17:01:20 <dkranz> #startmeeting qa
17:01:21 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jul 31 17:01:20 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dkranz. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:22 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:01:25 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'qa'
17:01:39 <dkranz> agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting
17:02:00 <dkranz> Any one here?
17:02:12 <jlanoux> o/
17:02:16 <mlavalle> dkranz: hi
17:02:21 <andreaf_> o/
17:02:32 <yfried> dkranz: hi
17:02:49 <dkranz> ok, a small crowd today as expected
17:03:08 <dkranz> What is the first agenda item that some one wants to discuss?
17:03:20 <andreaf_> specs review
17:03:29 <dkranz> #topic specs review
17:03:41 <asselin> hi
17:03:42 <dkranz> andreaf_: all yours
17:04:39 <andreaf_> dkranz: I don't have much on my side - just test-accounts, mtreinish was going to work on that - but he's not here today :)
17:04:58 <dkranz> andreaf_: I think he may be on vacation for a week or two
17:05:28 <dkranz> andreaf_: Is there anything to review at the moment?
17:05:29 <andreaf_> dkranz: yes - so we'll just continue working on the changes
17:05:50 <dkranz> andreaf_: ok, great
17:06:21 <dkranz> Any one have anything else to bring up?
17:06:38 <mlavalle> dkranz: about specs?
17:06:54 <dkranz> mlavalle: or anything else
17:07:09 <coolsvap> dkranz, about cinder v2 tests
17:07:21 <dkranz> coolsvap: yes?
17:07:34 <coolsvap> we have a patch for cinder v1 specs which I am waiting to be merged so that I can submit the v2 patch
17:07:49 <coolsvap> i did not see any action on it as I added comment that patch needs rebase
17:07:58 <dkranz> coolsvap: link?
17:08:27 <coolsvap> dkranz, just a min
17:09:30 <coolsvap> dkranz, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/90306/13
17:09:30 <ekhugen> I have a question on the add-service-tags bp.  I was wondering if it would make sense to change the 'ceilometer' tag in tempest/tests.py to telemetry.  It would save us from having to tag all the api/telemetry tests as ceilometer.
17:09:49 <andreaf_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/90306/13
17:10:47 <dkranz> coolsvap: I guess you have to ping swapnil kulkarni
17:11:05 <coolsvap> dkranz, I am swapnil kulkarni
17:11:19 <dkranz> coolsvap: :)
17:11:29 <coolsvap> it has been submitted by abhijeet jain
17:11:50 <dkranz> coolsvap: then you need to ping him
17:12:18 <coolsvap> dkranz, i will do
17:12:42 <yfried> dkranz: should I ask my question?
17:12:42 <coolsvap> dkranz, we have couple of other patches for neutron which need more eyes on it
17:13:07 <k4n0> hi all, sorry i am late
17:13:12 <k4n0> coolsvap, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106326/
17:13:15 <dkranz> ekhugen: I think that makes sense. It should be the same "kind" of name for the service as is used for the others
17:13:23 <coolsvap> Tempest Neutron Subnet tests review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106326/
17:13:44 <dkranz> yfried: go ahead
17:14:01 <ekhugen> dkranz, I don't think that tag has ever been used anywhere (I didn't see it on a search), so I think it's just a one line change
17:14:10 <dkranz> ekhugen: even better
17:14:10 <coolsvap> Tempest Neutron provider network ext tests review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103498, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/104526, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105234
17:14:16 <yfried> dkranz: waiting for coolsvap to finish
17:14:33 <ekhugen> thanks dkranz
17:14:49 <coolsvap> I would request people to get a few mins to have a look at the above patches
17:15:03 <andreaf_> dkranz, all: perhaps we should go back to the agenda?
17:15:19 <yfried> coolsvap: please tag and ping me on any neutron related patches. I'd love to review them.
17:15:24 <dkranz> andreaf_: good idea. thought there were only three people :)
17:15:47 <dkranz> Anything more on specs review?
17:15:51 <coolsvap> thanks yfried
17:16:22 <dkranz> Blueprints?
17:16:33 <andreaf_> #topic blueprints
17:16:51 <andreaf_> I have a couple of updates
17:16:59 <dkranz> andreaf_: ok
17:17:00 <yfried> dkranz: let me know when I can add my question. I added it to the agenda
17:17:39 <dkranz> yfried: we will cover that in the neutron item
17:17:47 <yfried> dkranz: oh. sorry
17:17:50 <andreaf_> re test-accounts, we have good progress there, three changes all pending reply to comments from the authors
17:18:03 <dkranz> andreaf_: great
17:18:29 <andreaf_> so once mtreinish is back we should be able to get the first implementation done
17:18:50 <andreaf_> re scenario test migration, we also have a good progress a lot of people is contributing
17:19:43 <andreaf_> I'm chasing an odd problem which started appearing related to aggreagates / az, which I suspect may be related to a fix  in the aggregate test done during migration
17:20:19 <andreaf_> I'm trying to reproduce the issue locally, until that is solved all changes that a based on that (all of them) may fail tests
17:20:45 <andreaf_> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/107428/6
17:20:51 <andreaf_> this is the aggregate test
17:21:40 <andreaf_> I suspect it could be an actual nova bug behind this issue
17:21:43 <yfried> andreaf_: is there some decision to block scenario patches until this bp is done?
17:22:31 <andreaf_> yfried: what we agreed last week is that new scenario tests started before the mid-cycle are ok, new ones shall use tempest client
17:23:24 <andreaf_> yfried: regarding patches to existing tests... well I guess if they are ready to go they should go throguh and the migration patch shall rebase
17:23:36 <andreaf_> yfried: do yiou have any specific one in mind?
