18:01:23 <krtaylor> #startmeeting third-party 18:01:24 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Dec 22 18:01:23 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is krtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:01:25 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:01:27 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'third_party' 18:01:48 <sweston> o/ 18:01:48 <krtaylor> anyone around for third-party work? 18:01:53 <krtaylor> hey sweston 18:01:57 <asselin> o/ 18:02:02 <sweston> hello krtaylor 18:02:05 <krtaylor> hi asselin 18:02:07 <asselin> hi 18:02:24 <krtaylor> didn't know if we'd have anyone today :) 18:02:41 <dougwig> o/ 18:02:42 <sweston> yup, should be a quiet week 18:02:53 <asselin> I checked the agenda and saw we had one, so here I am :) 18:03:03 <krtaylor> I did create an agenda, but I'm not actively driving things this week 18:03:11 <krtaylor> yeah, I debated calling this one 18:03:51 <krtaylor> so welcome everyone, this might be a quick one 18:04:01 <dougwig> i've got one announcement/item. 18:04:07 <krtaylor> cool, one sec 18:04:22 <krtaylor> get the meeting agenda underway 18:04:25 <krtaylor> #topic Welcome & Reminder of OpenStack Mission 18:04:34 <krtaylor> #info The OpenStack Open Source Cloud Mission: to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being simple to implement and massively scalable. 18:04:51 <krtaylor> although, this grew is prob very aware of the OpenSTack Mission 18:05:15 <krtaylor> and here is the agenda for completeness 18:05:17 <krtaylor> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#12.2F22.2F14 18:06:02 <krtaylor> #topic Review of previous week's open action items 18:06:08 <krtaylor> no previous action items 18:06:17 <krtaylor> #topic Announcements 18:06:30 <krtaylor> so on to you dougwig 18:06:35 <dougwig> heya 18:06:55 <dougwig> the neutron services split broke a lot of CIs. that work is now complete, and if your CI hasn't recovered, it'll need manual intervention. contact me if you have any trouble. 18:07:06 <dougwig> that's it from me. 18:07:11 <krtaylor> yeah, saw that 18:07:16 <krtaylor> thanks dougwig 18:07:25 <krtaylor> any questions from anyone? 18:07:28 <patrickeast> dougwig: what were the symptoms of the problems? 18:07:28 <ja_> I have a question on the community CI system: is its current sizing/config info listed anywhere on the wiki/etc? I'm trying to rough-size one for z/VM. 18:07:58 <krtaylor> ja_, why don't we table that for the open discussion 18:08:15 <dougwig> they use 8GB/4 cores for slaves, though if you're not testing swift, you can get away with 4GB/1 core. 18:08:17 <dougwig> oops. :) 18:08:26 <ja_> ah; I took the 'any questions' to mean we were there; np to wait 18:08:30 <krtaylor> heh, np 18:08:41 <krtaylor> yes, I should have been specific 18:09:44 <krtaylor> dougwig, did you see patrickeast 's question? 18:10:50 <dougwig> no, thank you. patrickeast: tempest tests related to services will bomb. if you're using devstack or devstack-gate, it should auto-recover, else you need to manually install the three new repos. 18:10:59 <krtaylor> it was problems testing LBaaS FWaaS and VPNaaS 18:11:13 <patrickeast> ah ok, thanks 18:11:36 <krtaylor> there was a patch too 140864 18:12:20 <dougwig> the final devstack patch is still out: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141873/ 18:12:32 <dougwig> though since no one has new db models yet, it's not fatal. 18:12:43 <krtaylor> good info 18:13:06 <krtaylor> anything else for dougwig? 18:13:35 <krtaylor> ok, next announcement was just a reminder that service account creation is now self service 18:13:47 <krtaylor> the description is here: 18:13:51 <krtaylor> link# http://ci.openstack.org/third_party.html#creating-a-service-account 18:14:25 <krtaylor> I have not heard any grumblings about that, it seems to be a great success 18:15:03 <krtaylor> #topic OpenStack Program items 18:15:52 <krtaylor> next was just a reminder for the forming of the CI doc subgroup 18:16:10 <krtaylor> sign up here: 18:16:15 <krtaylor> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/third-party-ci-documentation 18:16:34 <krtaylor> I'll get that going after the new year 18:18:12 <krtaylor> also wanted to mention that omrim_ and nuritv have pushed out a FAQ patch to kick it off 18:18:26 <sweston> woot 18:18:27 <krtaylor> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141817 18:18:36 <krtaylor> reviews please 18:19:14 <krtaylor> next is the monitoring dashboard spec, lots of activity there 18:19:24 <krtaylor> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135170 18:19:43 <sweston> yup, thanks everyone for your reviews 18:19:44 <krtaylor> sweston, did you want to comment on that 18:20:07 <sweston> if we have time during open discussion, I'd like to discuss a few of the issues 18:20:23 <krtaylor> sweston, will do 18:20:25 <sweston> also, an update .. I've been busy refactoring the application to split out the api service from the web client. 