21:53:57 #startmeeting third-party 21:53:57 Meeting started Wed Mar 4 21:53:57 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is krtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:53:58 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:54:01 The meeting name has been set to 'third_party' 21:54:47 NOTE: this is a replay from the meeting held earlier today at 1500UTC, in order for it to be logged 21:54:56 hi 21:54:56 morning 21:54:57 hm, no meeting services? 21:54:57 hi 21:54:57 o/ 21:54:57 * patrickeast (~patrick.e@50-205-1-130-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:55:00 we aren't logging for some reason 21:55:02 hm, well I guess I cut/paste the log after the meeting to somewhere 21:55:04 who's here for third-party-ci-wg meeting? :) 21:55:06 o/ 21:55:08 here for 3p 21:55:12 hi 21:55:14 nope, that didnt work either 21:55:16 oh well 21:55:18 o/ 21:55:20 hey everybody 21:55:22 I guess we'll carry on and see about restarting the service later 21:55:24 so, in case it is working, but being silent 21:55:26 here is the link for the agenda 21:55:28 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#3.2F4.2F15_1500_UTC 21:55:30 pretty light agenda today, but we can talk about some of the work being done 21:55:32 no system being highlighted today 21:55:34 let me know if you'd like to share what you are testing and how, problems you fixed, tools you built, etc 21:55:37 I'll get your system scheduled for a future meeting 21:55:39 * hareeshp (hareeshp@nat/cisco/x-qsvcmndsyksqnxtv) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:55:43 any volunteers? 21:55:45 I'd like to present our Intel Networking CI 21:55:47 next meeting (in 2weeks) works for me 21:55:49 wznoinsk, excellent 21:55:51 I'll put you on the agenda 21:55:53 * yamahata (~yamahata@c-67-160-193-250.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:55:55 wznoinsk, have you seen some of the previous highlight discussions? 21:55:57 * yamahata has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 21:55:59 * yamahata (~yamahata@c-67-160-193-250.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:56:01 yes, two and one from patrickeast last time 21:56:03 wznoinsk, great, I'll contact you and answer any questions about format 21:56:05 if there's any formal way of presenting I think we can talk about it after the main topics 21:56:08 good, thanks 21:56:12 I need to create a template for ideas to share, nothing too format 21:56:14 formal 21:56:16 * asselin_ will step away for a few minutes 21:56:18 but some ideas on what would be useful to share with others 21:56:20 I'll review the previous presentation as well again 21:56:22 #action krtaylor to put together a template for highlighting TPWG systems, suggestions for information to share 21:56:25 but basically I'll be focusing on dockerizing the CI as we did 21:56:27 * pkoniszewski has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) 21:56:29 wznoinsk, excellent, I'll put you down 21:56:31 lets move on to the agenda and we can come back to this in open discussion 21:56:33 #topic Third-party CI documentation 21:56:35 so this is moving along, although very slowly 21:56:37 there have been a few patches merge 21:56:39 but more is needed, however, I am not pushing on running-your-own as much anymore with the new openstack-ci changes coming 21:56:44 * david-lyle_afk has quit (Remote host closed the connection) 21:56:46 but we will talk about that in a few minutes 21:56:48 only 3 left in the queue 21:56:50 * asselin_ is back 21:56:52 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:third-party-ci-documentation,n,z 21:56:54 * ChuckC_ (~ccarlino@76-218-11-17.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:56:57 * ChuckC has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 21:56:59 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/149657/ looks pretty ready for >30 days. you said things have been slow. do we have a sense of the bottleneck? 21:57:02 yeah, I've been trying not to annoy infra cores any more than normal and get them approved :) 21:57:05 they will happen, lots of reviews from us will help refine them 21:57:07 smaller chunks instead of TLDR helps too 21:57:09 but, I'll see if I can beg some +2's on them 21:57:13 any questions or volunteers on docs? 21:57:15 this work is kinda in limbo with the new changes coming, IMO 21:57:17 and that is a nice transition... 