21:00:19 #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting 21:00:19 Meeting started Tue Feb 10 21:00:19 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:00:20 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:00:23 The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting' 21:00:23 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Solum#Agenda_for_2015-02-10_2100_UTC Our Agenda 21:00:30 #topic Roll Call 21:00:33 Adrian Otto 21:00:47 devdatta kulkarni 21:00:58 Ravi Sankar Penta 21:01:06 Roshan Agrawal 21:01:15 ed cranford 21:02:40 hello devkulkarni ravips roshanagr datsun180b and james_li 21:02:58 Hi adrian_otto 21:03:00 murali allada 21:03:05 hi adrian_otto 21:03:24 hi muralia 21:03:29 ok, let's begin 21:03:31 Hi adrian_otto 21:03:37 #topic Announcements 21:03:40 Hi adrian 21:03:58 for the next 3 meetings I will be away 21:04:10 Those dates are: 2015-02-17, 2015-02-24, and 2015-03-03. Our chair will be: devkulkarni 21:04:14 \o 21:04:27 Melissa Kam 21:04:35 This friday I am going on Vacation through the following friday, followed by two conferences 21:04:36 glad to lead the meetings on those days 21:04:56 so I will be checking email, but generally not around on IRC much during that time. 21:05:08 thanks devkulkarni. I appreciate it! 21:05:18 any other announcements from team members? 21:06:05 I submitted a talk for Vancouver ODS for Solum. 21:06:17 once the voting ink becomes available I will share that with you. 21:06:21 nice 21:06:26 awesome! 21:06:31 cool 21:06:50 I'm looking forward to giving you all credit for all the awesome work you've completed in this cycle. 21:07:17 #topic Review Action Items 21:07:24 we did not have any last week. 21:07:31 #topic Administrative 21:07:52 several of you have noticed -1 votes on your review submissions for administrative reasons 21:08:14 the purpose of this is to give more complete visibility to what is included as we cut releases 21:08:25 Please include links to "Implements blueprint BLUEPRINT" or "Closes-Bug: #NNNN" on the last line of the commit message. 21:08:41 if you notice a review without one of these, please vote -1 and request that it be added. 21:08:57 if there is not a bug ticket already, you can file one yourself 21:09:07 NOTE: The bug does not need to be previously approved to be linked to a review. 21:09:16 questions or concerns about this? 21:09:36 sounds reasonable 21:09:51 sounds fine 21:10:02 ok, if this ends up causing unreasonable friction for whatever reason, let's revisit it. 21:10:11 thanks for your help with this. 21:10:16 #topic Blueprint/Task Review 21:10:28 before I dive into specific work items 21:11:01 I want to mention that our gates are all complaining about a missing library for tempest 21:11:16 dimtruck fixed the issue recently 21:11:18 from what I have seen the devstack job is failing on allpatches 21:11:23 oh? 21:11:24 correct 21:11:28 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/154650/ 21:11:29 please elaborate 21:12:02 we now need this in our run_tests.sh: 21:12:04 ok, so I will happily order rechecks on open reviews once that merges 21:12:22 pip install -r $TEMPEST_DIR/requirements.txt 21:12:29 to install latest requirements 21:12:41 that was able to successfully pass jenkins 21:12:47 dimtruck: thanks for the fix!! 21:12:51 other projects (murano) did the same 21:13:00 there was a nice chain about it at openstack-qa 21:13:03 Thanks dimtruck 21:13:12 np 21:13:14 dumtruck rocks! 21:13:24 dimtruck 21:13:34 that way i can get my 2 month old patch in as well :) 21:13:57 also, I want to highlight that we held a short debate yesterday about how to address storage constraints on the build node caused by accumulated git repos and DU images 21:14:03 https://bugs.launchpad.net/solum/+bug/1419978 21:14:03 Launchpad bug 1419978 in Solum "Delete LP Images and repos when storage is low" [Wishlist,Triaged] 21:14:12 that's the resolution we agreed to. 21:14:29 muralia submitted revisions to the open reviews in accordance with this decision 21:14:35 yes 21:14:41 thanks muralia 21:14:49 muralia: did you see my comment on them? 21:14:51 any further discussion on this topic? 21:14:59 not yet 21:15:15 ok. we can discuss it on the patch itself 21:15:43 ok, that was a good compromise I thought. 21:16:00 any other work items we should discuss as a team today? 21:16:24 adrian_otto, I made roadmap cleanup 21:16:31 worth reviewing? 21:16:34 thanks roshanagr 21:16:39 yes, we have time for that 21:16:44 Also, have documentation for new cli 21:16:48 cool 21:16:49 have the link handy? 