18:20:40 <krtaylor> oh, good 18:20:48 <sweston> I have implemented the web client in angularjs, and implemented the rest api with pecan/wsme. 18:21:00 <sweston> I will be finished with that this week. 18:21:30 <sweston> I am still waiting on review permissions on the stackforge repo, however. 18:21:35 <krtaylor> ok, I'll hit the review again and read about it 18:21:45 <krtaylor> sweston, for radar? 18:21:52 <sweston> yes 18:22:26 <krtaylor> hm, ok, well, maybe it is time for a new project, or split into parts like jhesketh suggested 18:22:30 <sweston> so until I have the proper permissions, I will continue to update the github repo 18:22:54 <krtaylor> maybe part of the solution could use radar, I'd hate to block this dropping 18:23:18 <sweston> mikal did get back to me last week with an answer, saying that I could use the repo 18:23:38 <krtaylor> sweston, hopefully it is just a holiday thing, we'll make faster progress after the new year I expect 18:23:57 <sweston> krtaylor: ok, fingers crossed 18:24:15 <sweston> I will ping him again next week if I haven't heard anything 18:24:23 <sweston> that's all I have 18:24:29 <krtaylor> he may be on holiday 18:24:36 <krtaylor> ok, thanks again sweston 18:24:44 <sweston> krtaylor: you're welcome :-) 18:25:18 <krtaylor> next up is starting to socialize the idea of dividing up the meeting times into a Mentoring time for new CI teams 18:25:39 <krtaylor> and a work group time for getting patches reviewed, and docs and other work done 18:25:47 <krtaylor> kinda what I have been doing here 18:26:09 <krtaylor> there is a need for both, and our mission has included both 18:26:17 <krtaylor> might be time to split that up 18:26:26 <dougwig> i think the division is great, but do we really have three hours of content per week? 18:27:01 <asselin> the mentoring times is really for ppl to get together online and ask questions 18:27:03 <krtaylor> dougwig, short answer is no, at least not for the work group part 18:27:35 <asselin> (the way I understand it) 18:27:41 <krtaylor> yes as asselin said, the idea of the Mentoring time is like for office hours, open questions 18:28:02 <krtaylor> helping teams get started, bootstrapping CI is difficult 18:28:35 <krtaylor> it is times when infra folks will be available for questions about infra components and how it all works 18:28:42 <dougwig> is that something we could setup on-demand somehow? i'm happy to help people setup, but the current proposal is a larger meeting time commitment than active devs give even to neutron itself. 18:28:56 <asselin> any reason why this current time is not kept for the workgroup? 18:29:28 <krtaylor> asselin, the feedback I got was that the curent Monday time doesnt work for several people 18:29:57 <krtaylor> and, we want to make the work group time accessible for more people world wide 18:30:15 <krtaylor> the mid-day time is really only good for US 18:30:49 <krtaylor> dougwig, to your point, there is not enough content for the working group 18:31:09 <krtaylor> only one weekly meeting, at alternating times 18:31:36 <krtaylor> those times are being decided in an online poll at: 18:31:48 <krtaylor> #link https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=21b93c 18:33:13 <krtaylor> dougwig, the other Mentoring times are for on-demand questions from new teams and operators 18:33:36 <krtaylor> I will edit the wiki in the next week or so and make this more clear 18:33:57 <krtaylor> we'll try this new format in the new year 18:34:22 <krtaylor> starting it now doesnt make much sense, we'll just confuse a lot of folks 18:34:45 <krtaylor> but I want to give everyone a heads up that it is coming 18:35:14 <ja__> thinking out loud: will there be some place where mentoring questions could be added (e.g. another mtg agenda)? if so, people could also put (the beginnings of) answers there. 18:35:36 <ja__> ...I'm thinking of a question queue for the mentoring mtg 18:35:52 <asselin> ja__ +1 18:35:56 <krtaylor> ja_, that's a great idea 18:36:06 <ja__> ... my assumption would be, if there's a chair, that they'd chunk together adjacent topics 18:36:12 <krtaylor> I'll add that to the agenda 18:36:38 <krtaylor> ja_, yes and it will help infra folks assemble the right people to answer the question 18:36:50 <ja__> is there a specific cutover date for the new mtg schedule? 