#openstack-meeting log

21:02:32 <ttx> #startmeeting project
21:02:33 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Feb 12 21:02:32 2013 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:02:34 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:02:36 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'project'
21:02:40 <ttx> Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting
21:03:24 <ttx> #topic General announcements
21:03:33 <ttx> One week left for feature merging before grizzly-3... Remember we cut the branch at the end of the day next Tuesday.
21:03:52 <ttx> Review often and merge early... the gate *will* be slow, so the more you get in early, the better
21:04:06 <vishy> o/
21:04:25 <ttx> there will be stuff left over because the gate is busy and false negatives i ntests plaguing it
21:04:35 <ttx> #info The session submission site for the Havana Design Summit in Portland is open
21:04:40 <ttx> #link http://summit.openstack.org
21:04:49 <ttx> I'll announce it in email... soon
21:04:57 <ttx> But if you already have ideas for topics that would make nice sessions at the Design Summit, feel free to suggest them
21:05:08 <ttx> #info We'll all need to sign the CLA again after Feb 24
21:05:15 <ttx> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-February/005662.html
21:05:36 <ttx> So it's simplifying stuff a lot for new contributors, but existing ones need to go through one more hoop
21:05:57 <ttx> questions about that ?
21:06:32 <mordred> ^^^ that last thing is important for everyone to note
21:06:33 <uvirtbot> mordred: Error: "^^" is not a valid command.
21:06:46 <notmyname> ttx: does that affect voting at all?
21:06:47 * mordred punches uvirtbot
21:07:05 <ttx> the CLA stuff ?
21:07:21 <notmyname> yes. and whatever associated changes are involved
21:07:38 <fungi> it will not affect voting at all
21:07:40 <ttx> notmyname: hmm... you will have to be a foundation member to sign the CLA
21:07:56 <ttx> so you might see an increase in those members
21:07:59 <fungi> it may increase the number of eligible voters over time
21:08:03 <fungi> what ttx said
21:08:08 <mordred> ttx: do ongoing testing refactors count for feature freeze?
21:08:13 <ttx> and since only people that are fondation memebrs and contributors could vote in PTL elections...
21:08:14 * gabrielhurley despises the hoops it takes to contribute to openstack
21:08:25 * fungi does too
21:08:25 <heckj> gabrielhurley: +1
21:08:26 <ttx> that may result in affecting the vote somehow
21:08:30 <mordred> gabrielhurley: then you will like the new changes
21:08:54 <fungi> we made the hoops easier to jump through, and added chrome polish
21:09:01 <ttx> mordred: adding more tests (or fixing them) is not a feature.
21:09:02 <mordred> and lube
21:09:09 <ttx> notmyname: does that make sense ?
21:09:17 <mordred> ttx: just checking - I'm behind on that blueprint
21:09:30 <heckj> ttx: when will we need to go jumping through these new flaiming hopes? Doesn't look like we can quite yet
21:09:44 <notmyname> ttx: ya. I wouldn't expect anything to change. but since it's close to the election time and in some part is dependent on foundation membership, I wanted to make sure
21:09:44 <ttx> notmyname: previously, you could have contributors that were not foundation members. That won't be possible anymore
21:09:57 <ttx> notmyname: oh, I see what you mean
21:10:00 <fungi> heckj: february 24th or when you have time thereafter, but before you push any new commits to gerrit
21:10:10 <ttx> that's a question for mordred actually, how he will compile the voters list exactly
21:10:21 <heckj> at least it's after grizzly-3 close
21:10:23 <notmyname> ttx: ah. so it may be possible that some previous contributors will need to do something they haven't done before
21:10:27 <ttx> notmyname: but if anything, I expect it will increase the number of voters rahter than reduce it
21:10:50 <fungi> heckj: we scheduled it that way intentionally
21:10:52 <ttx> since it wil catch contributors that failed to be foundation members
21:10:54 <mordred> ATC is decided from people who have contributed - current eligibility to contribute does not factor
21:11:05 <ttx> ok, we need to move on
21:11:11 <ttx> more discussion on the thread linked above
21:11:27 <ttx> #topic Oslo status
21:11:34 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:11:43 <ttx> markmc: o/
21:11:48 <markmc> yo
21:11:55 <ttx> All Essential/High stuff is completed
21:12:04 <markmc> grizzly-3 came fast
21:12:14 <markmc> keyring won't make it
21:12:22 <markmc> oslo-config cli probably not either
21:12:32 <ttx> should you be removing those from the roadmap now ?