21:57:19 #topic Spec for in-tree 3rd party ci solution merged 21:57:21 aka openstack-ci 21:57:23 krtaylor, I agree we should ask them to review. These should be merged and changed again later if necessary 21:57:26 agreed 21:57:28 krtaylor, we can send them the gerrit topic 21:57:30 * pmesserli (~pmesserli@50.56.229.5) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:57:32 yeah, and I think that will wrap up the documentation effort for a while, prob post summit 21:57:35 * ChuckC_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 21:57:37 yes, openstack-ci "in tree" spec merged on monday. 21:57:39 asselin_, anything you want to say on the spec merge? 21:57:43 * lennyb_ (c12fa5fb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.193.47.165.251) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:57:45 yes, great news 21:57:47 gerrit topic is changing to puppet-downstream 21:57:49 Hello 21:57:51 hm, I thought is got changed back yesterday 21:57:53 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:+downstream-puppet,n,z 21:57:55 I mean, downstream-puppet 21:57:57 krtaylor, no, we'll have one topic for the 2 related specs. 21:57:59 * krtaylor thought it was decided to be openstack-ci 21:58:01 the puppet module name will be that 21:58:03 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2015/infra.2015-03-03-19.01.txt 21:58:05 whatever, I don't have a strong feeling either way (not a fan of downstream) as long as it stops changing :) 21:58:08 krtaylor, agree. 21:58:12 * openstack (~openstack@eavesdrop.openstack.org) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:58:15 * openstack has quit (Changing host) 21:58:16 * openstack (~openstack@openstack/openstack) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:58:18 * ChanServ gives channel operator status to openstack 21:58:20 krtaylor, for reviewers, it's easier to use one topic for the 2 specs since they're related. 21:58:23 * rhe00 (~IceChat9@207.250.72.10) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:58:25 asselin_, yes, I was just referring to "19:27:44 actually the spec said "openstackci" as a topic" 21:58:28 whatever, good to clarify here 21:58:30 so, we can start working on it now. First we'll create the new repo, and I'll add some tasks to storyboard 21:58:33 anyway, what is the plan to move forward, how can we help 21:58:35 ok, good 21:58:37 ppl can self-assign from there so we don't duplicate effort 21:58:40 agreed 21:58:43 * b3rnard0 (~b3rnard0@2001:4802:7800:1:adbb:e94c:ff20:c30) has left #openstack-meeting-4 ("Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com") 21:58:46 do we have a sense of when it would be usable by someone starting from scratch? 21:58:48 similar to what we did with puppet-module split out 21:58:50 #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 21:58:52 * ajmiller (~ajmiller@74.202.214.170) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 21:58:54 e.g. would we tell someone about to start building a new one to wait 'n' weeks, or proceed now 21:58:57 target liberty I would assume? 21:59:00 not much yet. I'll populate some items today. Anyone can add stuff too FYI 21:59:02 there's no target...it's a priority effort 21:59:04 krtaylor, but honestly, it would be great to be done by the liberty summit... 21:59:06 well as with puppet-module, use us for help 21:59:08 thats aggressive...but maybe doable 21:59:10 asselin_, if not a hack day there would be good too 21:59:14 krtaylor, yes, we'll probably use that. it was very effective. 21:59:16 agreed, the Friday mini sprint is very cool, nice to have everyone in one room 21:59:18 after we get a few patches going, we can do a sprint to review and get pieces merged 21:59:21 oh, I was talking about at summit 21:59:23 but a virtual sprint would be effective too 21:59:25 * evgenyf has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 21:59:27 yes, maybe after kilo releases during the downtime. in case there are riskier changes 21:59:30 agreed, this is the start of really doing something to improve the consumables 21:59:32 I encourage everyone to get involved in this 21:59:34 ok, anything esle you want to mention asselin_ ? 21:59:36 not on this topic 21:59:38 ok, onward then 21:59:40 #topic Repo for third party tools 21:59:44 I have not made any progress on this, this week 21:59:46 day job keeps getting in the way 21:59:48 but, I plan on returning to this today/tomorrow 21:59:50 * galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom 21:59:52 here is the etherpad 21:59:54 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/third-party-ci-wg-repo 21:59:56 there is some good ideas there 21:59:58 I am leaning toward starting slower, after thinking about it for a while 22:00:00 I think having an index of tools would be a good start 22:00:02 then we can see what we have and maybe better organize 22:00:04 i like that idea 22:00:06 this can also come out of the system highlight discussions 22:00:08 also, it gives us a way to collect up some tools and see how many we are talking about 22:00:13 if we only have a few that companies are willing to share, then not worth the effort 22:00:16 an index into individual github accounts would be great and serve the intent of why we are doing this in the first place 22:00:19 please share any thoughts in the etherpad, I will too 22:00:21 will do 22:00:23 any questions on this? 22:00:25 next then 22:00:27 #topic What to do with monitoring dashboard 22:00:29 is sweston around? 