08:01:43 #startmeeting ptl_sync 08:01:44 Meeting started Tue Sep 16 08:01:43 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 08:01:46 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 08:01:47 #topic Nova 08:01:48 The meeting name has been set to 'ptl_sync' 08:01:59 Oh hai! 08:02:08 Not sure where John is, he's not in the nova channel at the moment either 08:02:12 Regardless, let us proceed 08:02:13 https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/juno-rc1 08:02:22 I see 3 still up 08:02:26 So, yeah 08:02:32 All FFEs are now implemented / merged 08:02:44 Those three weren't granted FFEs 08:02:56 Well, except perhaps the partial one 08:03:04 I'm not sure why they're there, I need to touch base with John 08:03:14 here is is 08:03:19 johnthetubaguy: oh hai! 08:03:23 he is* 08:03:48 yeah, I'd tend to just move them to kilo-1 at this point 08:04:03 Yeah, I think that's the plan 08:04:09 With the possible exception of the partial one 08:04:20 yes, if it makes sense to split it 08:04:24 We should also be moving onto just bug fixes now 08:04:39 I also need to do a python-novaclient release in the next day or so 08:04:44 But didn't manage to get to it today 08:05:29 I can see that sdague did some serious triaging last week, so I feel like most of the critical issues were identified and targeted 08:05:39 Yeah, Sean has been doing an awesome job 08:06:05 The only other thing I have to discuss is the ongoing extra-atcs "fun" 08:06:16 so apart from moving BPs to k1 I'd say the next step is to assign those bugs 08:06:18 But that might be an "open discussion" item for the meeting tomorrow 08:06:48 * mikal checks if all criticals are listed there 08:06:54 Ummm, no 08:06:55 what did you want to discuss about them ? More a TC or a cross-project meeting topic ? 08:07:02 So yes, I agree that we need to get people assigned to the critical bugs 08:07:11 About extra-atcs? 08:07:14 yes 08:07:20 mikal: ttx: morning, sorry, battling getting my computer to wake up 08:07:29 Mostly that other PTLs need to do it themselves, the elections people had concerns with me doing it for people 08:07:30 but here now 08:07:58 johnthetubaguy: hi! 08:08:04 johnthetubaguy: the question is abot those BPs without a FFE still present on juno-rc1 page 08:08:09 lots of people just target bugs for giggles, they are not all important 08:08:16 johnthetubaguy: should we move them all to k-1 ? 08:08:28 johnthetubaguy: and what about the v2.1 api one 08:08:35 johnthetubaguy: its partial, so perhaps we mark it implemented now? 08:08:44 should it be implemeted/split 08:08:45 ttx: I think thats bad, given what we have agreed with people at this point, but certainly should do that semi-quickly 08:09:00 Oh yeah 08:09:02 ttx: +1 mark it partial and complete 08:09:09 ttx: so, we said that kilo would require spec reapproval 08:09:11 mikal: I think we need to merge the spec in K 08:09:13 So we should just untarget them 08:09:16 But not move them to K 08:09:37 And K specs don't open until the start of October IIRC 08:09:38 mikal: ok, remove juno-rc1 from them then, and remove priority 08:09:59 so that if they retarget it, they won't stick 08:10:31 mikal: so clear the milestone target, and set priority to undecided 08:10:38 Yep 08:10:50 I'll mark the partial v2/v3 implemented 08:10:57 Ok 08:11:46 So yes, focus this week is to come up with a reasonable list of release-critical bugs, get them all assigned 08:11:59 so that we can potentially have a RC1 cut next week 08:12:54 does that make sense? 08:13:14 Yep 08:13:21 Ok, so those two BPs have been untargetted now 08:13:59 I'll start chasing people about RC bugs ASAP 08:14:01 Kilo PTL election season starts at the end of this week, too 08:14:17 with one week for self-nomination 08:14:22 Yep, which is why extra-atcs is important 08:14:30 But so noted 08:15:10 mikal: I'll add the topic of extra-atcs to the cross-project meeting 08:15:19 that's where the PTLs are 08:15:22 ttx: do you intend to use this 1:1 next week for getting a rc1 sha? 08:15:30 ttx: or do we need to sync up before then on that? 08:15:44 Yep, agreed that's the right venue for it 08:15:54 Hopefully the TC will have made a stance clear in the meeting before the release meeting 08:16:06 i.e. -1'ed to death the review or approved it 08:16:09 mikal: there is no set date for the RC1 sha. It's when ready. But starting next week, if the list is empty, we should cut one yes 08:16:22 sorry, it died again, batter is very, very low 08:16:22 ttx: do you try to sync up the projects? 