21:12:38 <markmc> yeah, will do
21:12:51 <markmc> the two rpc ones could miss too, I need to catch up on them
21:12:54 <ttx> I gather that none of the remaining stuff is worth a feature freeze exception, right ?
21:13:09 <markmc> right
21:13:24 <markmc> other thing is I pushed a 2013.1b tag for oslo-config
21:13:33 <markmc> tarball didn't get pushed, but we're fixing that
21:13:43 <markmc> I've got patches ready to push to make all projects use it
21:14:02 <markmc> basically s/from $project.openstack.common import cfg/from oslo.config import cfg/
21:14:05 <ttx> markmc: tarballs not getting pushed happens. Would like it to happen less.
21:14:07 <markmc> so they're fairly invasive
21:14:22 <markmc> hoping to get them merged before grizzly-3
21:14:29 <markmc> so we're all using oslo-config
21:14:30 <ttx> markmc: that would be preferable
21:14:32 <mordred> ttx: this was missing jobs - not broken jobs at least
21:14:33 <markmc> ttx, it was my fault
21:14:47 <ttx> markmc: cool, I like that.
21:15:00 <markmc> ok, that's me
21:15:21 <ttx> markmc: if that oslo-config import doesn't make grizzly-3... are you fine with the code copy living there for grizzly release ?
21:15:44 <markmc> ttx, yeah, that's fine
21:15:51 <markmc> ttx, I can remove it from oslo-incubator
21:15:56 <markmc> ttx, without affecting the projects
21:15:56 <ttx> ok, thx
21:15:58 <ttx> Anything else on the oslo topic ?
21:16:03 <markmc> not from me
21:16:17 <ttx> #topic Keystone status
21:16:22 <ttx> heckj: o/
21:16:28 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:16:30 <heckj> ola
21:16:56 <ttx> Limited progress since last week...
21:17:25 <ttx> Should we be removing stuff from scope to allow focusing efforts ? Or does it not make any sense here due to the interrelation ?
21:17:26 <heckj> lots of it held up in reviews, but code's coming in
21:17:48 <heckj> ttx: it's trimmed down pretty tight, all pretty interrelated right now
21:18:06 <heckj> All teh status could legit read "Needs Code Review" for the current status
21:18:17 <ttx> ok
21:18:19 <heckj> we have some code that's still being written, but down to the last pieces
21:18:48 <ttx> How is "trusts" going on ?
21:19:06 <heckj> we brought it up in the keystone meeting earlier today, but I'll reiterate - please actively review code - try and look and review at least once a day this week to help
21:19:18 <heckj> ttx: under active review, looking pretty good.
21:19:36 <ttx> heckj: I can spend some time looking into that later today
21:19:49 <ttx> benefit of having me in that timezone
21:19:55 <ttx> Anything more about Keystone ?
21:20:25 <heckj> just a need for a lot of reviews, that's it
21:20:25 <ttx> heckj: should I update all those statuses to "Needs code review" ?
21:20:34 <heckj> ttx: sure, thanks
21:20:49 <ttx> including replace-tenant-user-membership, ok
21:21:01 <ttx> #topic Swift status
21:21:05 <ttx> notmyname: o/
21:21:07 <notmyname> hi
21:21:10 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.8.0
21:21:21 <ttx> Still shooting for roughly first half of March ?
21:21:46 <notmyname> yes, but there is no date set
21:22:09 <notmyname> there are a couple of outstanding reviews that are important for 1.8 IMO, and a few that need to be written/submitted
21:22:30 <ttx> ok
21:22:38 <ttx> I don't have anything else
21:22:40 <ttx> Anything more on Swift ?