17:24:29 <yfried> andreaf_: a few, but I think it's better to hold on them until bp is done, or at least until these scenarios migrate
17:25:50 <dkranz> shall we move on?
17:25:54 <andreaf_> yfried: sure if they are not critical they can wait
17:26:05 <andreaf_> dkranz: yep that's all I have
17:26:22 <dkranz> #topic grenade
17:26:26 <dkranz> Anything on this?
17:26:56 <dkranz> #topic neutron testing
17:27:11 <mlavalle> dkranz: as far as Neutron from me, just to report that I've developing api and scenario tests for LBaaS v2 and for group based policy, which are new subprojects with Neutron. Working closely with those two teams. That's all I have
17:27:43 <yfried> mlavalle: let me know if I can help
17:27:44 <dkranz> mlavalle: ok, yfried wanted to ask something about neutron/nova-network
17:28:04 <mlavalle> yfried: you bet…. I'll take you up
17:28:10 <yfried> mlavalle: btw, wasn't there a ban on 2 LBaaS patches because of long execution time?
17:28:29 <yfried> dkranz: ^
17:28:36 <mlavalle> yfried: I think that's lbaas 1
17:28:51 <yfried> mlavalle: what's the difference
17:29:10 <mlavalle> yfried: theretely new as under developemnt
17:29:21 <yfried> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59729/
17:29:32 <yfried> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62662/
17:29:46 <yfried> mlavalle: ok
17:29:58 <dkranz> mlavalle: Since we are now planning to migrate most functional tests to projects, certainly slow ones should be in that category I would think.
17:30:21 <mlavalle> dkranz: ok
17:30:57 <yfried> dkranz: Neutron - Novanetwork
17:31:07 <dkranz> mlavalle: Anyway, we can get opinions from sdague and mtreinish but we should not just leave it hanging with that comment
17:31:50 <dkranz> yfried: go ahead
17:31:52 <yfried> mlavalle: dkranz: on LBaaS - I was told this is pending comments from the neutron dev team workin on lbaas
17:31:53 <mlavalle> dkranz: I underdtand and will follow up
17:32:07 <dkranz> mlavalle: thanks
17:32:33 <yfried> dkranz: about Neutron - Novanetwork - I wanted to bounce an idea off you guys:
17:33:42 <yfried> could prioritize neutorn over nova network, so no new patches are allowed to novanetwork. either at all, or pending a parallel patch for neutron?
17:33:58 <yfried> s/could/could we/
17:34:39 <andreaf_> yfried: are you talking about tempest patches?
17:34:52 <yfried> andreaf_: yeah - both api and scenarios
17:35:13 <yfried> is this something we could/should do?
17:35:42 <andreaf_> yfried: what's the rationale behind this?
17:36:23 <yfried> andreaf_: forcing neutron tests.
17:36:49 <yfried> andreaf_: if you have a test for novanetwork, you should make sure it's covered by neutron as well
17:37:42 <andreaf_> yfried: I think the neutron folks are doing a great job in getting neutron testing sorted out :)
17:37:45 <dkranz> yfried: do you have an example?
17:38:06 <dkranz> yfried: of a test that was added and should have also had a new neutron test?
17:38:28 <dkranz> yfried: or are you concerned about a theoretical problem?
17:38:57 <yfried> dkranz: I had a specific patch that triggered this in my head. can't find it right now, though
17:39:32 <dkranz> yfried: I think it is the intent of the neutron team to have good coverage. It would help if you could point to the example.
17:39:39 <dkranz> yfried: But does not have to be right now
17:40:18 <yfried> dkranz: in theory - is this a good practice - forcing someone to add neutron tests if they want novanetwork?
17:41:05 <mlavalle> dkranz: I have to run to another meeting….. see you in the irc channel
17:41:05 <yfried> dkranz: I can think of reasons for both ways, and I was curious what the more expirenced members here think
17:41:06 <andreaf_> yfried: its something that makes sense to propose at review time but I would not make a policy
17:41:18 <dkranz> andreaf_: I agree
17:41:50 <dkranz> Aren'
17:41:50 <yfried> andreaf_: dkranz: tnx for the thoughts. I yield :)
17:42:09 <dkranz> yfried: If it becomes a problem we can deal with it
17:42:35 <dkranz> yfried: BUt I think most tests involving neutron are around neutron-only features or in tests that don't care what network is being used
17:42:37 <yfried> dkranz: I'll try to do a survey for the meeting in 2 weeks and let you know if there are any major gaps
17:42:57 <dkranz> yfried: And the rest should have been covered by the neutron parity work
17:43:08 <dkranz> yfried: yes, examples would really help
17:43:25 <dkranz> #topic Bugs
17:43:43 <dkranz> Any importnat bugs to discuss?
17:44:33 <dkranz> #topic Critical Reviews
17:45:05 <dkranz> Any reviews (other than mentioned earlier) that should get immediate attention?
17:45:45 <dkranz> Ok, that's the agenda. Any one have anything else to discuss?
17:45:58 <andreaf_> I think in general it would be good to keep an eye on https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/tempest-client-scenarios,n,z
17:46:02 <andreaf_> for reviews
17:46:24 <dkranz> andreaf_: yes
17:46:38 <dkranz> Remember there is no meeting next week.
17:46:55 <dkranz> ok, last call...
17:47:48 <dkranz> Thanks every one. See you in two weeks.
17:47:51 <k4n0> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:%22Cedric+Brandily%22+status:open+project:openstack/tempest,n,z
17:48:37 <dkranz> yfried: Those look like good ones to review
17:49:13 <dkranz> #endmeeting