21:02:08 <ttx> #startmeeting
21:02:09 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Aug 14 21:02:08 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:02:10 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:02:15 <ttx> Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting
21:02:28 <ttx> #info Folsom-3 should be cut at the end of the day, so we'll look into remaining targets and defer/consider exceptions where appropriate
21:02:42 <ttx> #topic Actions from previous meeting
21:02:47 <ttx> * comstud to create a Cells blueprint so that we can track it
21:02:53 <ttx> vishy: Can't find one yet. I guess this is Grizzly material now ?
21:04:10 <vishy> ttx: yes appears so
21:04:19 <ttx> #topic Keystone status
21:04:22 <ttx> heckj: o/
21:04:25 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3
21:04:39 <ttx> Not much apparent progress since last week...
21:04:50 <ttx> document-deployment-suggestions-policy being doc-only can be postponed to RC1...
21:05:02 <ttx> heckj: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/pki : Defer/Will be merged today/Exception requested ?
21:05:12 <heckj> exception requested
21:05:25 <ttx> heckj: ETA for that ?
21:05:32 <heckj> based on feedback from the community, we really want to add in revocation support for the tokens - aiming to have it in within 1 week
21:05:53 <ttx> heckj: how self-contained is this feature ?
21:05:59 <heckj> very
21:06:10 <ttx> so it doesn't impact "regular use" of keystone ?
21:06:37 <heckj> nope - not even defaults. It's all for new use of PKI - default is the older token mechanisms
21:06:46 <ttx> heckj: i'm fine with it, especially if it's the only one in Keystone
21:06:56 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/ocf-support : Couldn't find code proposed... Deferred ?
21:06:57 <dolphm> yay
21:07:22 <heckj> ttx: change was abandoned - so deferring it
21:07:28 <ttx> heckj: Is that all the features that got in F3 ? Or is there anything we should retroactively create ?
21:07:57 <ttx> #info FFe for pki blueprint, if it gets merged in one week max
21:08:00 <heckj> That's really it
21:08:08 <ttx> From the Folsom blueprints, I'll also defer iana-register-port to Grizzly.
21:08:21 <ttx> heckj: Looking at F3-targeted bugs now, I see two bugs targeted... Are those really F3 publication blockers, or should they be removed from list ?
21:08:29 <heckj> ttx: they denied us - so will be relooking at that blueprint entirely
21:09:02 <ttx> (or pushed back to RC1 milestone)
21:09:05 <heckj> ttx: not blockers for the release
21:09:24 <heckj> can be easily kicked back to RC1 milestone - it's also out of the path for normal operation
21:09:24 <ttx> ok, great
21:09:30 <ttx> heckj: anything else ?
21:10:12 <heckj> I need to follow up with mtaylor and jeblair, but we might experiment with a feature branch to continue work on the V3 API while we continue to stabilize keystone for grizzly release
21:10:30 <ttx> you mean Folsom :)
21:10:36 <ttx> sounds like a cool experiment
21:10:40 <ttx> Questions about Keystone ?
21:10:41 <heckj> yeah - sorry, Folsom
21:10:42 <dolphm> heckj: good idea
21:11:17 <ttx> #topic Swift status
21:11:21 <ttx> notmyname: hey
21:11:24 <notmyname> howdy
21:11:25 <ttx> Great write-up to the list with recent features, thanks.
21:11:36 <ttx> I created 1.6.1 milestone for you, no date yet. Let me know when you have an ETA.
21:11:45 <notmyname> thanks. it's a great group of contributors
21:12:01 <notmyname> ok. I have an FYI though
21:12:27 <ttx> I can use that
21:12:33 <notmyname> based on a patch merged yesterday, and depending on what happens before the next release, there is a very good chance we may call the next one 2.0
21:12:51 <ttx> oooh.
21:13:34 <notmyname> the patch updated the on-disk format of the ring (a great fix from swifterdarrell) but it may require the version updated to communicate that
21:13:42 <bcwaldon> notmyname: curious what the reason is
21:13:55 <notmyname> I'll probably send an email to the openstack-dev list about it
21:14:03 <ttx> notmyname: sounds like a good plan
21:14:04 <bcwaldon> ha, looked up and hit enter, ill shh now
21:14:11 <ttx> notmyname: anything else ?