21:22:43 <notmyname> I have one other thing
21:22:47 <ttx> go for it
21:22:57 <notmyname> an FYI, since it's been discussed in many places recently
21:23:23 <notmyname> one thing we talked about in the swift meeting last week was encryption in swift
21:23:26 <ttx> a not in b or not a in b ?
21:23:36 <notmyname> heh
21:24:02 <notmyname> although this isn't really a new position, we all agreed that encryption doesn't belong in the scope of swift
21:24:22 <ttx> sounds good to me
21:24:30 <ttx> the bucket needs to stop somewhere
21:24:39 <notmyname> again, nothing new. just a little more formal
21:24:54 <ttx> noslzzp: anything else ?
21:25:01 <ttx> notmyname: anything else ?
21:25:04 <notmyname> nope :-)
21:25:06 <ttx> (bucket. heh)
21:25:11 <ttx> #topic Glance status
21:25:14 <noslzzp> lol - nope. :)
21:25:25 <ttx> bcwaldon: o/
21:25:30 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:25:31 <bcwaldon> hello!
21:25:47 <ttx> Mostly concerned with the (essential) glance-api-v2-image-sharing
21:26:02 <bcwaldon> this is my week to catch up on reviews and land several bug fixes and features
21:26:06 <bcwaldon> one of them being image sharing
21:26:16 <bcwaldon> so I'm not actually concerned about it
21:26:22 <ttx> Since the reviews there are a bit stalled, and it will take time to get them processed through the gate queue
21:26:41 <ttx> the sooner the better, for essential stuff
21:26:47 <ttx> Are the rest of them still likely to make it ?
21:26:55 <bcwaldon> yep, the first half of the reviews for that BP are already approved :)
21:26:58 <bcwaldon> yes
21:27:17 <ttx> Should we remove (not started) api-v2-property-protection from the mix ?
21:27:23 <bcwaldon> markwash: ?
21:27:53 <bcwaldon> ttx: there's your answer
21:27:59 <bcwaldon> not sure
21:28:07 <bcwaldon> will confirm what to do offline
21:28:09 <ttx> Also I'd remove importing-rootwarp / iscsi-backend-store and move that to Havana, sounds like somethig that would benefit frmo further discussion
21:28:29 <bcwaldon> ttx: I've thought about that quite a bit, actually
21:28:39 <ttx> bcwaldon: what's your take ?
21:29:01 <bcwaldon> ttx: I'm not against landing it in grizzly at all - I think there is an alternative approach we will end up taking as a community (cinder backend vs iscsi backend), but this is still a valid use case
21:29:12 <bcwaldon> the rootwrap piece has been proved in nova already, so I'm not worried about that
21:29:28 <ttx> bcwaldon: it impacts packaging a bit, but if it lands by g3 it's probably ok
21:29:42 <bcwaldon> yes, I would not give it a FFE
21:29:51 <ttx> it's just that adding it for that release if the plan is to remove it next release, meh
21:30:17 <ttx> but that's your call, as long as you respect the deadlines :)
21:30:22 <ttx> Anything more on Glance ?
21:30:24 <bcwaldon> what deadlines!?
21:30:28 <jgriffith> ha!
21:30:38 <bcwaldon> nothing more on Glance other than an apology for not keeping up with reviews ;)
21:30:39 <rainya> there are deadlines!?
21:30:56 <bcwaldon> rainya: quiet!
21:31:00 <bcwaldon> ttx: that is all
21:31:02 <ttx> #topic Quantum status
21:31:04 <rainya> bcwaldon: yes, sir!
21:31:05 <danwent> hi
21:31:08 <ttx> danwent: hi!
21:31:12 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:31:28 <ttx> Loking busy but good
21:31:37 <danwent> yes, overall, more green
21:31:43 <ttx> How is review prioritization going ? Do you think reviewers give priority to high-prio stuff ?
