17:00:30 <mtreinish> #startmeeting qa
17:00:30 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Aug 28 17:00:30 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mtreinish. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:31 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:00:33 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'qa'
17:00:45 <mtreinish> hi who is here today?
17:00:54 <asselin> hi
17:00:55 * mlavalle is here
17:00:57 <jlanoux> o/ hi
17:01:00 <mtreinish> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Proposed_Agenda_for_August_28_2014_.281700_UTC.29
17:01:08 <mtreinish> ^^^ Today's agenda
17:01:50 <mtreinish> sdague, dkranz: you guys around?
17:02:20 <dkranz> mtreinish: o/
17:02:28 <mtreinish> ok let's get started
17:02:37 <mtreinish> #topic Specs Review
17:03:07 <mtreinish> so considering where we are in the cycle I don't think there should be too many open spec reviews to look at
17:03:20 <mtreinish> but does anyone have an open spec review they'd like to bring up?
17:03:36 <dkranz> Yes, the tempest config spec
17:03:58 <dkranz> I propose to submit a new spec for that which more reflects my vision for what could be done
17:04:19 <mtreinish> dkranz: yeah, that seems fair, that one has been sitting without any updates from the author for quite some time
17:04:52 <dkranz> mtreinish: I plan to do that tomorrow.
17:04:53 <mtreinish> dkranz: but, if you can ping the guy who took it over from boris-42 and see what happened there that would be good too
17:05:10 <dkranz> mtreinish: I didn't know some one took it over. I'll take another look.
17:05:39 <mtreinish> well someone else was the committer after the first rev.
17:06:08 <dkranz> mtreinish: Yes, I see. I will ping him with a comment and see if any one is actually working on this.
17:06:18 <mtreinish> ok cool
17:06:31 <mtreinish> are there any other specs reviews to bring up?
17:07:29 <mtreinish> ok, then let's move on
17:07:40 <mtreinish> #topic Blueprints
17:07:49 <mtreinish> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Proposed_Agenda_for_August_28_2014_.281700_UTC.29
17:07:56 <mtreinish> oops sry wrong link
17:08:07 <mtreinish> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/juno
17:08:30 <mtreinish> so looking at this list we still have a fair number of open bps
17:08:48 <mtreinish> I've seen patches on quite a few
17:09:16 <mtreinish> does anyone have any status updates on a bp they're working on?
17:10:09 <mtreinish> looking at the open high prio bps
17:10:25 <mtreinish> mkoderer: the schema unification one is almost done right?
17:10:41 <dkranz> mtreinish: client-checks-success is making a lot of progress. There were even two people grabbed the same service :)
17:11:08 <mtreinish> dkranz: heh, are you guys using an etherpad or something for tracking?
17:11:16 <jlanoux> dkranz: :D
17:11:31 <dkranz> mtreinish: Yes, but one guy didn't use it :(
17:11:43 <dkranz> jlanoux: Sorry that happened
17:11:52 <mtreinish> heh, ok I guess it happens
17:11:56 <dkranz> yup
17:11:59 <jlanoux> dkranz: don't worry, there is no problem!
17:12:35 <mtreinish> sdague: is there any update on the status of javelin2?
17:13:56 <mtreinish> ok well if no one else has a status update on any other bps let's move on
17:14:35 <mtreinish> #topic git history with tempest-lib migration (mtreinish)
17:15:00 <mtreinish> so I started working on doing the tempest-lib migration the other day
17:15:22 <mtreinish> but I wanted to get a poll on how important people thought it was to maintain the git commit history from tempest
17:15:34 <mtreinish> it's not very hard to do, but it's a manual process
17:15:55 <mtreinish> because I didn't want to just clone tempest and widdle it away into a library
17:16:14 <mtreinish> I put up my current working repo with the maintained history here:
17:16:19 <mtreinish> #link https://github.com/mtreinish/tempest-lib
17:16:59 <mtreinish> if we decided it wasn't important it would just be a matter of copy and pasting files from one repo to the other
17:18:01 <mtreinish> oh, and I haven't closed the name survey yet, but unless something drastic happens the name will be tempest-lib :)
17:18:05 <dkranz> mtreinish: I have yet to look at the history except for very recent.
