jroll> #topic announcements and reminders
17:01:07 <jroll> a reminder for people with features touching nova: nova spec freeze is thursday (nov 17)
17:01:10 <krtaylor> o/
17:01:18 <jlvillal> o/
17:01:30 <jroll> not much of an announcement, but I saw good progress on lots of things last week
17:01:32 <jroll> good work everyone \o/
17:01:38 <jroll> anyone else have a thing here?
17:01:56 <mjturek1> o/
17:01:58 <rloo> ocata priorities were 'finalized'
17:02:04 <mariojv> PTG registration is open, not sure if that was covered last time
17:02:05 <jroll> ah, yes
17:02:06 <TheJulia> o/
17:02:08 <xavierr> o/
17:02:19 <jroll> those are here:
17:02:21 <jroll> #link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/ironic-specs/priorities/ocata-priorities.html
17:02:29 <jroll> and yes, PTG reg is open
17:02:39 <jroll> #link https://www.eventbrite.com/e/project-teams-gathering-tickets-27549298694
17:02:42 <rloo> oh, trello board for ocata priorities: https://trello.com/b/ROTxmGIc/ironic-ocata-priorities
17:02:51 <rloo> #link https://trello.com/b/ROTxmGIc/ironic-ocata-priorities
17:03:00 <jroll> we plan to be wed-fri for ironic meetup, though I suspect most people will leave friday afternoon
17:03:32 <jroll> thanks rloo and mariojv
17:03:53 <HoloIRCUser3> o/
17:04:03 <jroll> anything else?
17:04:30 <jroll> #topic subteam status reports
17:04:37 <jroll> these start around line 81 here:
17:04:42 <jroll> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicWhiteBoard
17:05:09 <jroll> woo for new pep8 passing
17:05:53 <jroll> interface attach/detach spec/BP went through, we should get that code done early as it blocks nova portgroups code
17:06:19 <rloo> so what's the order for portgroups & attach/detach code?
17:06:32 <rloo> ironic portgroups, ironic attach/detach, nova attach/detach, nova portgroups?
17:06:40 <jroll> yeah, sounds right
17:07:03 <vdrok> jroll: so we need to land the actual code in nova till feature freeze? Jan 23-27?
17:07:13 <rloo> i see 'movement' wrt the nova spec for portgroups. does it look close to being approved this week?
17:07:14 <jroll> BFV stuff looks ready for review
17:07:16 <jroll> vdrok: yep
17:07:24 <jroll> rloo: yes, I think it will be approved this week
17:07:36 <jroll> rloo: it has a +2 now
17:07:43 <rloo> jroll: sweet!
17:07:47 <jroll> :)
17:08:33 <vdrok> jroll: that was fast :)
17:08:58 <stendulker> o/
17:09:11 <jroll> it's not on a subteam report, but I've made some progress on dropping ironic code from tempest - I think that will be ready to land this week as well
17:09:23 <rloo> vdrok: yes, nova code has to land by feature freeze, R-4 like you said
17:09:40 <vdrok> yup, thanks
17:10:34 <rloo> sambetts: wrt attach/detach -- you'll let us know this week when you've got the updated patches?
17:10:39 <jroll> do "this week's priorities" look alright to folks? I updated it a bit (line 74)
17:11:04 <sambetts> rloo: yup will do :) Ironic side is nearly finished, just adding more tests
17:11:09 <rloo> sambetts: thx
17:11:15 <jroll> I'd like to get root device hints done and get it out of the way, same for notifications
17:11:21 <dtantsur> lgtm
17:11:34 <jlvillal> If people want to stick in links to the patches to review for the priorities, I wouldn't object :)
17:11:35 <TheJulia> jroll: lgtm
17:11:39 <rloo> jroll: root device hints docs should be fairly easy, not sure it is a priority?
17:11:41 <lucasagomes> I need to update the docs, will do it tomorrow (writting it down here)
17:11:43 <jroll> jlvillal: yeah, I plan to add links
17:11:53 <lucasagomes> (for root device hints I mean)
17:12:03 <jlvillal> Thanks
17:12:04 <jroll> rloo: I worry it will get left behind if we don't just get it done now
17:12:18 <jroll> rloo: it's also on trello left over from newton
17:12:21 <rloo> jroll: it is close, lucasagomes just has to update i think.
17:12:24 <jroll> yeah
17:12:27 <rloo> jroll: ah, the real reason :)
17:12:36 <jroll> keeping visibility will help us just get it over with :)
17:12:45 <rloo> jroll: true
17:12:57 <rloo> jroll: what about the security patch then?
17:13:11 <jroll> rloo: security groups?