21:17:03 I cleaned up high level roadmap 21:17:05 https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/HighLevelRoadmap#Milestone:_Kilo 21:17:06 use #link LINK DESC 21:17:22 #https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/HighLevelRoadmap#Milestone:_Kilo High Level Roadmap 21:17:36 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/HighLevelRoadmap#Milestone:_Kilo 21:17:43 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/HighLevelRoadmap#Milestone:_Kilo Roadmap 21:17:48 ok, let's dig in! 21:18:09 will give it a few minutes for folks to take a look 21:19:40 new cli looks great, minor suggestion..can we do 'solum app deploy ' instead of 'solum app deploy --name ' that will make it consistent with solum app build/show/delete 21:19:43 well done roshanagr 21:20:24 ravips: agreed, because name is required and can not be confused with other options. 21:20:31 ravips: i think name's supposed to be required, yes 21:20:37 thanks adrian_otto. 21:21:01 ravips: makes sense 21:21:20 I will reflect that change 21:21:21 roshanagr: awesome, doc was very easy to understand 21:21:38 cool, thanks ravips 21:21:59 So when would you like to tag a new release? 21:22:08 maybe this week? 21:22:28 sounds good to me 21:22:55 kilo2 is scheduled to land now 21:23:06 and March 19 for kilo3 21:23:36 Kilo release is scheduled for April 30 21:23:52 is it reasonable to expect that we will complete the roadmap items by then? 21:24:23 May 21 is the OpenStack Design Summit 21:24:37 seems possible 21:24:57 we have not divided different features into kilo-1, 2, 3 21:24:59 ok, anyone worried that it's too much? 21:25:09 well we are at kilo2 now 21:25:22 so I am going to merge in open reviews, and tag kilo2 21:25:26 but by April 30 it should be probably okay 21:25:34 so it's what we can do between now and April 30 21:25:52 right 21:25:57 the official OpenStack feature freeze is March 19 21:26:18 for Kilo3? that might not be possible to reach 21:26:21 so if we tracked with that, we would resolve bugs (defects and tech debt) until April 30. 21:27:19 devkulkarni: what would you propose we cut from scope for kilo 21:27:20 we could revisit it in March 21:27:33 to decide whether to do a feature freeze or not 21:27:54 adrian_otto: +1 21:27:56 right now, I think we should not change 21:28:04 but towards mid March we should re-evaluate 21:28:30 ok, I'll make a note on our meeting agenda (I can set up a few agendas in advance) 21:29:24 #action adrian_otto to schedule follow-up discussion for mid-March to determine when a feature freeze should be applied. Should it be March 19? 21:30:01 #topic Open Discussion 21:30:13 I have one topic for this section 21:30:24 relating to inactive core reviewers 21:30:44 I suggest we consider either March 17 or 24 21:30:50 traditionally core reviewers that have been inactive for a long time are polled by the PTL to ask if they have a continued interest in the project 21:30:54 those are Tuesdays (our meeting days) 21:31:05 and if not, the PTL proposes to remove them from the core group 21:31:28 would you like me to initiate this process, as we have several members of that group 21:31:34 ? 21:31:53 anyone in particular? 21:31:54 seems like logical step 21:32:00 given that folks have not been active 21:32:20 devkulkarni: ok, we can tentatively discuss the feature freeze again on March 17 21:32:37 does anyone feel we should keep inactive cores around? 21:32:51 + 1 on inactive core reviewers 21:33:08 roshanagr: to be clear you are supporting a purge, correct? 21:33:15 yes 21:33:17 ok 21:33:34 any other thoughts? 21:34:04 would you like me to record this as an #agreed, or as an action item? 21:34:12 or perhaps both 21:34:14 +1 21:34:25 sounds like an action item 21:34:35 probably both 21:34:45 I'm not hearing any arguments to the contrary 21:35:10 alternatively, i'm not seeing any other votes in favor 21:35:25 so I think a #agreed is appropriate. The reason for my question is that we have not purged in a long time, so I wanted to be confident that the current core group feels comfortable. 21:35:43 folks can be re-included again when they get back into the rhythm of the project 21:35:55 yes, they can. 21:36:19 in fact anyone interested in joining core is welcome to contact me for guidance about how to accomplish that. 21:36:31 I'm happy to help with that. 21:36:35 yes, I think the current group of core is very comfortable with the form and shape of the project (as it stands) and where it needs to evolve 21:37:05 #agreed We will contact inactive core group members, and ask if they want to continue as part of that group, or be proposed for removal. 21:37:25 #action adrian_otto to contact inactive core reviewers to ask if they want to continue as part of that group, or be proposed for removal. 21:37:46 ok, we are in open discussion. I have no more topics for you :-) 21:39:29 if there is nothing more to discuss we can adjourn. I'll wait a bit. 21:40:17 adios. good meeting 21:40:23 Our next meeting is 2015-02-17 at 2100 UTC 21:40:28 take care! 21:40:32 #endmeeting