17:18:38 <jlanoux> mtreinish: no mesocyclone then?
17:18:48 <mtreinish> dkranz: well when I looked at all the other lib migrations/oslo graduations happening they all maintained the git log
17:19:20 <dkranz> mtreinish: But you are still proposing to not do that
17:20:06 <mtreinish> I just wanted to see how important it was to everyone? Because it'll probably delay things a bit because I need to script my manual process for migrating files
17:20:24 <mtreinish> I think it's the right thing to do
17:20:33 <dkranz> mtreinish: ok
17:20:50 <mtreinish> honestly, I put this on the agenda before I figured out exactly how to do it :)
17:20:54 <jlanoux> mtreinish: I think it's nice to keep the history
17:21:15 <mtreinish> jlanoux: yeah, that's what I'm thinking
17:21:25 <mtreinish> jlanoux: as for mesocyclone it only has 4 votes :(
17:21:32 <jlanoux> Tempest has a lot of contributors and the history is a good way to keep track
17:21:35 <mtreinish> while tempest-lib has 13
17:22:25 <andreaf_> mtreinish, +1 to keep history - it helps finding out who to ask in case of questions
17:22:26 <mtreinish> ok, then before I publish the lib I'll write a file migration script to generate the merge commits automatically
17:22:27 <asselin> I agree it's nice to keep history
17:22:52 <mtreinish> because the issue is doing it piecewise instead of all at once
17:22:54 <andreaf_> mtreinish: and what the reason behind was - sometime docs only go into commit messages
17:23:01 <mlavalle> mtreinish: +1 keep history
17:23:28 <mtreinish> ok, well I think that settles it then :)
17:23:34 <asselin> mtreinish, there's folks in infra that are pulling out puppet scripts into their own repo. they may have a script to help
17:23:41 <mtreinish> does anyone else have something to add about the tempest lib
17:23:53 <mtreinish> asselin: ok cool, I'll take a look
17:24:50 <asselin> mtreinish, he're their BP https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99990/
17:24:58 <asselin> *here's
17:25:58 <mtreinish> asselin: yeah, that'll actually be different than what we need here
17:26:09 <mtreinish> but we can talk about it in more detail after the meeting
17:26:26 <asselin> ok
17:26:31 <mtreinish> ok, then lets move on
17:26:42 <mtreinish> #topic Grenade
17:26:55 <mtreinish> jogo, sdague, dtroyer: around?
17:27:04 <dtroyer> \o
17:27:15 <mtreinish> dtroyer: anything new in the world of grenade?
17:27:49 <dtroyer> honestly it hasn't been at the top of my queue, and I think there are a few things I need to look at…
17:28:17 <mtreinish> ok, that's fine. It's the same for me which is why I was pinging other people :)
17:28:35 <mtreinish> does anyone else have anything to bring up about grenade?
17:29:34 <mtreinish> ok I guess not :)
17:29:41 <mtreinish> so let's go to the next topic
17:30:00 <mtreinish> #topic Neutron testing
17:30:31 <mtreinish> mlavalle: you around?
17:30:37 <mlavalle> mtreinish: hi
17:30:52 <mlavalle> mtreinish: slowly coming back to work after surgery
17:31:15 <mlavalle> mtreinish: this week conducting code reviews for a couple of provider networks api tests
17:31:41 <mlavalle> mtreinish: I will start converting the lbaas scenario test to tempets client
17:32:02 <mlavalle> mtreinish: and use that exercise to develop the scenario tests for new LBaaS api
17:32:26 <mlavalle> that's all I have at the moment
17:32:32 <mtreinish> ok cool, thanks
17:32:45 <mtreinish> does anyone else have any updates on neutron testing?
17:33:25 <mtreinish> ok then let's move on
17:33:39 <mtreinish> #topic Bugs
17:34:01 <mtreinish> so I dkranz_afk was planning a bug day, I can't remember the date
17:34:12 <mtreinish> and I haven't seen a ML announcement yet
17:34:17 <mtreinish> dkranz_afk: is there any update on that?