17:13:13 <rloo> jroll: security groups :)
17:13:20 <milan> o/
17:13:32 <jroll> rloo: same idea, I guess, though I've been keeping a close eye on it
17:13:38 <vdrok> rloo: just couple of unittests missing there
17:13:54 <jroll> right ^ almost done
17:14:12 <jroll> sukhdev needed some help with it, once we work it out I'll plug it for review
17:14:23 <rloo> ok, good.
17:14:57 <jroll> cool, sounds like we have another week nice and full of work - anything else here?
17:15:20 <rloo> i'm looking for a week that is not nice and not full of work :)
17:15:37 <JayF> rloo: thanksgiving is next week, that'll only be about 60% full of work :P
17:15:47 <rloo> JayF: phew. Saved!
17:15:52 * jroll hands rloo a vacation request form
17:15:55 <jroll> :D
17:15:59 <TheJulia> lol
17:16:00 <vdrok> lucky you!
17:16:05 <jroll> next up
17:16:08 <jroll> #topic Bringing MoltenIron into the Ironic governance
17:16:14 <mjturek> heyo
17:16:18 <jroll> hi krtaylor, mjturek
17:16:40 <jroll> does anyone need background on this or do we all remember the previous conversation(s)?
17:16:52 <rloo> i thought we had decided to do it
17:16:52 <mjturek> so hamzy has projectized molteniron https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/molteniron
17:17:15 * lucasagomes thinks he remembers it
17:17:17 <mjturek> https://launchpad.net/molteniron
17:17:18 <TheJulia> rloo: ditto
17:17:22 <jroll> rloo: well, we decided it fits in our new rules, now it's time to exercise those
17:17:23 <jroll> :)
17:17:33 <jroll> also not everyone was in that room
17:17:33 <lucasagomes> #link http://governance.openstack.org/reference/new-projects-requirements.html
17:17:38 <lucasagomes> the rules btw ^
17:17:45 <rloo> oh, i thought we exercised it at the time too, but yay, we get to vote on something? :)
17:17:52 <jroll> and ironic's rules specifically
17:17:55 <jroll> #link http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ironic/dev/governance.html
17:18:26 <jroll> so one concern I pointed out to the molteniron folks last week was a bunch of self-approved patches
17:18:36 <jroll> looks like they understand that's not okay and are already changing that
17:18:44 <mjturek> yep I've been making it a priority to review new changes
17:18:46 <mjturek> well
17:18:47 <jroll> see the last few here
17:18:49 <jroll> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/molteniron
17:18:52 <mjturek> ones that aren't mine
17:19:04 <jroll> mjturek: :)
17:19:12 <mjturek> :)
17:19:32 <jroll> so otherwise I think this looks like an ironic project, does anyone else disagree / have concerns?
17:19:50 <jroll> (and should we formally vote or is lazy consensus enough?)
17:20:09 <rloo> so is molteniron going to be tested in the gate?
17:20:25 <JayF> I think formal voting sometimes takes less time than informal consensus, lol :). I agree with their inclusion though.
17:20:27 * TheJulia thinks lazy consensus/polling for disagreement works
17:20:43 <jroll> rloo: depends what you mean, I guess, they already have unit tests and pep8
17:20:53 <sambetts> CI for a CI tool is an interesting paradox
17:20:55 <vdrok> rloo: I think use it , in the third party ci
17:21:05 <vdrok> *they use it
17:21:05 <rloo> jroll: depends on what the new-project-requirements mean: http://governance.openstack.org/reference/new-projects-requirements.html
17:21:07 <xavierr> sambetts: lol
17:21:14 <jlvillal> So will ironic-core be added to the project as core reviewers?
17:21:14 <lucasagomes> sambetts, hah indeed
17:21:14 <mjturek> rloo: right we have pep8 and unit tests
17:21:23 <mjturek> rloo: and pkvmci is using it
17:21:27 <rloo> The project has core reviewers and adopts a test-driven gate in the OpenStack infrastructure for changes
17:21:45 <jroll> rloo: yeah, pep8/unit tests is enough
17:21:51 <jlvillal> mjturek: Off topic, but a coverage job would be nice (if not existing) and see what the percentage is for the unit tests.
17:21:54 <lucasagomes> jlvillal, yes, I think we agreed that all projects under the ironic umbrella will include the ironic-drivers group, right ?
17:21:55 <rloo> ok, that is good enough for me
17:21:58 <jroll> see also http://governance.openstack.org/reference/project-testing-interface.html
17:21:58 <rloo> jlvillal: yes
17:22:01 <jlvillal> Thanks
17:22:16 <mjturek> jlvillal: sounds fair to me. I'd be interested in that as well
17:22:24 <rloo> mjturek: who are the core reviewers?
17:22:37 <mjturek> as of now it's myself, krtaylor, and hamzy
17:23:09 <rloo> sounds good to me. mjturek, are you all at ibm?