21:14:30 <notmyname> nope. swift meetup on Aug 30 if you are in the bay area
21:14:38 <ttx> #action notmyname to send an email to openstack-dev with 2.0 plans
21:14:42 <ttx> Questions on Swift ?
21:14:51 <notmyname> s/plans/thoughts
21:15:24 <ttx> #topic Glance status
21:15:28 <ttx> bcwaldon: o/
21:15:31 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-3
21:15:41 <ttx> Only one left:
21:15:49 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/glance-deprecate-client : Looks like we should wait for this one, should be merged today ?
21:16:06 <ttx> or do you need slightly more time ?
21:16:09 <bcwaldon> if anyone can offer their opinion on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11359/, we can get that bp in today
21:16:23 <bcwaldon> ttx: the code is there, just need to get it reviewed/merged
21:16:48 <ttx> bcwaldon: ok, lets wait
21:17:01 <ttx> #help Priority glance review at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11359/
21:17:08 <bcwaldon> hopefully somebody watching this meeting has a few minutes
21:17:13 <ttx> Is that all the features that got in F3 ? Or is there anything we should retroactively create ?
21:17:25 <bcwaldon> that would be it, afaik
21:17:32 <ttx> Looking at F3-targeted bugs now, I see two bugs targeted...
21:17:42 <ttx> Are they F3 blockers, or more like RC1 targets now ?
21:17:47 <bcwaldon> rc1
21:17:56 <ttx> ack
21:17:59 <ttx> bcwaldon: Anything else ?
21:18:11 <bcwaldon> I wanted to mention something about the v2.0 Images API spec
21:18:30 <ttx> go ahead
21:18:32 <bcwaldon> As Folsom-3 is our feature freeze, this is the point where we say "What's in the code is v2.0"
21:18:58 <bcwaldon> and I'm working on getting a nice markdown-formatted api spec for people to refer to
21:19:07 <ttx> kewl
21:19:12 <heckj> bcwaldon: nice!
21:19:29 <ttx> Questions on Glance ?
21:20:05 <ttx> #topic Quantum status
21:20:13 <ttx> danwent: around ?
21:20:17 <danwent> yup
21:20:23 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-3
21:20:28 <ttx> Pretty long list of stuff under review here :)
21:20:31 <danwent> still clearing out some bugs
21:20:41 <danwent> so the way to think of it as there are 3 high priority things we're tracking
21:20:51 <danwent> and anything medium or below "gets in if it gets in"
21:21:17 <danwent> the provider net stuff is 90% in, we just keep lobbing off sub-commits
21:21:22 <danwent> OVS support is all that is left
21:21:44 <ttx> All the "needs review" here are expected to hit today ? Or do you need slightly more time ?
21:22:09 <danwent> I wouldn't mind more time for our 3 branches that are high priority and above
21:22:38 <danwent> but any of the lower stuff should either be merged tonight, or move on, in my opinion
21:22:45 <danwent> to help people focus on key items and testing.
21:23:01 <ttx> hmm, we'll see with Nova if it makes sense to delay F3 one more day to include a bit more stuff
21:23:18 <ttx> I won't ask if there was anything implemented that isn't already part of this list :)
21:23:19 <danwent> ttx: otherwise, the three big high priority branches can get merged
21:23:30 <danwent> we'd just lop off smaller bugs to fix any remaining issues.
21:23:50 <ttx> Looking at https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-rc1 you targeted quite a few blueprints there
21:24:02 <ttx> taht's in addition to the 3 you already mentioned, right
21:24:24 <danwent> ack.  two of those are testing infrastructure
21:24:33 <danwent> and two are in review already
21:24:44 <ttx> (but unlikely to hit today or tomorrow ?)
21:25:06 <danwent> if we have an extra day, the ones in review may hit.  I just haven't been super involved in the reviews, so I can't say for sure.
21:25:16 <ttx> which ones are testing infra ?
21:25:26 <danwent> "agent for test"
21:25:36 <danwent> "v2 quantum versions of devstack exercise scripts"
21:25:51 <danwent> basically, those are one item, but they are going into separate repos, so two BPs.
21:26:02 <ttx> I'm fine with those hitting early in RC1
21:26:18 <danwent> the L3 CLI stuff is in review, but needs unit tests written
21:26:23 <ttx> especially the devstack one which probably doesn't land in Quantum anyway
21:26:30 <danwent> multi-host and rootwrap are the more concerning ones.