08:16:29 ttx: or just when nova is ready we do nova? 08:16:34 johnthetubaguy: :( 08:16:36 mikal: no, RCs are done "when ready" 08:16:44 Ok, define done for me 08:16:48 All RC bugs closed? 08:16:50 mikal: yes 08:16:55 mikal: yeah, we need that list 08:17:05 And I assume there's a RC bug tag we use to mark bugs as RC? 08:17:07 so the question becomes: fine-tuning that list 08:17:22 mikal: no, that's anything on juno-rc1 08:17:30 Ahhh, ok 08:17:32 we use the milestone target 08:17:32 Makes sense 08:17:40 So what's the historical stance on critical bugs? 08:17:44 Are they all RC by definition? 08:17:48 Cause, critical? 08:17:49 well, it would make more sense if that targeting was restricted to drivers, but meh 08:18:08 so, generally yes, critical bugs are RC 08:18:16 but sometimes a non-critical bug is RC 08:18:27 Oh, agreed 08:18:30 think a doc bug, or a missing file in tarball 08:18:34 Its just we have untargetted criticals as well 08:18:37 ttx: mikal: sorry, lazyness, but we said friday was the drop dead date for FFEs, did anyone kick those out of juno yet, and we wait for spec to be moved to kilo before re-approve? 08:18:39 things you need to fix before release rather than the day after 08:18:48 missing LICENSE file, that sort of thing 08:18:52 johnthetubaguy: so... all FFEs merged 08:18:59 johnthetubaguy: the two things without FFE were bumped just now by me 08:19:06 mikal: gotcha 08:19:13 johnthetubaguy: assuming I didn't horribly screw up 08:19:19 mikal: you got the blueprint links? I can put them in the usual places 08:19:21 mikal: if they are truly critical then yes, they should be RC 08:19:21 johnthetubaguy: certainly all the things on the etherpad merged 08:19:32 but sometimes they aren't that critical, if you see what I mean 08:19:46 johnthetubaguy: links for the two things I untargetted you mean? 08:19:54 I guess easy backports on not worth delaying the train, etc 08:19:57 ttx: in which case they should have their priority changed 08:20:00 mikal: yes 08:20:03 mikal: exactly 08:20:10 johnthetubaguy: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/lvm-ephemeral-storage-encryption 08:20:15 johnthetubaguy: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-start-lxc-from-block-devices 08:20:26 mikal: cool, thank you 08:20:30 NP 08:20:42 Ok 08:20:46 I will target all criticals 08:21:02 And bump any criticals which aren't really critical (and possibly untarget them as well) 08:21:09 bump == "reduce priority" 08:21:22 awesome 08:21:25 generally, after one week, we realize we won't cut a RC1 in time for final release, and we aggressively raise the bar for release-criticalness :) 08:21:33 mikal: will you catch tracy when she is online? 08:21:46 johnthetubaguy: yep, tomorrow morning I assume 08:21:53 But I feel an email in my future as ewll 08:21:55 well even 08:22:22 mikal: in summary, you build a god list, and then we trim it down either by bugfixing or considering bugs non-release-critical after all 08:22:26 good* 08:22:36 Works for me 08:23:45 then we track RC burndown in graphs like http://ttx.re/images/havana-rcs.png 08:24:01 Oh, I love a good management dashboard 08:24:11 mikal: cool, I removed the approval of those blueprint, moved them to trunk where I am holding the others, and added a note about whats happened to them, and that they will need a kilo spec. 08:24:26 you can see when we started refining the nova list for havana 08:24:35 johnthetubaguy: thanks 08:24:50 it was like OMG we'll never make it, then on 9/24 we just cut the list down 08:25:13 Wow, that's a lot of