17:23:10 <jroll> I expect ironic-core to have core reviewer rights on any ironic project, btw
17:23:14 <jroll> (which I may need to fix)
17:23:15 <mjturek> rloo: yes
17:23:20 <mjturek> we're open to others of course
17:23:31 <krtaylor> but we'd like to get non-ibmers involved of course
17:23:36 <mjturek> +1
17:23:42 <rloo> so i think this is fine. what happens in a year or so if only ibm is contributing? guess we can revisit it then if we feel like it
17:23:56 <jroll> yeah, I think that should be a case-by-case thing
17:24:06 <krtaylor> sounds reasonable
17:24:42 <mjturek> agreed
17:25:02 <rloo> so lets vote cuz we so rarely do it. how many votes are needed anyway?
17:25:14 * rloo looks for fun in the smallest things
17:25:19 <jroll> we have 11 cores
17:25:26 <jroll> so 6 I guess?
17:25:35 * jroll doesn't think we have rules about consensus written down
17:26:19 <jroll> #startvote should molteniron be in ironic governance? Yes, No
17:26:20 <openstack> Begin voting on: should molteniron be in ironic governance? Valid vote options are Yes, No.
17:26:21 <openstack> Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.
17:26:22 <jroll> #vote yes
17:26:26 <lucasagomes> #vote yes
17:26:27 <sambetts> #vote yes
17:26:30 <rloo> #vote yes
17:26:31 <JayF> #vote yes
17:26:32 <jlvillal> #vote yes
17:26:35 <stendulker> #vote yes
17:26:49 <TheJulia> #vote yes
17:27:01 <vdrok> #vote yes
17:27:13 <dtantsur> #vote yes
17:27:19 <jroll> perfect time for UPS to come \o/
17:27:25 * jroll waits another minute or two
17:27:36 <TheJulia> jroll: that is the nature of the universe
17:27:57 <jroll> looks like a yes though
17:28:04 <mjturek> \o/
17:28:06 <jroll> #endvote
17:28:07 <openstack> Voted on "should molteniron be in ironic governance?" Results are
17:28:07 <jlvillal> I think that is 9 cores.
17:28:08 <openstack> Yes (10): TheJulia, lucasagomes, dtantsur, rloo, jlvillal, JayF, stendulker, vdrok, jroll, sambetts
17:28:13 <lucasagomes> mjturek, krtaylor btw, some refactoring on the tests files name and directory structure would be appreciated (to match ironic and other projects): https://github.com/openstack/molteniron/tree/master/molteniron/tests
17:28:26 <krtaylor> lucasagomes, absolutely
17:28:28 <jroll> mjturek: would you like to propose the governance repo change or shall I?
17:28:41 <rloo> congrats mjturek, krtaylor, hamzy !
17:29:11 <jroll> mjturek: I have some changes to do there anyway, so I don't mind
17:29:21 <mjturek> jroll: that would be appreciated. thanks!
17:29:27 <jroll> cool, no problem
17:29:31 <mjturek> thanks rloo!
17:29:35 <jroll> ok what's next
17:29:39 <jroll> #topic open discussion
17:29:50 <jroll> karthiks had a thing, otherwise the floor is open
17:29:55 <karthiks> We have proposed a spec for retrieving NUMA node information during introspection
17:30:00 <karthiks> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396147/
17:30:00 <karthiks> Please give us feedback.
17:31:08 <xek> I also updated the spec on rolling upgrades
17:31:12 <xek> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/299245/
17:31:20 <jroll> sweet, thanks xek
17:31:29 <jroll> I guess one more thing we should make sure we hit this week :)
17:31:36 <jlvillal> #info Rolling upgrade spec updated: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/299245/
17:31:44 <milan> karthiks, I'll take look as well
17:31:51 <karthiks> Thanks milan
17:32:07 <milan> karthiks, np
17:32:15 <rloo> jroll: i was going to suggest next week - to look at some specs. i saw some in the subteam reports that might need some attention.
17:32:43 <jroll> rloo: yeah, we should get all of the specs out of the way soon
17:32:54 <jroll> before we bikeshed all the way into release day
17:33:06 <rloo> jroll: yup. i figured we already had a lot on our plate this week
17:33:13 <JayF> Would any folks be interested in a spec review jam?
17:33:24 <jroll> indeed, but if folks need things to fill their free time, specs are good
17:33:57 <jroll> JayF: it could help, maybe we all try to look at some priority specs, and if there seems to be contentious things, line them up for a jam
17:33:58 <rloo> jroll: true -- i challenge anyone to have free time though, after going through this week's priorities! a beer on me!
17:34:09 <jroll> :P
17:35:02 <jroll> anything else or do we want 25 minutes back?
17:35:37 <jroll> cool cool, thanks y'all :)
17:35:42 <jroll> #endmeeting