18:37:14 <krtaylor> ja_, I am thinking I'll get it started the first week of Jan 18:37:19 <reed> ja__, one place to ask question is https://ask.openstack.org, we can build FAQs there 18:37:29 <krtaylor> voting has slowed down, so that seems like a good time 18:37:35 <dougwig> i wonder if a third-party discuss mailing list wouldn't fill a lot of this need without another meeting. right now we have -announce or the infra mailing list, neither of which is terribly friendly to newbie questions. 18:38:06 <krtaylor> re: FAQ, yes, and we will have a section in the new third-party ci doc too 18:38:08 <reed> dougwig, what's unfriendly about those? 18:38:33 <dougwig> heh, i knew someone would call me on using that word. :) 18:38:42 <krtaylor> dougwig, typically we have wanted to use -infra 18:38:44 <reed> krtaylor, I encourage you to experiment with ask.openstack.org because that place gets lots of search engine traffic 18:38:47 <dougwig> not unfriendly, per se, just the wrong forum, which is always pointed out. 18:38:58 <ja__> dougwig, by a [new] list do you mean a [third-party] or similar subject tag? 18:39:21 <reed> dougwig, I'm just curious :) 18:39:28 <asselin> +1 for an 'official' tag and use -dev mailing list 18:39:42 <dougwig> new ML or a standardized tag, sure. 18:39:44 <krtaylor> dougwig, -announce isnt the place for questions, it is for letting ci accounts know something from infra core 18:39:46 <reed> ja__, tags assume that new people know a) tags exist b) they know/learn how to use them 18:40:10 <krtaylor> the official tag is [third-party] 18:40:20 <krtaylor> we agreed to that a long time ago 18:40:30 <asselin> krtaylor, link? 18:40:43 <dougwig> is there a reason that isn't getting the setup question traffic, then? 18:40:56 <krtaylor> asselin, not within reach atm 18:41:19 <reed> asselin, http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev 18:41:20 <ja__> reed, fair enough. I'm not yet sure of the temp in this community. In some I've been in the answer would be "smack 'm until they use the right tag" i.e. untagged questions would be largely ignored if only because "everyone" filters on them programmatically in their email clients. 18:41:20 <asselin> krtaylor, perhaps an action then to make sure it's easy to find 18:41:38 <krtaylor> asselin, agreed, good for doc patch 18:42:09 <reed> ja__, that's why I suggest using Ask OpenStack also, in addition to email which requires a steeper learning curve 18:42:42 <ja__> fwiw I spent much of last half of last week scouring pages and never ran into the [third-party] ... which surprised me 18:42:52 <reed> asselin, the topics on mailing lists are hard to find, it's a fact of (mailman) life 18:42:54 <asselin> reed, didn't find the tags there...and don't remember my pw 18:43:06 <reed> asselin, that's your answer then :) 18:43:16 <asselin> :) 18:43:30 <reed> the official topics for the mailing lists are in the mailman options page 18:44:20 <krtaylor> re: tags, I added a mention to the doc etherpad 18:44:33 <krtaylor> asselin, I agree, we can make that more clear 18:45:08 <krtaylor> ja_, your input on how to fix this as you are coming up to speed will be invaluable 18:45:16 <ja__> @reed, try google on "openstack mailman options" and see if it's in the first result page - I'm not seeing it 18:46:15 <krtaylor> I think a FAQ in ci docs would get a lot of use 18:46:30 <ja__> krtaylor, you'll find I'm a good tester. lots of jokes about that in my old groups. former officemate used to call me into her new office to watch her screen so things would start working (rather than failing in front of me so I could debug them) 18:46:45 <reed> ja__, I put a link before: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev 18:46:52 <asselin> btw, I got in and there's no tag for thrid party 18:46:59 <krtaylor> ja_, hehheh 18:47:33 <krtaylor> asselin, you got in where? 18:47:36 <reed> ah! krtaylor there is no topic for [third-party] on openstack-dev 18:47:47 <asselin> krtaylor, http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev 18:47:59 <reed> which confirms the kumbersomeness of those things :) 18:48:06 * reed invents words 18:48:08 <ja__> reed, then I misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were saying that your link showed the valid [tags]... not a login screen. 