17:00:15 #startmeeting tailgate 17:00:16 Meeting started Thu Aug 13 17:00:15 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gema. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:17 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:20 The meeting name has been set to 'tailgate' 17:00:25 #topic rollcall 17:00:47 o/ 17:04:17 o. 17:04:20 o/ 17:04:24 malini: \o/ 17:04:32 malini: I thought I was going to have to cancel :D 17:04:38 heyy gema :) 17:05:04 how was your week? 17:05:14 it was good :) 17:05:22 house back in shape now? 17:05:32 nope, they delayed till next week 17:05:38 :/ 17:05:39 they confirmed they are starting monday :D 17:05:48 hope you are not living in a tent 17:05:54 nah, it's not that bad 17:05:57 next week maybe ;) 17:06:02 :) 17:06:17 jose-idar: you around? 17:06:39 alright, let's get started then 17:06:45 and review our stuff 17:06:58 #topic Last week's actions 17:07:09 we'll carry over all the non present people actions to next week 17:07:24 you'll have to carry over the present one as well :/ 17:07:40 #action spyderdyne to give more updates on HA testing 17:07:44 ok, don't worry :) 17:07:56 #action jasonb to initiate the review of the questionaire on the ML and handle review comments, review due to end early Sept (in case people are on holidays) 17:08:11 #action jasonb to figure out the mechanics of getting endpoints and gurumeditationreport and maybe create a simple script that does this 17:08:21 #action malini to try to write a test with tempest-lib that spins a VM and destroys is, as a POC 17:08:32 #action jose-idar to start a spec for component tests for nova (user side, no admin), so we can all contribute cases and maybe implement them at some point , but at least start to get organised 17:08:33 I havent started on tht yet.. 17:08:40 hope to get to that by next week 17:08:45 alright, sounds good 17:09:00 #action gema to continue with the strategy doc 17:09:05 this one keeps going too 17:09:19 #action gema to check what parts of keystone are accesible without admin on ubuntu's distro 17:09:22 so does this one 17:09:43 * gema gema to talk to matthew about stable tempest kilo and report back 17:09:56 I have decided this one is not necessary anymore, after having a go at refstack tests 17:10:05 cool..one less :) 17:10:14 they are aiming at having a set of tests that can be run on the different releases 17:10:17 in a stable manner 17:10:36 * gema gema to submit a few test runs of refstack and get familiar with it 17:10:56 I did this one yesterday, did set up a cloud and configured it for tempest, came up with a tempest.conf 17:11:07 and used refstack-client to run a bunch of tests 17:11:15 did you set up a real cloud or devstack? 17:11:30 a real cloud, but virtualised 17:11:41 we stand up test clouds on a cloud we have for testing 17:11:43 tht is reallly eneat! 17:11:47 neat 17:11:51 it's openstack on openstack but with juju 17:12:08 and I run the tests on the overcloud 17:12:13 undercloud is kilo 17:12:17 overcloud was icehouse 17:12:25 it went well, I managed to get it to run and pass most of the tests, except for some exceptions that were listed on the "flagged tests" list 17:12:29 tht is really cool 17:12:36 how hard was it? 17:12:42 it took me a couple of hours 17:12:49 tht is not at all bad 17:12:51 to figure out what I was doing wrong with refstack client 17:12:51 thats not bad 17:12:58 running the tests was 10 mins 17:12:58 jasonsb: o/ 17:13:07 jasonsb: o/ 17:13:17 :) 17:13:24 however you need a working tempest.conf file for the cloud under test and the basic initial set up (default users, networks, images available), having that ready, running with refstack-client is very easy (just follow README instructions). 17:14:09 we can talk more about refstack now or later on a separate topic 17:14:12 whatever you guys prefer 17:14:14 do they have the tests in https://github.com/stackforge/refstack as well? 17:14:25 or is it pulled from tempest repo? 17:14:38 malini: no, the tests are from the tempest repo, however they have lists that have to use to run 17:14:48 sorry..I am hijacking 17:15:18 #link https://github.com/openstack/defcore 17:15:25 if you look at the folder 2015.05 17:15:28 I run that one 17:15:39 once you get your failures you look at the flagged list 17:15:51 the names somehow remind me of perf evals :/ 17:16:03 maybe 17:16:26 I can prepare a blog post about how I did the run 17:16:30 if you guys think that may be useful 17:16:36 +1 17:16:38 I have a new blog to talk about what we are doing ready to go :) 17:16:41 tht will be cool 17:16:56 #action gema to write a blog post about refstack-client running experience 17:17:03 I was just getting irritated