22:00:31 there has been some discussion on this 22:00:33 I have been thinking about it too 22:00:35 it seems that what everyone wanted was to get the previous dashboard (now radar) working again 22:00:38 it kind of looks like the spec hasn�t really moved forward in a while 22:00:40 yeah 22:00:44 oh 22:00:46 i showed this at the monday meeting 22:00:48 for anyone who missed that one http://ec2-54-67-102-119.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com:5000/?project=openstack%2Fcinder&user=&timeframe=24 22:00:51 i put together a lame little dash 22:00:52 not lame, excellent tool 22:00:54 the original intent was that i can�t see when zuul reports a failure (only jenkins) so i wanted to monitor the event stream 22:00:57 cool! 22:00:59 but i let it watch all the ci accounts 22:01:01 still has some serious perf issues 22:01:03 needs more than a weekend of abuse to get working 22:01:05 yeah, and it just needs some historical stats to be exactly what we need 22:01:07 * asselin_ likes it 22:01:09 imo its a different solution than what sweston�s spec was aiming for 22:01:13 patrickeast, did you ever see the radar tool working? 22:01:15 no control, no stats, trends 22:01:17 nope, before my time 22:01:18 krtaylor: yes, I am here 22:01:19 https://github.com/patrick-east/scoreboard 22:01:21 ^ thats the source for it if anyone wants to run it for themselves 22:01:23 the ec2 thing that test one is running on sucks 22:01:25 works better on a local machine with a little more network bandwidth 22:01:27 easily modified to only watch your ci account and jenkins 22:01:29 * asselin_ notes his ci needs some work 22:01:31 asselin: hehe its a harsh judge, if 1/5 of your tests fail it marks the ci as a fail 22:01:34 radar - it was simple gauges that showed the percentages of passed, failed, skipped tests for each ci system and upstream jenkins 22:01:37 ahh gotcha 22:01:39 it was a set sample, I believe it was 30 days 22:01:43 did it query gerrit or just track events? 22:01:45 or both 22:01:47 gathered and presented, but the urls changed for CI systems and it broke 22:01:49 it was kinda hacky, but worked fine 22:01:51 problem is that we don't have a master list of CI systems anymore 22:01:53 well, with a little bit of work i can add those kind of stats to this dash if folks are interested 22:01:56 except the maillist one 22:01:58 i basically record the gerrit events in the db and can do whatever with em 22:02:00 I made a small script to monitor last N Jenkins JObs to see if they failed. can it help you ? 22:02:03 jhesketh and I discussed using his gathering backend at paris summit 22:02:05 lennyb_: do you mean jenkins like the infra jenkins account posting on gerrit or a jenkins server in general? 22:02:08 * ChuckC_ (~ccarlino@15.219.162.26) has joined #openstack-meeting-4 22:02:10 #link https://github.com/Triniplex/third-party-ci-dashboard 22:02:14 patrickeast, FYI^^ 22:02:15 krtaylor: can you catch me up? I have been busy with investors all day 22:02:16 I think that part is fairly easy, getting the list of systems to monitor, harder 22:02:18 patrickeast, Jenkins server in general 22:02:20 asselin_: oh nice, thanks! 22:02:22 #link http://dashboard.triniplex.com/#!/ 22:02:24 sweston had it running here, but I don't see anything now ^^ 22:02:26 actually #link https://github.com/stackforge/radar 22:02:28 lennyb_: gotcha, i was looking to catch events a bit further down the chain when comments are added to gerrit, i noticed that for my ci it would sometimes report things like NOT_REGISTERED or just ERROR from zuul and jenkins would never even know it happend 22:02:32 the requirement was to have a place where a developer (core) could go see if a system was behaving 22:02:35 this just came up with a patch that failed on a system, but was ignored and merged anyway 22:02:38 mainly because ci systems are not seen as reliable 22:02:40 yea its a problem in cinder right now 22:02:44 patrickeast: listening to stream event using ssh may be more reliable 22:02:46 if someone could check if it was reliable, then its report could be trusted if a patch comment showed a failure 22:02:49 wznoinsk: yep, the scoreboard thing does just that with paramiko 22:02:51