20:42:49 #startmeeting requirements 20:42:50 Meeting started Wed Apr 3 20:42:49 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is prometheanfire. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:42:51 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 20:42:53 The meeting name has been set to 'requirements' 20:43:02 #topic rollcall 20:43:05 tonyb, prometheanfire, number80, dirk, coolsvap, toabctl, smcginnis, dhellmann ping 20:43:07 o/ 20:43:08 o/ 20:44:26 o/ 20:45:58 ok 20:46:07 #topic Any controversies in the Queue? 20:46:26 Not that I'm aware of. 20:46:27 I don't think so 20:46:39 we still have the dangling requests stuff on stable 20:47:21 yep 20:47:55 maybe I should just abandon those, I don't think those are really mergable 20:48:09 I think leaving them there is fin 20:48:22 prometheanfire: IIRC, you approved rocky but had stated there it wouldn't be backported further? 20:48:22 I do want to go back and look at the actual imapact 20:48:30 smcginnis: yep 20:48:45 tonyb: ok, I'll leave them there for another week for you 20:49:20 Yup that's my position too but I aslo want to look at them and get a real risk assessment rather than my initial FUD/policy based one 20:49:25 prometheanfire: thanks 20:49:35 fair enough 20:49:37 anything else? 20:49:58 I'll abandon https://review.openstack.org/648457 at least 20:50:01 just smcginnis's https://review.openstack.org/#/c/649669/ ;P 20:50:09 lol 20:50:16 Yup drop it 20:50:30 it's wrong and encourages poor behaviour 20:50:49 when you abandon it can you put in a plug the the requirements-libs session at the forum? 20:51:12 tonyb: yep, that's the plan 20:51:25 #topic conf/ptg 20:51:36 https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23626/consumption-models-for-service-projects 20:52:01 oh, nice 20:52:17 on monday though :( will miss it 20:52:20 it even has a nice 'adult' names :) 20:52:26 prometheanfire: yeah 20:53:26 you know if it's recorded? 20:53:39 That wont be 20:53:44 it's a forum session 20:53:44 ah, ok 20:53:56 I should be able to be in irc at that time 20:54:02 okay 20:54:18 any other forum news? 20:54:29 I can try to hangouts you but I dont think that'll work super well 20:54:34 willing to try though 20:55:07 or if opendev infra has a better tool than hangouts I'm all ears 20:55:37 I also have project update 20:55:43 * tonyb will send the slides around 20:55:47 it'll be pretty light 20:55:48 ya, no need for video though 20:55:50 kk 20:57:01 #topic open floor 20:57:49 So looks like that jsonschema one I will need to update each project first, then uncap? 20:58:13 Which will be a little odd since they won't actually test with the newer version until u-c is raised. 20:58:25 smcginnis: Yeah that seems strange 20:58:32 smcginnis: I'll look at the failure today 20:58:40 Cool, thanks tonyb. 20:58:45 smcginnis: we can test with dependant patches 20:58:50 Would be nice to get some deprecation warnings out of everyone's logs. 20:59:03 smcginnis: Yeah 20:59:04 but ya, it's a large set 20:59:32 Nothing else from me today. 20:59:44 me either 20:59:53 prometheanfire: Oh, kind of tangential, but did you want to update that release patch with a newer commit? 21:00:06 smcginnis: the bot? 21:00:06 or abandon it 21:00:27 smcginnis: ok, release for reqs 21:00:31 prometheanfire: no the requirement rc1 release from diablo_rojo 21:01:10 Yeah, that. 21:01:12 eh, meh 21:01:18 https://review.openstack.org/648279 21:01:31 I don't see the need for another release 21:01:41 releases are more for code changes, not reqs/constraints 21:02:11 Yeah I agree so just abandon it 21:02:27 Done 21:02:33 smcginnis: shoudld we document an exclusion for requirements? 21:03:01 Maybe good to add that to process.rst so it's explicit that requirements PTL will take care of those as needed. 21:03:10 Or get that all scripted right so it's baked in. 21:03:15 smcginnis: cool 21:03:33 cool 21:03:35 thanks 21:03:37 anything else? 21:03:43 nope 21:03:43 add a flag: no_procedural_releases ;P 21:03:50 tonyb: Heh, maybe 21:03:59 #endmeeting