21:31:45 <danwent> everything must be in review by today, or its automatically out
21:31:52 <ttx> i.e. we don't need to remove anything ?
21:32:07 <danwent> good.  really there are only two high priority features, though one of them (lbaas) is split into three BPs
21:32:15 <ttx> OK, looking at the remaining ones in that category:
21:32:16 <danwent> yong's multi l3/dhcp stuff is in good shape
21:32:22 <ttx> ok
21:32:28 <ttx> How close is quantum-scheduler ?
21:32:31 <danwent> he is on holiday, but i'm not very worried about that going in.
21:32:43 <danwent> that is yong's BP… sorry, we shoudl have renamed it.
21:32:51 <ttx> oh, ok
21:33:05 <danwent> the good news on lbaas is that we got intiial code posted early enoug
21:33:21 <ttx> danwent: when are you going to remove those without code proposed ? EOD ?
21:33:25 <danwent> that when the feeback was that we need to drastically simplify the code, we still have some time to do it.
21:33:32 <danwent> yes, EOD today
21:33:35 <danwent> only really two
21:33:38 <ttx> sounds good
21:33:44 <danwent> include one plugin that was dropped way last minute
21:33:51 <danwent> dropped -> proposed
21:34:01 <ttx> I use the word "thrown"
21:34:08 <danwent> just a heads up, with the lbaas reworking, i wouldn't be shocked to be talking FFE next week
21:34:18 <danwent> but we've paired down what we're targeting
21:34:20 <ttx> prepare the beer bribes
21:34:25 <danwent> so I think its managable.
21:34:30 <ttx> ok
21:34:32 <ttx> Anything else on Quantum ?
21:34:33 <danwent> i think the mirantis folks would rather pay in vodka :P
21:34:40 <danwent> nope
21:34:54 <ttx> I'll have to check the beer/vodka change rate
21:35:00 <ttx> #topic Cinder status
21:35:06 <ttx> jgriffith: hi!
21:35:10 <jgriffith> hola
21:35:11 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:35:39 <jgriffith> I'm pretty confident in most of these
21:35:49 <ttx> How is volume-backups doing ?
21:35:59 <jgriffith> The drivers from coraid and Huawei etc are debateable
21:36:05 <ttx> yeah
21:36:12 <jgriffith> Good, going through review with the batch of changes from last round
21:36:19 <jgriffith> I think it's looking good so far though
21:36:34 <jgriffith> And the change eharney has for Gluster and LIO I'm not worried about at all
21:36:39 <ttx> The week will be very short
21:36:42 <ttx> Is there anything in the rest of the list that we should remove right now ?
21:36:45 <reed> jgriffith, did you have time to look at the encryption patch?
21:36:59 <jgriffith> reed: Yeah, there's some concerns there
21:37:05 <jgriffith> reed: snapshots, clones etc?
21:37:34 <jgriffith> ttx: I think I've cleaned out as fair as I can right now
21:37:35 <ttx> jgriffith: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/quotas-limits-by-voltype in particular is "not started". Still want to keep it in scope ?
21:37:48 <jgriffith> ttx: I'm giving some of the drivers til Friday to make some progress
21:37:58 <jgriffith> ttx: I tricked ya
21:37:58 <ttx> hhm, ok
21:38:04 <jgriffith> ttx: I already pulled that one out :)
21:38:10 <jgriffith> ttx: just a couple minutes ago
21:38:14 <reed> jgriffith, cool, thanks
21:38:27 <jgriffith> reed: we should sync up after meeting
21:38:27 <iccha> win 19
21:38:40 <ttx> jgriffith: still looks not statred to me
21:38:59 <jgriffith> Oh crud, I didn't save the change
21:39:01 <jgriffith> I'll do that
21:39:05 <jgriffith> It will disappear
21:39:05 <ttx> heh
21:39:08 <jgriffith> sorry bout that
21:39:09 <ttx> ok
21:39:29 <ttx> Is xenapinfs-glance-integration complete ?