21:26:36 <danwent> yes
21:26:49 <ttx> What about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/ovs-security-filtering ?
21:26:59 <ttx> if it's really not started, sounds like grizzly to me
21:27:03 <danwent> this would likely be a very small vif driver
21:27:13 <danwent> if its about 200 lines of code, it won't go in :)
21:27:40 <ttx> what about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/metadata-overlapping-networks ?
21:27:52 <danwent> yeah, carlp mentioned that last week.
21:28:11 <danwent> this is one of those "oh shit.." issues, as nova's metadata API assumes clients have unique ips.
21:28:35 <ttx> hmm, could almost be considered a gap bug rather than a blueprint
21:28:51 <ttx> Those all kinda make sense, but added all together it makes me fear for Quantum stability
21:28:53 <danwent> yeah.  we tend to create BPs for everything.
21:29:02 <ttx> in times when we need some stasis
21:29:21 * ttx should reassign the last one since he is no longer working on it
21:29:34 <danwent> agreed.  as I mentioned, these aren't all for sure things we're looking for, more just things we're considering
21:29:48 <danwent> i'll do a write-up on this and get your thoughts.
21:30:00 <danwent> as I mentioned, rootwrap and multi-host seem the most possible to disrupt
21:30:05 <ttx> danwent: sure, I'll look into them into more detail and talk to you
21:30:19 <danwent> k, thanks
21:30:23 <ttx> #action danwent/ttx to discuss how to reduce the nmber of FFe in Quantum
21:30:35 <ttx> From the untargeted Folsom blueprints, should we just defer:
21:30:40 <ttx> official-v2-api-spec
21:30:44 <ttx> nova-quantum-interface-creation
21:30:49 <ttx> isc-dhcp
21:30:50 <ttx> ?
21:31:03 <danwent> v2 spec is going to be done, but its not code, just using an item to track it.
21:31:09 <danwent> all others are going to be deferred.
21:31:13 <ttx> ok
21:31:30 <ttx> On the bugs list, you should only keep F3 blockers
21:31:43 <danwent> yup, i'm half way to cleaning it out
21:31:43 <ttx> (those we'll need to fix and backport to milestone-proposed before Thursday)
21:31:56 <ttx> Ideally all of those should have someone assigned to fix
21:32:03 <danwent> agreed
21:32:06 <ttx> Otherwise it doesn't look like it's going to happen
21:32:11 <ttx> You can push back the others to Folsom-RC1.
21:32:17 <ttx> danwent: Anything else ?
21:32:26 <danwent> nope, back to hacking and reviewing :)
21:32:39 <ttx> danwent: stay around, we migth discuss a one-day delay once we get to Nova
21:32:46 <ttx> Questions on Quantum ?
21:32:53 <danwent> ok.  do me a favor and ping my irc handle?
21:32:57 <ttx> sure
21:33:16 <danwent> i'll be rebasing :)(
21:33:21 <ttx> #topic Cinder status
21:33:28 <ttx> jgriffith: around ?
21:33:34 <jgriffith> Yep
21:33:36 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/folsom-3
21:33:51 <ttx> This list grew quite a lot since last week :)
21:33:58 <jgriffith> Yes, that it did
21:34:15 <ttx> Are all those reviews going to land today ?
21:34:23 <jgriffith> *should*
21:34:50 <jgriffith> Most are close, minor fixes here and there
21:34:52 <ttx> in other words, can we defer anythign that doesn't make it by the end of the day ? Or would you appreciate just a few more hours ?
21:35:07 <jgriffith> Depends on when the end of your today is :)
21:35:14 <jgriffith> A few more hours would be great
21:35:24 <ttx> jgriffith: it's actually the beginning of my tomorrow.
21:35:42 <ttx> also known as midnight Hawai time
21:35:43 <jgriffith> I think everything that's in review now should be closed out by COB mountain time today
21:35:56 <ttx> ok
21:36:00 <ttx> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/cinder-notifications -> deferred ?
21:36:14 <jgriffith> LOL
21:36:23 <jgriffith> yes, that's the *one* that won't go probably
21:36:31 <jgriffith> yes, deferred
21:36:36 <ttx> netapp-volume-driver-cmode and create-volume-from-image got reviews merged, are they completed ?