RC bugs at the start 08:25:29 mikal: you could argue it was unreasonably too much 08:25:47 bugs were added to list faster than they were fixed 08:25:56 * ttx should geberate that graph again 08:26:00 or generate 08:26:08 No, I prefer geberate 08:26:14 I think we had some bug triage day to pick the top ones, but I might be miss-remembering 08:26:29 johnthetubaguy: yeah, I was just thinking on the process of picking them 08:26:36 johnthetubaguy: might be email to -drivers time? 08:27:00 Although perhaps -dev is the right place 08:27:03 mikal: well, may as well ask everyone, stuff thats hard to backport, and affects lots of people 08:27:06 yeah 08:27:11 sdague has been doign good work and I want to include him 08:27:45 yeah, I have a lot of time for him 08:27:53 I do too 08:27:59 But then he went and triaged every nova bug 08:28:00 mikal: ok any other questions? 08:28:06 So now I think I owe him my first born or something 08:28:16 ttx: no, I think I know what to be doing for the next week 08:28:53 ok then, talk to you tomorrow morning 08:29:14 mikal: any urgent stuff you need me to do today, was off yesterday, hence not fixing up the RC1 blueprint list 08:29:38 (yesterday being monday for me) 08:30:03 johnthetubaguy: I think we ok for now 08:30:11 good good 08:30:14 johnthetubaguy: I'm a bit worried about getting RC bugs fixed, but step one is working out what is RC 08:30:26 ttx: thanks once again for being super helpful 08:30:54 np! 11:44:07 eglynn: ready when you are 11:44:18 ttx: cool, let's go for it :) 11:44:30 #topic Ceilometer 11:44:31 #link https://launchpad.net/ceilometer/+milestone/juno-rc1 11:44:45 all FFE BPs are now landed :) 11:44:51 great! 11:45:10 so now the focus is on identifying release-critical bugs and fixing them 11:45:11 I've done a trawl of the targeted bug and punt on all that look like they don't have sufficient traction to land 11:45:14 yep 11:45:27 geenrally a good time to triage all bugs too 11:45:30 one new high priority bug is the main concern https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1369836 11:45:54 yep, I'll be going all the untriaged bugs 11:46:03 going *over 11:46:33 are you still thinking in terms of end of week for RC1? 11:46:38 You build a nice list of RC bugs, all targeted to juno-rc1. Whenever we manage to empty the list, we can generate a release candidate 11:46:50 I was more thinking sometimes next week 11:46:55 cool 11:47:09 are the RC1 tags synchronized for all projects? 11:47:16 no they aren't 11:47:30 some projects have less bugs and want to open kilo faster 11:47:47 a-ha, k, got it 11:47:52 the only rule is to have at least one RC before final release 11:48:19 to guarantee that, we try to get everyone with an RC1 befor ethe end of month 11:48:34 OK, that makes sense 11:48:45 but starting next week, if your bug list is empty, we should tag 11:49:36 I'll resurrect the RC burndown chart, hopefully today 11:49:49 that wil let us track progress towards RC1 and see if adjustments are needed 11:49:58 right, I'd expect the bug list to grow a bit first as the triage progresses, but yeah lets aim for next week 11:50:27 questions on the process ? 11:50:37 anything you want to discuss at meeting today? 11:50:53 in parallel, the kilo summit planning will be kicking off, just wondering about your timing expectations on that collaborative scheduling exercise? 11:51:19 in particular pre- or post- PTL elections? 11:51:58 hmm, starting next week I should have a slot allocation (i.e. the number of "scheduled" slots we propose for your program, and the length of the "contributors meetup" thing 11:52:19 cool, that'll be a good start 11:52:33 we want the new PTLs involved obviously, so final planning happens after election 11:52:52 goal is to have a final schedule one week after release 11:52:53 yeah, that's kinda what I'd suspected 11:53:25 (10 days before summit) 11:53:33 so in summary, no hard decisions on summit scheduling until after the incoming PTL is confirmed 11:53:37 so it's more of an October thing 11:53:40 that makes sense 11:53:42 exactly 11:53:54 but it's good to open the dumping ground early 11:54:20 so that when you think about something you can write it down 11:54:23 cool, we'll discuss at our weekly meeting on Thurs and agree the shared doc format at least 11:54:43 and get a link onto your wiki page 11:55:23 I'll write something up soon 11:55:28 cool 11:55:40 ok then ttyl 11:55:45 yep, laters 12:07:46 dhellmann: sergey will be late, so you can go whenever you are ready 12:12:44 ttx: here now 12:14:59 #topic Oslo 12:15:02 dhellmann: hi! 12:15:15 ttx: good afternoon! 