21:39:50 <jgriffith> review IIRC
21:40:01 <ttx> I saw two review linked both merged
21:40:10 <ttx> anyway, you can check it out, we need to move on
21:40:15 <jgriffith> yeah, it merged
21:40:18 <ttx> Anything more on Cinder ?
21:40:21 <jgriffith> Yeah
21:40:29 <jgriffith> NetApp's share service:
21:40:39 <jgriffith> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/21290/
21:40:42 * ttx marks xenapinfs-glance-integration implemented
21:41:05 <jgriffith> didn't get much feed-back from the ML on the whole topic
21:41:28 <ttx> maybe raise it again
21:41:39 <jgriffith> Yeah, just wanted to point it out to folks here
21:41:41 <ttx> or hunt down key people on IRC for feedback
21:41:44 <ttx> ok
21:41:50 <ttx> #topic Nova status
21:41:50 <jgriffith> thats' it for me I htink
21:41:51 <jgriffith> thanks
21:41:57 <ttx> jgriffith: thx!
21:42:01 <ttx> vishy: o/
21:42:08 <vishy> hi
21:42:08 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:42:31 <ttx> vishy: About backportable-db-migrations: how about we push that between g3 and rc1 ? I don't see that as really disruptive anyway, and that's the right moment to push it (after all features merged) ?
21:42:38 <vishy> yup
21:42:44 <ttx> OK, then I'll move it to rc1 when I'll have that created
21:42:51 <ttx> Looking at the remaining High stuff:
21:43:01 <ttx> How is nova-quantum-security-group-proxy going ?
21:43:07 <vishy> code is up
21:43:09 <vishy> under review
21:43:18 <ttx> vishy: should make it ?
21:43:25 <vishy> i think so
21:43:30 <ttx> Same question for instance-actions
21:43:39 <vishy> same answer :)
21:43:57 <ttx> show-availability-zone and rebuild-for-ha still shouldn't be considered completed ?
21:44:15 <vishy> show-availability-zone is complete
21:44:22 <ttx> ok, updating
21:44:56 <vishy> rebuild is complete too
21:45:05 <ttx> ok, updating
21:45:34 <ttx> Should you be removing all stuff that doesn't have any code proposed yet ?
21:45:41 <ttx> like quantum does ?
21:45:57 <vishy> ttx: yeah
21:46:01 <ttx> no point is spending time on reviews that won't make it anyway
21:46:04 <vishy> ttx: although i don't know if there are any of those
21:46:06 <ttx> Planning on reviewing that at the next Nova meeting ?
21:46:37 <ttx> quite a few of those are marked 'started' with no code attached AFAICT
21:46:55 <ttx> Also 3 blueprints are targeted to g3 but not in series goal: migrate-volume-block-migration configuration-strategies encrypt-cinder-volumes
21:47:04 <vishy> sure
21:47:05 <ttx> you might want to remove them as well
21:47:19 <ttx> Any question on Nova ?
21:47:36 <russellb> vishy: i can take that on (going through and removing stuff without code) if you'd like
21:47:41 <ttx> I feel like we are in good shape, it's just that there isn't so much time left
21:47:57 <ttx> so prioritization might be in order
21:47:59 <vishy> russellb: cool thanks
21:48:09 <ttx> if only to have the gate process the right stuff
21:48:13 <russellb> vishy: np, will get through it tonight/tomorrow AM
21:48:26 <ttx> when it will be on the critical path (and it will)
21:49:05 <ttx> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-aoe has code in review but is marked implemnted, I should probably reverse that
21:49:28 <ttx> hhm
21:49:44 <ttx> no, just merged
21:49:47 <vishy> ttx: it merged
21:49:48 <vishy> yeah
21:50:09 <ttx> ok, that's all I got. Anything more about Nova ?
21:50:42 <ttx> #topic Horizon status
21:50:47 <gabrielhurley> hi
21:50:48 <ttx> gabrielhurley: hey
21:50:53 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:51:14 <gabrielhurley> a couple of those BPs will likely merge today
21:51:18 <ttx> I see you updated your statuses recently
21:51:25 <gabrielhurley> several more are one patch away from being mergeable
21:51:27 <ttx> How is the upload stuff going ?