abt the lack of good test blogs :D 17:17:12 mine is empty for now 17:17:19 not tht I am inclined to do anything abt it ;) 17:17:23 never felt inspired to write and when I did, I kept taking it down xD 17:17:41 #link http://www.thetestingcorner.com/ 17:17:43 a blog is a nice dipping-the-toe in 17:17:46 coming soon ^ ;) 17:17:47 i'll do one too 17:17:57 yeah, and we can link each others 17:17:58 hola 17:18:02 spyderdyne: hello 17:18:22 i alologize for dropping off the face of the earth 17:18:26 i think i'll do one on network testing ala spyderdyne 17:18:37 spyderdyne: no worries..rockets do tht to you 17:18:38 spyderdyne: don't worry 17:18:42 lol 17:19:17 i have somethign cool i have been working on if anyone is interested 17:19:23 spyderdyne: go for it 17:19:30 Odin, a bash loader for Rally test plans 17:19:41 a tool? 17:19:47 just some scripting 17:19:56 pretty useful though 17:20:03 share the link 17:20:05 i will write it up and share a link 17:20:25 #action spyderdyne to write up and share link about Odin, the bash loader for rally test plans 17:20:29 Rally test plans == json templates they use? 17:20:41 accepted 17:20:52 all my plans are json 17:21:01 easy to convert though 17:21:09 spyderdyne: do you have a blog? 17:21:16 i do 17:21:18 gema is all bloggy today :) 17:21:22 malini: lol, yep 17:21:26 spyderdyne.com 17:21:32 i dont use it much tho 17:21:43 i can write it up on there and share if you like 17:21:49 that'd be nice 17:21:53 ok 17:21:55 #link http://spyderdyne.com/ 17:21:57 will let you know 17:22:05 thanks, send an email to the mailing or so 17:22:27 ok, where were we 17:22:36 spyderdyne: wanna talk about HA, whilst at it? 17:22:53 our ha testing has failed to launch 17:23:15 ok, we keep the action to talk about it in the future, then? 17:23:22 we have some issues with the test plans 17:23:37 can we help with that? 17:23:41 go ahead and drop the action and I will provide it when its available. 17:23:51 ok, will drop it next week 17:23:54 it turned out not to be as easy as we thought it would be though 17:23:58 I have already added it to this week's 17:23:58 thanks 17:24:07 spyderdyne: HA is never easy 17:24:19 HA, ha, hah! 17:24:21 spyderdyne: however, we have a way to deploy HA in one go with juju that it may be useful for you 17:24:24 you can keep the topic i think 17:24:28 i'm working on it too 17:24:39 so we should visit it soemtime 17:24:42 with the new version of juju that has leader election and the new charms, you can deploy openstack HA unattended 17:24:48 would that we were using juju 17:24:52 ;) 17:25:00 juju is nice 17:25:23 :) 17:25:25 ok 17:25:54 we moved to RHEL for bug fix support so we are in the middle of a jump between operating systems and have our hands full at the moment 17:25:58 I don't remember what actions I haven't covered x) 17:26:21 spyderdyne: ah, ok 17:26:26 fair enough 17:26:34 #action gema to send out the defcore details on actionable gaps 17:26:45 I am still working on understanding the scope for this one 17:26:55 I attended their meeting yesterday but I have that as a topic 17:27:32 and reading the previous week's meeting and check whether glance required admin are both done 17:27:42 I think that's it for actions 17:27:47 unless I am forgetting something? 17:28:15 alright, moving on 17:28:21 #topic defcore 17:28:30 Mid cycle feedback: 17:28:38 #link http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/openstack-continues-to-strenghten-its-commitment-to-interoperability 17:28:46 #link http://robhirschfeld.com/2015/08/11/defcore-update-slowly-taming-the-interop-hydra/ 17:28:54 Yesterday's meeting: 17:29:01 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/defcore/2015/defcore.2015-08-12-14.59.html 17:29:10 The meeting was good, they are working on more capabilities. 17:29:35 tbh I am not very clear on what constitutes a capability , I stilll have to read further about it, but they seem to be api calls (don't quote me on this though) 17:29:49 I found the fact that they are entertaining the idea of vendors providing details of the cloud they are running interesting and somewhat concerning: 17:29:57 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/207209/6/doc/source/process/2015B.rst 17:30:45 if you guys are interested, there was a lively discussion in yesterday's meeting about this 17:30:48 you can read it 17:31:14 i tried to join 17:31:16 I sent my results this morning to their interop meeting and got an email back saying my support request would be dealt with 17:31:23 but couldn't figure out when 17:31:32 jasonsb: ok, I can ping you next week if you want 17:31:36 please 17:31:41 ok 17:31:45 i haz tiny brain 17:31:48 lol 17:32:01 that's all I have on defcore 17:32:04 questions? 