12:15:21 https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/next-juno 12:15:37 I tagged a last alpha for rootwrap this morning using my script 12:15:48 we can tag the final maybe tomorrow 12:16:05 you don't want to wait and do it thursday with the others? 12:16:26 sure, thursday. I thought some of those were being tagged earlier 12:16:31 based on your recent announcements 12:16:39 so i thought it was ASAP 12:16:53 but Thursday is easier for me anyway, so Thursday it is 12:16:58 I guess we could do some earlier, but I was just planning to do them all at once 12:17:13 cliff is already a final, but it wasn't using an alpha release irrc 12:17:17 should we open stable/juno from those same commits ? 12:17:28 yes, that makes sense 12:17:44 * ttx thinks the script could also do that for you 12:17:48 I'd also like to create the appropriate branch in the incubator so we can start cleaning things up 12:17:53 but let's do it manually for now 12:18:13 dhellmann: when do you want the incubator branch to be created? Thursday too? 12:18:16 ok, I don't remember if I've ever done that step so I'm not sure how 12:18:24 yes, thursday is the Big Day :-) 12:18:45 we have this unicode issue with mask_password to land in the incubator before we branch 12:18:46 dhellmann: I know it required a bit of spcial rights, but you may have those 12:18:55 ttx, dhellmann, good day 12:19:00 I wasn't sure of the process 12:19:02 hi, SergeyLukjanov 12:19:49 for reference, to open a branch you can use something like http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/release-tools/tree/rccut.sh#n74 12:20:15 oh, well, that's easy then 12:20:17 probably requires push reference right 12:20:29 I thought there might be something special to make gerrit take it 12:20:38 you ca, also do it directly on gerrit ui 12:20:41 can* 12:20:43 and the branch should be called proposed/juno? 12:21:06 depends if it's final juno or not 12:21:19 in the case of the incubator ISTR we did stable/juno directly 12:21:37 ok 12:21:45 https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/projects/openstack/oslo-incubator,branches 12:21:50 and for the libs, should we call it stable/juno or should we use the version numbers 12:21:53 that's where the UI for the branch creation is ^ 12:22:07 if you see "create branch" there you probably can do it 12:22:15 I don't 12:22:25 so that's something to work out today 12:22:38 i'll be around to do that for you 12:22:41 on Thursday 12:22:57 ok, maybe I'll just let you do it then 12:23:27 sure, that's fine 12:23:30 I have a dentist appointment thursday morning around this time, so I probably won't be tagging releases until a bit later in the morning 12:23:36 want to do it on Thursday, or before ? 12:24:03 (the oslo-incubator final tag and branch) 12:24:13 I have one patch I want to make sure we've merged before we cut it 12:24:16 looking now 12:24:38 for oslo.messaging in icehouse we did stable/icehouse 12:24:41 oh, good, that one merged 12:24:47 so I guess we should do stable/juno for oslo.