17:34:50 <mtreinish> heh, I guess he went afk :)
17:35:09 <mtreinish> we can come back to this if when he comes back
17:35:19 <mtreinish> so let's move on
17:35:28 <mtreinish> #topic Critical Reviews
17:35:48 <mtreinish> So does anyone have any reviews that they need to get extra eyes on?
17:36:24 <jlanoux> yes, #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112535/
17:36:47 <mtreinish> jlanoux: ok, I'll take a look at that after the meeting
17:37:07 <mtreinish> I actually have 2 myself this week:
17:37:08 <jlanoux> mtreinish: thanks, it got a +2 from andreaf but I rebased
17:37:12 <mtreinish> #link https://review.openstack.org/117049
17:37:24 <mtreinish> #link https://review.openstack.org/111635
17:37:51 <mtreinish> jlanoux: ok, yeah that's always annoying
17:38:09 <jlanoux> mtreinish: indeed
17:38:10 <mtreinish> does anyone else have any open reviews to bring up?
17:39:08 <dkranz> mtreinish: I decided day after Labor day was not a great choice for bug day. So I propose Sept 9 and will send out a message.
17:39:20 <mtreinish> dkranz: ok great, thanks
17:39:33 <mlavalle> dkranz: good call
17:40:00 <mtreinish> ok if there aren't any other reviews I guess we'll move to open discussion
17:40:09 <mtreinish> #topic open discussion
17:40:18 <dkranz> mtreinish: I have one
17:40:27 <mtreinish> this is like the first time we've had enough excess time for this a while
17:40:32 <mtreinish> dkranz: sure go ahead
17:40:33 <dkranz> "reverse liasons" for in-project functional tests
17:41:05 <dkranz> in-project functional tests will reduce the tempest review burden but it would be good to pay attention
17:41:17 <cdent> dkranz++
17:41:22 <mtreinish> dkranz: in other words someone from qa-core helps the projects with spinning up functional testing?
17:41:40 <dkranz> mtreinish: Yes, and keeps an eye on things
17:42:01 <mtreinish> that sounds fine, but the only issue with that is that the number of projects outnumber the core team :)
17:42:03 <dkranz> I have some concern about loss of the tempest two-step as I outlined in my email on the subject
17:42:48 <dkranz> mtreinish: Perhaps there needs to be a distinction between a "core" member of the qa program and a core on tempest repo
17:43:23 <mtreinish> well actually I was just thinking tempest and grenade in my count
17:43:33 <dkranz> mtreinish: ok :)
17:43:45 <mtreinish> but yeah I see what you're saying
17:43:50 <dkranz> But you don't need to be a core reviewer on the (new) tempest repo to do this
17:44:05 <dkranz> Just some one with the QA mindset
17:44:28 <dkranz> To watch for in-project func tests being modified
17:44:46 <mtreinish> I do share some of the same concerns as you on the functional testing bringup. But I think it's too early in the process to act on that
17:45:03 <mtreinish> I agree keeping an eye on things would probably be good
17:45:07 <dkranz> mtreinish: that's fine. I just wanted to open the discussion and get people thinking about this issue
17:45:36 <dkranz> because things were not so good before the tempest two step
17:45:50 <dkranz> but awareness of api stability has also increased
17:45:57 <dkranz> anyway, that's all for now
17:46:15 <mtreinish> yeah, honestly tempest scope isn't going to shrink this cycle. This will definitely be a summit topic or 2
17:46:33 <mtreinish> I'm thinking I'm going to propose a cross-project track topic about it
17:46:46 <dkranz> mtreinish: right. It should not shrink until there is a defined and adequate replacement
17:47:09 <dkranz> mtreinish: speaking of which, when should we start summit planning etherpad?
17:47:21 <mtreinish> dkranz: I'm going to start that up next week
17:47:25 <mtreinish> and I'll put it on the ML
17:47:27 <dkranz> mtreinish: ok, cool
17:47:35 <mtreinish> just to get us thinking about it
17:47:57 <mtreinish> ok, does anyone else have a topic to bring up?
17:49:12 <mtreinish> well if there is nothing else to discuss we can end early then
17:49:18 <dkranz> bye all
17:49:24 <mtreinish> which will be I think a first for this cycle :)
17:49:35 <mtreinish> thanks everyone
17:49:44 <mtreinish> #endmeeting