21:51:34 <gabrielhurley> well... mixed bag
21:51:53 <gabrielhurley> direct image uploading has a review which is gonna be functional for grizzly
21:52:13 <gabrielhurley> but the overall file upload UI stuff has about a day to get something up before I call that dead in Grizzly
21:52:22 <ttx> You mentioned you potentially consider an exception to get that merged... but it only makes sense if it's just a few days away
21:52:46 <gabrielhurley> soooo... it looks like that one may be a function over style decision for Grizzly
21:53:01 <gabrielhurley> revisit in conjunction with the glance team and rework the UI in Havana
21:53:08 <ttx> ok
21:53:36 <ttx> almost everything else has code proposed now, iiuc
21:53:37 <gabrielhurley> the Quantum Security Groups BP needs code as well, but amotoki is very on top of things and I trust him to get it done if he says it'll happen.
21:53:46 <gabrielhurley> otherwise everything else has code up, yep
21:53:56 <ttx> Looks good
21:53:58 <ttx> Anything more on Horizon ?
21:54:04 <gabrielhurley> started winnowing the bugs list too
21:54:16 <ttx> This is going to be review week
21:54:16 <gabrielhurley> just trying to get ready for the RC
21:54:20 <gabrielhurley> yeah
21:54:25 <gabrielhurley> nothing more beyond that
21:54:35 <ttx> ok
21:54:41 <ttx> #topic Incubated projects
21:54:52 <ttx> Anyone from Heat/Ceilometer around ?
21:54:56 <sdake_z> heat here
21:55:01 <ttx> #link https://launchpad.net/heat/+milestone/grizzly-3
21:55:08 <sdake_z> so good progress in last week
21:55:21 <sdake_z> although getting tight on time with lots of bugs to fix
21:55:24 <ttx> Looks like you should remove stuff that won't make it by the deadline
21:55:34 <ttx> I suspect some of the 'not started' stuff will miss
21:55:37 <sdake_z> our meeting is wednesday where we will pull stuff that isn't going to make it
21:55:49 <sdake_z> ttx agree
21:55:49 <ttx> ok
21:56:08 <ttx> although you're not in the common gate so you might not suffer that much
21:56:34 <sdake_z> sounds like more schedule time to me ;)
21:56:53 <ttx> next week we'll basically review what's left and drop stuff that is not merged yet
21:57:00 <sdake_z> sounds good
21:57:05 <ttx> that's when people realize it's too late and statr crying :)
21:57:13 <rainya> *sob*
21:57:20 <sdake_z> quesito ntho, that does not include bugs right?
21:57:23 <sdake_z> only blueprints?
21:57:26 <ttx> yep
21:57:37 <sdake_z> we still have few moreweeks for bugs?
21:57:41 <ttx> After g3... you build a RC bug list
21:57:45 <sdake_z> got it
21:57:56 <ttx> when you complete that we build a RC1
21:58:06 <ttx> and then shit happens, a new RC bug is discovered
21:58:14 <ttx> so you build a new list and do RC2, etc.
21:58:34 <ttx> Explaines at http://wiki.openstack.org/ReleaseCycle
21:58:38 <ttx> anyone from ceilometer ?
21:59:30 <ttx> for logging purpose, same remark as for heat
21:59:51 <ttx> Looks like it's time to reduce the list to match what will be in by next week
22:00:05 <ttx> anything else anyone ?
22:00:12 <rainya> ttx, i've read that wiki on release cycle several times times and it helped a lot having you type it out just now :)
22:00:40 <ttx> rainya: I'm usually always confusing. Wiki AND Irc.
22:00:50 <rainya> between the two, perfectly sensible!
22:00:51 <ttx> God thing today I'm clearer on Irc.
22:01:02 <ttx> ok, next meeting awaits
22:01:04 <ttx> #endmeeting