* 12:24:51 ok, let's stick with that 12:26:03 the incubator is ready to be branched but it looks like we have one or two other bugs to close before we're completely done 12:26:44 for oslo-incubator we can do two ways... tag rc1 and create proposed/juno, or tag 2014.2 and create stable/juno 12:27:10 in the first case we would tag 2014.2 on release day and rename proposed/juno to stable/juno then 12:27:23 apparently for icehouse, we did the latter 12:28:02 tagged rc1 on April 3, created proposed/juno then 12:28:11 err. proposed/icehouse I mean 12:28:34 then one change was backported on April 9 12:28:47 bah, doesn't really matter that much tbh 12:28:51 that seems fine, we're pretty good at backports 12:29:01 we've been doing them for graduating modules all cycle 12:29:56 basically if we backport something to proposed/juno we'd have to sync it in all consuming projects 12:30:05 which is a bit painful 12:30:13 (in RC perdiod) 12:30:19 period* 12:30:41 I think last time we only synced to projects that had the issue being fixed 12:30:54 yes 12:31:12 bah, let's do the incubator at the same time as the libs ? If it's ready then ? 12:31:30 and do rc1 / proposed/juno until release ? 12:32:17 my plan is to start prepping for kilo work right away, because I want to close our kilo work down a little earlier in the cycle 12:32:23 that means deleting things from the master branch 12:32:42 since there is no incubator release, the proposed/stable choice and what tag we use is actually quite irrelevant :) 12:32:42 so I think it makes just as much sense to call it stable/juno right away, since some backports are going to bypass master 12:32:47 right 12:33:05 right, there is no proposal there. 12:33:14 I think we're considering the libs "stable" too, so we can go straight to stable/juno for them as well 12:33:17 ok, let's do it that way 12:33:21 anything else ? 12:33:36 some topic for meeting today ? 12:33:44 that's all I had, I'll ping you when I get back from the dentist thurs to set up the tags 12:33:47 er, branches 12:34:00 nothing to add to the meeting 12:34:35 dhellmann: ok, thx! ttyl 12:34:49 SergeyLukjanov: around? 12:34:53 ttx, yup 12:34:54 thanks, ttx! 12:35:00 #topic Sahara 12:35:14 https://launchpad.net/sahara/+milestone/juno-rc1 12:35:21 client release is now in the gate 12:35:33 So your 3 FFEs appear to still be in progress ? 12:35:47 two of them being Doc, iirc 12:36:13 ttx, doc bp is in progrecc, one is in the gate 12:36:27 ok that leaves us with... 12:36:34 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sahara/+spec/edp-swift-trust-authentication 12:36:36 and the largest one re trusts for swift auth all the changes are now merged 12:36:55 folks doing final testing for it 12:36:59 should we mark it implemented then ? 12:37:10 if tests reveal bugs that can be addressed using RC bugs ? 12:37:34 there are several more actions required 12:37:38 in sahara-extra repo 12:38:03 probably it's better to keep bp open to show current status 12:38:19 but it doesn't require any more changes in sahara repo 12:38:27 ok let me document that 12:38:45 #info cluster-persist-sahara-configuration gating 12:38:55 #info move-rest-samples-to-docs is docs, still in progress 12:39:22 #info edp-swift-trust-authentication all sahara changes merged, some remaining work items in sahara-extra 12:39:36 ttx, thx 12:39:46 SergeyLukjanov: would be great to get those extra items done quickly so you can focus on bugfixing 12:40:08 ttx, yeah, I hope it'll be completed this week 12:40:33 So after that, focus should be on identifying release-critical bugs, target them all to juno-rc1, assign someone to fix them, fix them all 12:40:37 then we can tag RC1 12:40:44 ttx, oh, I'm on vacation now and will be travelling tomorrow to CA, so, I'm unable to attend today's project meeting 12:40:55 SergeyLukjanov: ok, no problem 12:41:11 any question on the release process at this point? 12:41:25 ttx, yeah, exactly - we already have some folks who are working on qa 12:41:44 ttx, I think no, everything is going ok 12:41:49 ttx, thank you 12:42:17 SergeyLukjanov: ok, enjoy openstacksv 12:42:36 ttx, openstacksv? 12:43:06 ttx, oh, OpenStack Silicon Valley 12:43:07 heh 12:43:27 ttx, I'm going to CA for mirantis internal things 12:44:12 and for big data meetup[ 13:17:59 SergeyLukjanov: ah, ok ! 13:59:50 jgriffith: ready when you are 14:02:06 ttx: I'm going to leave for openstack SV soon. I won't be online much (any?) for the rest of the day 14:02:22 notmyname: ok, anything urgent ? 