21:37:04 <jgriffith> yes
21:37:12 <ttx> ok, willfix
21:37:13 <ttx> In the untargeted folsom list, I see:
21:37:19 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/implement-availability-zones
21:37:29 <ttx> should I mark this one deferred too ?
21:37:41 <jgriffith> That made it I believe...
21:37:54 * jgriffith checking...
21:38:16 <jgriffith> Yes, that made it
21:38:29 <ttx> linked stuff says "Partially implement blueprint implement-availability-zones"
21:38:30 <jgriffith> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11035/
21:38:40 <ttx> so I was kinda wondering
21:39:02 <ttx> We can clarify that off-meeting
21:39:14 <ttx> Only one bug targeted to F3, that's bug 1023311
21:39:14 <jgriffith> k.. the second part was cinderclient which is going through now
21:39:15 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1023311 in cinder "Quotas management is broken" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1023311
21:39:27 <ttx> Is it really a F3 blocker, which will get fixed in master and backported to milestone-proposed before Thursday ?
21:39:37 <ttx> Or should we just retarget it to RC1 to make sure it's fixed before release time ?
21:39:43 <jgriffith> RC1
21:39:56 <jgriffith> I've about got it, but honestly won't get back to it in time
21:40:07 <ttx> Will add implement-availability-zones to F3 targets
21:40:13 <ttx> jgriffith: Anything else ?
21:40:32 <jgriffith> Nope, just trying to push the pypi of cinderclient
21:40:37 <jgriffith> that's it
21:40:54 <ttx> Questions on Cinder ?
21:41:18 <annegentle> jgriffith: moving to docs after f3?
21:41:24 <gabrielhurley> ttx, jgriffith, mtaylor: can we get cinderclient pushed to PyPI? The entry for the package exists but no distributions were ever uploaded. It's non-existence is blocking the last Horizon blueprint (code's done, it just depends on a package that doesn't exist...).
21:41:26 <jgriffith> annegentle: Yes
21:41:48 <annegentle> jgriffith: great, thanks. I think the original "doc plan" we outlined on IRC still works.
21:41:50 <jgriffith> gabrielhurley: Working on it now, you should see it soon
21:41:54 <gabrielhurley> jgriffith: thanks
21:42:03 <ttx> #topic Nova status
21:42:06 <ttx> vishy: hey
21:42:22 <comstud> just in time
21:44:07 <ttx> hmm, maybe we'll do horizon first
21:44:12 <gabrielhurley> lol
21:44:22 <vishy> sorry
21:44:22 <ttx> #topic Horizon status
21:44:23 <vishy> :)
21:44:23 <heckj> heh
21:44:25 <ttx> arrrh
21:44:27 <gabrielhurley> ahaha
21:44:30 <ttx> #topic Nova status
21:44:36 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-3
21:44:36 <heckj> tease!
21:44:53 <ttx> vishy: this list is a mess :)
21:45:11 <vishy> yes it is
21:45:12 <ttx> ok, lets iterate through it...
21:45:17 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/general-host-aggregates : Implemented, right ?
21:45:21 <vishy> yes
21:45:32 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/task-management
21:45:33 <vishy> remaining work of converting availability zones will have to be in grizzly
21:45:53 <vishy> maoy: comments on that ^^ are we complete for now? remaining stuff done in bugs?
21:46:20 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/config-drive-v2
21:46:31 <maoy> vishy: it's a bit complicated. :)
21:46:46 <vishy> implemented
21:46:50 <vishy> marked
21:47:02 <vishy> maoy: so do we defer it to grizzly then?
21:47:35 <maoy> vishy: I'd revise the bp for folsom only and get a new one for grizzly
21:47:48 <maoy> vishy: there is a race condition that should be fixed in f-4
21:47:54 <vishy> maoy: ok can you revise it to what was done and mark it implemented?