18:48:15 <krtaylor> not formalized ever, convention 18:48:32 <asselin> krtaylor, ok, convention :) 18:48:49 <krtaylor> if someone wants to formalize that, get after it! 18:48:55 <krtaylor> that would be extremely cool 18:49:10 <krtaylor> and I am not married to third-party either 18:49:18 <krtaylor> but it is what we have been using 18:49:48 <asselin> I'm fine with convention. Let's just make it more visible in docs, meeting page, etc 18:49:49 <krtaylor> external testing, 3rd party, lots of options were discussed 18:49:49 <reed> I have added [third-party] as a topic 18:50:03 <krtaylor> excellent 18:50:14 <reed> #info [third-party] is now a topic on openstack-dev mailing list. http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev 18:50:19 <asselin> reed, awesome! 18:50:35 <krtaylor> that is fantastic, thanks reed ! 18:50:50 <reed> asselin, don't get too excited: topics are hard to use, I don't know how many people use them. 18:50:55 <asselin> ok, now that's it's official, we still need to make it more visible :) 18:51:06 <krtaylor> every little bit helps 18:51:06 <asselin> reed, don't worry, I get that very well :) 18:51:11 <sweston> asselin: +100 18:51:15 <reed> it will help people who sign up for the first time, they may see third-party in the full list of topics... that's it 18:51:29 <krtaylor> we can keep chipping away at it, someday we'll have an easy button :) 18:51:36 <ja__> ala the old dilbert: [the code is done] TPHB: Now all we need is that Plan. 18:51:53 <krtaylor> hehheh 18:52:28 <krtaylor> anything else on that? 18:52:33 <krtaylor> 8 minutes 18:52:47 <asselin> well...I'm interested int he ask.openstack.org idea 18:53:13 <krtaylor> and links to and from that in the doc 18:53:59 <krtaylor> noted in doc etherpad 18:54:01 <reed> asselin, https://ask.openstack.org/en/questions/ :) 18:54:25 <reed> anyone with high enough karma can edit questions and re-tag them 18:54:32 <asselin> might be a good tool for these kind of questions 18:55:02 <reed> so if you have a pool of people moderating and adding tags you can crate a live FAQ 18:55:23 <reed> s/crate/create 18:55:27 <krtaylor> ok, I'm going to skip protocol and jump to Open Discussion, we are there anyway :) 18:55:41 <krtaylor> #topic Open Discussion 18:55:43 <asselin> I can start to monitor. play around with it. 18:55:55 <krtaylor> me too 18:56:02 <asselin> I have 1 karma :) 18:56:10 <reed> asselin, https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Community/AskModerators to get started 18:56:21 <krtaylor> nice 18:56:32 <reed> #info to get started with Ask OpenStack https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Community/AskModerators and https://ask.openstack.org/faq 18:56:56 <ja__> bookmark to get back to sizing question we tabled earlier 18:57:11 <reed> #info the idea is for moderators to be brutal and edit questions radically so that they can be re-used in the future by others with similar issues 18:57:25 <krtaylor> ja_, sure, we can mix topics, what was the question 18:57:28 <sweston> interesting 18:57:40 <reed> #info edit the questions and answers down so that they represent 1 single problem with at least 1 possible correct solution 18:58:00 <reed> that's the basic :) 18:58:01 <krtaylor> reed, and used in docs FAQ 18:58:28 <reed> krtaylor, exactly, the principle should be so that you can re-use the content 18:58:29 * krtaylor needs to go play around with this 18:58:38 <ja__> I'm trying to rough-size a 3rd party CI sys for zvm. The more I know about the size/shape of what the community system (realizing it's x86) is using, since that meets the wg's SLA, more accurate I can be. 18:58:42 <reed> ideally embedding the live documents, not copying it over (too much work) 18:59:24 <ja__> ...earlier dougwig said [with swift] 8GB+4 cores, [without] 4+1 ... how much disk, and how many slaves do you average (or set, if it's constrained) 18:59:39 <krtaylor> ja_, we have similar problem with PowerKVM 19:00:00 <notmyname> questions around thrid party swift QA testing? 19:00:08 <krtaylor> ja_, its a tough question because we are a new environment, not just testing a driver 19:00:14 <dougwig> i use 40GB disks on slaves (steady state is 20GB, much more with cinder), and I have 2 slaves during off-times, 3-4 during crunch. 19:00:27 <krtaylor> we can move this discussion, we are out of time 19:00:36 <krtaylor> move to -infra or -dev? 19:00:37 <ja__> krtaylor, figured that. that's why I call mine a rough sizing. 19:00:56 <dougwig> ja__: for neutron, plan on running ~12 jobs/hour during crunch time. 19:00:56 <krtaylor> thanks everyone, another great meeting! 19:00:59 <dougwig> bye 19:01:03 <sweston> thanks everyone 19:01:13 <krtaylor> #endmeeting