14:03:05 notmyname: I had nothing special on my side 14:03:32 ttx: (1) swiftclient release because now there's a deadline for that. so that will happen this week; (2) I'm still following and concerned about defcore. I'm planning on phoning in to the BoD meeting on thursday 14:03:46 ttx: otherwise, "the usual" 14:03:50 notmyname: ok 14:04:09 thanks 14:04:12 I'll #topic and #info the client release so it appears in summary 14:04:16 #topic Swift 14:04:25 #info swiftclient release because now there's a deadline for that. so that will happen this week 14:04:30 heh 14:04:35 notmyname: enjoy openstacksv 14:04:42 thanks. talk to you later 14:07:55 morganfainberg: ready when you are 14:08:00 ttx, o/ 14:08:08 #topic Keystone 14:08:27 So you've completed your FFEs a long time ago 14:08:43 yep those are looking good. 14:08:51 so the focus now is on identifying the release-critical bugs we need to solve before we can do a release candidate 14:08:56 and fixing those 14:09:23 morganfainberg: would you say that the current list at https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/juno-rc1 is representative of what you need to fix before release ? 14:09:39 Or do you plan to go through reported bugs and increase that list a bit 14:10:05 ttx, I hope that is represenatative, but I expect a few more to sneak onto that list. 14:10:23 ttx, s/sneak/need to be added 14:10:40 right 14:11:00 there are a few recent bugs that might need to be added but we've been trying to keep that list up to date as possible. 14:11:14 that's the focus on week, test things and make sure we track RC bugs 14:11:23 s/on/this/ 14:11:45 I expect it wont be many more bugs that what is there now. 14:11:48 morganfainberg: do you have any question on the process ? 14:12:06 morganfainberg: any specific topic you'd like to see discussed at the cross-project meeting later today ? 14:12:11 ttx, not off the top of my head. 14:12:23 morganfainberg: if you have any, don't hesitate to ping me :) 14:12:24 ttx, if anything comes up between now and then I'll let you know. 14:12:27 :) 14:12:40 ok then, thanks for stepping up, and talk to you later 14:12:45 cheers 14:31:38 mestery: you can go now if you're around 14:31:46 looks like we don't have david or johnG yet 14:31:48 ttx: o/ 14:31:52 Ready and waiting 14:31:53 #topic Neutron 14:32:06 https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/juno-rc1 14:32:11 all ffes set ? 14:32:15 Yes, we're all done! 14:32:18 10 merged, I moved one out 14:32:30 I plan to scrub bugs today 14:32:56 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/120806/ is still up for add-ipset-to-security 14:33:02 but I advocated it should be done in K 14:33:13 I tend to agree, and will reply on that thread 14:33:47 so yeah, this week is identify RC bugs, and get them assigned 14:33:55 ttx: Ack on that 14:34:04 coming up with a list we can burn down 14:34:19 Yes, and prioritizing them as such as well 14:34:21 ideally sometimes in the next 2 weeks :) 14:34:31 * mestery hopes to have that done today even. :) 14:34:40 I mean burning down the RC1 list 14:34:45 Ah ... 14:34:47 :) 14:34:49 Yes, that will take longer than today ;) 14:35:24 I don't think I have anything to add here 14:35:43 questions ? topics for cross-project meeting tonight ? anyting blocking you ? 14:36:17 I need to talk to mikal about the nova-network deprecation status for Juno 14:36:21 Otherwise, nothing else :) 14:36:45 mestery: want me to add that as discussion topic for the meeting ? Or would you rater have a 1:1 on that ? 14:36:58 ttx: Let me do a 1:1 first, maybe next week we can add that. Sound fair? 14:37:02 ack 14:37:08 talk to you later! 14:37:12 david-lyle: ready? 14:37:18 ttx: thanks and later! 14:39:52 ttx: here 14:39:55 #topic Horizon 14:40:03 https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/juno-rc1 14:40:08 All FFEs in 14:40:27 and a nice set of release-critical issues 14:40:39 david-lyle: do you think you identified most of them ? 