21:47:58 <ttx> maoy: unfortunately tere is no f4 :)
21:48:07 <vishy> maoy: yes that can be reported as a bug
21:48:16 <maoy> ttx: oops. my bad
21:48:21 <vishy> maoy: and fixed for rc1
21:48:23 <maoy> vishy: yes i'll update it
21:48:28 <vishy> maoy: thanks
21:48:30 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/novaplugins
21:49:02 <ttx> looks like defer to me
21:49:08 <vishy> i still haven't heard from andrew whether it is done
21:49:11 <vishy> he got stuff merged
21:49:15 <vishy> but i don't know if it is complete
21:49:28 <ttx> right, but no more code in
21:49:33 <ttx> in all cases
21:49:48 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/deprecate-createserverext
21:50:04 <vishy> ttx: so i'm not exactly sure how we should deprecate an extension
21:50:17 <vishy> so i guess that one is kind of blocked?
21:50:28 <vishy> i mean we can warn when it is loaded i guess
21:50:44 <ttx> yeah I would add a DeprecationWarning
21:50:46 <vishy> right now createserverext is exactly the same as /servers/
21:50:55 <vishy> so maybe we should just leave it and kill that blueprint
21:51:05 <ttx> kill kill
21:51:17 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/xenapi-live-block-migration
21:51:17 <markmc> yeah, probably best - not like it's much maintenance overhead
21:51:22 <vishy> that should make it
21:51:28 <ttx> vishy: today ?
21:51:34 <vishy> i think so
21:51:44 <ttx> I won't go over all the Low stuff...
21:52:02 <ttx> can we apply the "what gets in is in, the rest is Grizzly" rule ?
21:52:18 <vishy> ttx: i have a list of potential stuff to keep an eye on for ffe
21:52:24 <primeministerp> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11276
21:52:27 <primeministerp> ';)
21:52:30 <vishy> ttx: http://etherpad.openstack.org/nova-ffe
21:52:54 <vishy> and I would also like a special ffe to put everything that goes into cinder into nova-volumes
21:53:06 <vishy> we can drop it as one big chunk
21:53:23 <ttx> vishy: would one extra day of review significantly help in getting more in F3 and less in FFe ?
21:53:37 <annegentle> what is the ruling there? cinder v nova-volume?
21:53:45 <vishy> probably, there is a number of close stuff
21:53:48 <ttx> I've been pondering delaying F3 by one day since there is so much stuff "almost there"
21:54:00 <vishy> ttx: i buy that
21:54:36 <ttx> Would be good to apply some priority treatment though... Concentrate on stuff that is more important first
21:54:44 <ttx> danwent: would you buy that too ?
21:55:05 <danwent> as long as its a targeted extension, only at high priority stuff, then yes.
21:55:08 <vishy> my rationale on the dump from cinder -> volume is: there was uproar about removing nova-volume so we need to keep it and put in security fixes
21:55:16 * ttx kinda prefers to wait one day and get less FFes, so that stuff gets tested in F3 rather than randomly after
21:55:31 <vishy> a) cinder is the one being gated on so we should keep the code the same
21:55:33 <danwent> though i'm not sure how to enforce that, other than to actually branch, and just say that its OK to cherry-pick a select set of features over as well as bugs.
21:55:47 <vishy> b) security backports will be way easier if the code is in sync at folsom release
21:56:12 <vishy> ttx: do you buy that?
21:56:44 <ttx> vishy: yes, from security pov
21:56:54 <ttx> russellb: opinion ?
21:57:10 * russellb reads scrollback..
21:57:36 <ttx> #info F3 cut for Quantum/Nova delayed by one day to let a few extra prioritized reviews in, in an effort to limit the number of FFe
21:57:48 <ttx> #info other projects may opt in
21:57:58 <russellb> yes, does seem like a good idea to keep the code in sync, backports would def be easier
21:58:10 <russellb> need to look closely at any compatibility/upgrade issues from the big dump though ....
21:58:13 <danwent> ttx:  is it just the branch cut that is delayed, or also the final release?
21:58:19 <danwent> (of folsom-3)
21:58:24 <ttx> also F3 milestone publication, yes
21:58:32 <danwent> ok
21:58:32 <ttx> would be done on Friday (god, I hate that)
21:58:53 <ttx> vishy: Can I mark Deferred everything from https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/folsom that is not F3-targeted ?
21:59:01 <vishy> ttx: yes
21:59:16 <ttx> On the bugs side, there are 6 bugs targeted to F3...
21:59:24 <ttx> Could we refine that list to include only real F3 blockers ?