17:32:41 ok, moving on 17:32:45 #topic AOB 17:32:52 (any other business?) 17:33:10 oh, jasonsb , I forgot 17:33:19 did you get my email with the thoughts on the review? 17:33:22 and the links and all? 17:33:34 I sent it to your gmail account, I believe 17:33:50 (questionaire review) 17:33:56 opps! 17:34:01 i missed it i'm sorry 17:34:05 looking now 17:34:15 if you don't have it I can send it again 17:34:20 maybe I ended up in the spam folder 17:34:43 i have it i'm just lame and missed it 17:34:48 jasonsb: lol, ok 17:34:58 jasonsb: do you still want to keep that action? 17:34:58 very nice 17:35:02 yes 17:35:05 cool 17:35:23 the other question I had, do you guys think the weekly meetings are good or do you want to fall back to every two weeks? 17:35:58 or shall we alternate times on consecutive weeks? 17:35:58 i'm fine as-is 17:36:20 ok 17:36:28 me too 17:36:30 me too, but wanted to hear if someone wanted to go back 17:36:38 there is a lot of people that don't show up 17:36:44 shall we ask on the mailing the reason? 17:36:49 if this is a conflict time for them 17:36:51 or so? 17:36:55 maybe the interest is waning? 17:37:14 maybe 17:37:20 I still think it's worth it 17:37:22 sry, just got here. 17:37:30 jose-idar: welcome sir 17:37:44 malini: see? jose-idar clearly had a conflict :D 17:37:53 indeed! 17:38:12 jose-idar: did you have a chance to start your spec? 17:38:31 so, just an update, I'm talking with daryl walleck. He's working with defcore to clarify what it is the tempest tests actually do 17:38:54 I'd like to piggyback on that work, and make the request something along the lines of: 17:38:57 jose-idar: what do you mean what they do? 17:39:22 making the steps tests actually take explicit 17:39:56 Right now defcore is driven by what the tests actually do, which is bad since what they do and what they are assumed to be doing sometimes doesn't match. 17:40:09 yep 17:40:20 but I thought what they are doing is identifying capabilities 17:40:24 and then choosing tests 17:40:29 So, I think I want the spec to read something like "Decide what steps define feature X, and make a test that actually does that" 17:40:29 to validate those capabilities 17:41:08 which is fine, but no one has really gone through and audited the tests from top to bottom 17:41:21 I have done a few 17:41:35 they were poor :) 17:41:38 a big one is whether or not authenticating is a 'necessary step' for doing something like creating a server. 17:41:39 as in, simple 17:41:44 yeah 17:42:26 So, i'm still writing that, with all that stuff in mind. 17:42:35 jose-idar: ok, sounds great 17:42:39 i've had precious little time to work on it, should be better this week 17:42:41 so what do you want me to call the action? 17:42:49 I gues leave it the same? 17:42:54 ok, done :D 17:43:03 jose-idar: where are you writing that? 17:43:08 in a doc locally? 17:43:16 I am wondering if we shouldn't start a project 17:43:40 or does what you are doing fit nicely into defcore? 17:45:28 gema: good question! I was just keeping it local. 17:45:37 I think we are going to add a topic to our meeting about how we want to contribute "stuff" 17:45:39 Do ya'll have a preference? 17:46:09 we can discuss that next week, you can put it on an etherpad if you want to share it, but etherpads are not really the right place to do reviews and stuff 17:46:31 google doc is what I was using foor the test doc, but it is also not the right place 17:46:35 that's fine. I'll modify it to follow the defcore spec 'style' and put it up there. 17:46:47 jose-idar: sounds good 17:46:57 coolbeans 17:47:03 if it fits nicely there and it is only about what defcore are doing, it belongs there indeed 17:47:25 #action next chair to discuss location of our contributions and whether we should create a project in github 17:47:45 malini: going back to your concern about interest fading 17:47:50 I also have it 17:48:12 but there are a few of us that keep pushing, so I think it is worth it, what do you guys think? 17:48:20 +1 17:48:24 +1 17:48:29 +1 17:48:37 i hope to spend more time starting now 17:48:45 got behind on work stuff a little bit recently 17:48:47 Right now, even a sounding board is good :) 17:48:57 :) 17:49:02 alright, we are good then, rock solid here 17:49:06 let's keep it up 17:49:14 it will come to you gema 17:49:23 you'll see 17:49:28 hehe 17:49:38 so any volunteers for next week's chairing? 17:50:12 ok, I think I can do it, will let you guys know if not and we can reorganise 17:50:20 (on the mailing) 17:50:31 snds fine 17:50:50 anything else in the last 10 mins? 17:51:21 ok, thank you all for coming, as usual! 17:51:28 #endmeeting