14:40:59 (i.e. the target list is somehow representing upcoming RC1 work) ? 14:41:12 or do you need to scrub more 14:41:17 I think we have a good handle on them 14:41:35 a couple may appear 14:41:51 sure 14:42:10 one of them is unassigned, but overall you seem to have your team on it 14:42:35 david-lyle: any question on the RC1 process ? Any topic for the cross-project meeting today ? 14:43:00 no questions 14:43:11 I'll work on an assingee for the last issue 14:43:20 *assignee 14:43:23 david-lyle: ok then, thanks for the sync time, and talk to you later 14:43:27 later 14:43:38 jgriffith: you can go now if you're around 14:49:58 ttx: cool 14:50:09 ttx: offer still good? 14:51:13 #topic Cinder 14:51:25 jgriffith: yes, within the next 8 min :) 14:51:36 ttx: cool 14:51:36 https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/juno-rc1 14:51:42 All FFEs implemented 14:51:58 did you scrub all bugs to find the release-critical ones ? 14:52:06 I see you have a sane list aleady 14:52:07 started, not completed 14:52:31 OK, well, that's the objective for this week, identify all known issues taht would be release-critical 14:52:39 ttx: on it 14:52:49 then get people assigned to those and then get them all fixed and then RC1 14:52:59 jgriffith: any question on that process ? 14:53:04 jgriffith: anything blocking you ? 14:53:09 good thing is most items already have someone working/assigned 14:53:13 jgriffith: any topic for the cross-project meeting today? 14:53:22 no topics for the meeting 14:53:34 ttx: do we want to set a timeline today? 14:53:42 ttx: or just shooting for RC next week? 14:53:44 timeline for.. rc1? 14:53:50 ttx: yeah, rc1 14:54:05 the window would be Sep 22-31 14:54:23 Oh.. same is published... never mind 14:54:25 sounds like the sweet spot 14:54:48 Yeah, I think that's going to line up just about right 14:54:50 but really, the idea is to tag when you're done with known issues and want to start working on kilo :) 14:54:54 ttx: ok... thanks 14:55:18 if you still have 30 bugs opened next week, we migth want to work on culling the list 14:55:26 and start documenting known issues :) 14:55:32 ttx: I'm goign to work on it this week for sure 14:55:46 jgriffith: sounds good 14:55:50 ttx: there's also sure to be "more" coming along 14:56:07 yes, the curve tends to go up in the first days of rc1 bug tracking 14:56:12 that's fine :) 14:56:23 ttx: yeah... and I've lost control of drivers at this point :( 14:56:34 anyway... 14:56:36 havana was like this: http://ttx.re/images/havana-rcs.png 14:56:55 :) 14:56:57 I restarted tracking @ http://old-wiki.openstack.org/rc/ 14:57:04 ttx: this is where the fun starts IMO 14:57:17 ok then, talk to you later! 14:57:26 ttx: thanks 14:57:28 cya 15:43:32 o/ I'm awake 15:47:17 zaneb: o/ 15:47:22 #topic Heat 15:47:31 https://launchpad.net/heat/+milestone/juno-rc1 15:47:44 it's better than it looks ;) 15:47:51 So it looks like you still have 4 FFEs open 15:47:56 I hope so! 15:48:09 * ttx puts back the baseball bat under the desk 15:48:30 the first one is basically done for our purposes 15:48:44 cfn-api support hasn't merged yet, but I don't care about that 15:49:07 the Sticky parameters one has one patch still in the gate currently 15:49:22 it would have merged last night except there was a random Neutron failure 15:49:24 zaneb: so the first one could technically be marked "implemented" ? 15:49:58 ttx: I guess it could, although _technically_ there is still one patch left to merge 15:50:12 zaneb: how far is that patch? 15:50:21 also client support, but that is on a different release schedule 15:50:51 sticky parameters, if the final patch is gating, we can let it in 15:50:57 it's pretty close, but the return value is wrong w.r.t. CloudFormation 15:51:16 yep, agree on the sticky parameters 15:51:43 the snapshot/rollback was a late addition 15:51:49 so you could consider that last cancel-update-stack patch as a RC bug I guess 15:51:50 because most of it had already merged 15:52:06 ok 15:52:12 I'm just concerned you guys can't fully focus on bugfixing because you are distracted with those last patches 15:52:25 and it's way past that moment in the cycle now 15:52:40 I guess 2 patches is fine, 5.. 