21:59:42 <ttx> Like "ZOMG I can't start an instance anymore"
22:00:14 <russellb> pretty sure that qpid one is fixed, *changes it*
22:00:42 <ttx> vishy: Anything else ?
22:01:08 <primeministerp> ttx: may speak for a sec
22:01:09 <vishy> i would suggest people doing reviews prioritize these: http://etherpad.openstack.org/nova-ffe
22:01:30 <ttx> #help Nova Review prio to http://etherpad.openstack.org/nova-ffe
22:01:32 <comstud> i just approved xenapi live migration
22:01:33 <ttx> primeministerp: sure
22:01:44 <primeministerp> would like to open up https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11276
22:01:52 <primeministerp> for reprioritization
22:02:04 <primeministerp> for review if possible
22:02:21 <primeministerp> to a higher priority
22:02:38 <med_> 3rd on vishy's list
22:02:42 <ttx> primeministerp: it's on vishy's prio list I just linked
22:02:46 <primeministerp> o
22:02:53 * primeministerp needs to refresh
22:03:00 <primeministerp> ttx: thx
22:03:00 <med_> (row 12)
22:03:04 <russellb> it's a good candidate for an exception if we don't get it in by the freeze
22:03:07 <ttx> but let's be honest... there is a risk that it won't get in... it was proposed very late
22:03:17 <russellb> but yes, that too
22:03:23 <russellb> it's a lot of code to review..
22:03:25 <primeministerp> ttx: I understand
22:03:34 <ttx> Frankly I was amazed by the number of last-minute reviews
22:03:41 <ttx> not just yours
22:03:51 <vishy> ttx: it was kind of amazing actually :(
22:03:57 <ttx> It's so much easier to get your code in at any other moment of the 6-month-long cycle
22:03:58 <russellb> yeah we kinda got slammed in the last week or two
22:04:13 <ttx> Questions on Nova ?
22:04:17 <primeministerp> however quite honestly it would be a major milestone and help our community from a single source of code perspective
22:04:26 * ttx tries not to overrun too much
22:04:31 <primeministerp> give us the ability to file bugs properly
22:04:40 <primeministerp> etc
22:04:54 <ttx> ack
22:04:57 <russellb> 'tis on the exception candidate list
22:04:58 <ttx> #topic Horizon status
22:05:10 <ttx> gabrielhurley: thanks for your patience
22:05:12 <gabrielhurley> o hai
22:05:14 <gabrielhurley> ;-)
22:05:16 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-3
22:05:29 <gabrielhurley> I'm so much happier with this milestone than I was last week
22:05:37 <ttx> switch-to-cinder-client got done ?
22:05:46 <gabrielhurley> it's merging right this second
22:06:02 <ttx> * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/translation-documentation -- sounds like this is doc and can be pushed back to RC1 in case of need
22:06:08 <gabrielhurley> yep
22:06:12 <ttx> You have an enormous list of F3-targeted bugs, I suspect most of them are not F3 publication blockers...
22:06:20 <gabrielhurley> all the wishlist stuff can be flat out deferred
22:06:27 <ttx> Should I push back to RC1 anything that is not FixCommitted when I cut the branch ?
22:06:32 <gabrielhurley> yep
22:06:36 <ttx> awesome
22:06:46 <gabrielhurley> of the remaining 8 there are no blockers, and most of them will be fixed today
22:06:56 <ttx> it might be end of day tomorrow, so you have a bit more time
22:07:00 <gabrielhurley> even better
22:07:11 <ttx> gabrielhurley: Anything else you wanted to mention ?
22:07:14 <ohnoimdead> woo hoo extra day!
22:07:25 <gabrielhurley> nope. just a thanks to everyone for helping tear through the end of the F3 milestone :-)
22:08:12 <ttx> Questions for Horizon ?
22:08:21 <ttx> ohnoimdead: yay, thank me for another sleepless night
22:08:49 <ttx> #topic Other Team reports
22:08:56 <ttx> Any other team lead with a (quick) status report ?
22:09:51 <annegentle> \o
22:10:04 <ttx> go for it
22:10:06 <annegentle> actually no, looking at the clock :)
22:10:10 <annegentle> I'll put it in an email
22:10:12 <ttx> heh
22:10:18 <ttx> #topic Open discussion
22:10:21 <ttx> Anything else, anyone ?
22:11:25 <ttx> #endmeeting