15:52:58 yeah, I think we should wrap these up now 15:53:10 so we keep the first two and defer the last two ? 15:53:31 I think that's a good compromise -- complete features that are 90% in 15:53:33 basically yeah 15:53:49 and actually the third one, half of it merged already before FF 15:53:59 so we got something in 15:54:13 it's somewhat useful without the rest 15:54:16 zaneb: how wrong does it look if it stays that way up to release ? 15:54:28 I'm OK with it 15:54:32 ok 15:54:41 basically we have snapshot but not rollback yet 15:54:43 ok, let's keep the first two and defer the last two 15:54:51 and switch everyone to bugfixing asap 15:54:52 +1 15:55:29 is the rc1 list somehow representative of your release-critical bugs, or is there more work needed to compile a good list ? 15:56:04 I scrubbed the list a couple of weeks back and didn't see anything major languishing 15:56:16 #info FFE maintained for to finalize cancel-update-stack & troubleshooting-low-level-control 15:56:27 I should probably go through it again, but it should be reasonably representative I think 15:56:42 #info Defer handle-update-for-security-groups and stack-snapshot to kilo 15:56:47 zaneb: ok good 15:57:22 so yeah, now focus on identifying release blockers, get someone to fix them, fix them all 15:57:30 then we can tag rc1 and open kilo 15:57:40 hopefully all within the next two weeks 15:57:43 it sounds so easy when you put it like that ;) 15:57:54 easy peasy. Benn doing that a few times 15:57:59 Been* 15:58:13 zaneb: questions on the process at this point ? 15:58:24 zaneb: any topic you want to discuss at cross-project meeting today? 15:58:41 nope, I think I'm ok 15:58:55 zaneb: great, talk to you later then 15:58:58 markwash__: o/ 15:59:02 cool, thanks ttx 15:59:07 ttx: ahoy hoy 15:59:08 #topic Glance 15:59:48 https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/juno-rc1 15:59:56 one FFE still up: refactoring-glance-logging 16:00:03 what's up with that ? 16:00:25 ttx: it is in a mostly great state, we had a little disagreement about the appropriate log levels 16:00:46 there was an overwhelming consensus on the ML though so I think we're one new patchset away from landing it 16:00:51 markwash__: how far is it from merging ? We need to switch focus to full bugfixing now 16:01:23 ttx: I expect middle-late this week 16:01:46 how much of your bugfixing resources does this tie up? 16:02:04 You don't have any RC bug on your list yet :) 16:02:15 yeah I was just looking through the high bugs 16:02:21 not sure it's because you're perfect, or because you didn't have time to compile a list :) 16:02:22 we had a bug day and I didn't find anything that looked super blocky 16:02:55 well, as long as you don't have any RC bug, I'd say you can have a few more days to merge that logging thing 16:03:03 we're fairly untriaged so I was really looking for bombs though--I would probably increase my sensitivity if there weren't so many "NEW" to worry about 16:03:31 but if that means your core team doesn't have time to scrub bug reports because it's still reviewing a featury thing... let's kill it 16:04:11 ttx I don't think it will take that much time o:-) 16:04:36 markwash__: ok, let's keep it 16:04:39 for the rest of the week 16:04:57 #info FFE maintained for refactoring-glance-logging 16:05:34 but you need to get those NEW bugs checked and do some testing of the new features 16:05:48 so we are reasonably sure we aren't overlooking a big issue 16:06:01 markwash__: does that sound like a good deal ? 16:06:04 yes 16:06:19 ok then -- question on anything ? Topics for the meeting today ? 16:06:33 only the ever-present existential questions 16:06:53 the answer would be 42 16:07:07 hmm, yeah actually the math checks out 16:07:07 markwash__: ok then, talk to you later! 16:07:17 ttx: thanks! see you then 16:07:35 fWIW we are skipping Trove this week, will sync via email 16:07:38 #endmeeting