17:00:16 #startmeeting third-party 17:00:16 Meeting started Tue Jun 23 17:00:16 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is krtaylor. 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 'third_party' 17:00:44 Who's here for the Third Party CI Working Group meeting? 17:00:49 o/ 17:00:56 o/ 17:01:36 hey patrickeast , mmedvede 17:01:36 o/ 17:01:45 hi marcusvrn 17:01:53 asselin, around? 17:02:15 o/ 17:02:24 hey asselin 17:02:27 hi 17:02:31 thanks everyone for joining 17:02:46 I was hoping that a few would find the new time :) 17:03:08 this is a more convenient time for me 17:03:19 I'll continue to send out email reminders too 17:03:21 excellent 17:03:24 for me too 17:03:32 +1 17:03:42 it was hard to find a time that did not conflict with cinder or neutron 17:03:56 lots of metings 17:03:59 and meetings 17:04:33 so, please spread the word, hopefully this time will agree with more people 17:04:48 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#6.2F23.2F15_1700_UTC 17:04:55 there's the link for todays agenda 17:06:18 #topic Common CI virtual sprint 17:06:32 asselin, your up first, do you have any thing to discuss for the sprint 17:06:44 you're 17:06:56 just requesting review os zuul patches: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet+owner:%22Fabien+Boucher+%253Cfabien.boucher%2540enovance.com%253E%22+status:open,n,z 17:07:26 fbo has been working on them. I'd like to prioritize these reviews so we can merge this one next 17:07:41 fbo_, ping if you're around 17:08:36 goal is to get as much done before the sprint, so we can really finish then 17:08:45 then=during the sprint 17:09:00 sounds like a good plan 17:09:11 the etherpad is listed in the agenda 17:09:38 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/common-ci-sprint 17:09:44 for completeness 17:09:52 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet+owner:%22Fabien+Boucher+%253Cfabien.boucher%2540enovance.com%253E%22+status:open,n,z 17:09:54 mmedvede, I see you ave reviewed some 17:10:29 yes, I did, but I need to do more. I have actually been using some patches for our deploy 17:10:41 mmedvede, wow nice 17:10:51 can anyone else review? 17:11:02 * krtaylor takes a look 17:11:38 I can try it, I review the code, but I need to test in my deploy to ensure that's working 17:11:44 ctlaugh_ said he's interested 17:12:12 marcusvrn, +1 17:12:14 marcusvrn: exactly my sentiment, I do reviews after I test them manually 17:12:31 I did not look into beaker testing yet 17:12:56 I have a question, there's a simple way to pull the code and test it manually in a current deploy? 17:13:47 current deploy (zuul installed by asselin's scripts) 17:13:50 marcusvrn, i've been pulling them manually in my /etc/puppet/modules/ 17:14:09 e.g. /etc/puppet/modules/openstackci 17:14:17 asselin: hmmm nice 17:14:23 * krtaylor googles beaker 17:14:31 sudo git checkout....fetch_head copied link from gerrit 17:15:04 marcusvrn, also used this approach: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/169117/ 17:15:42 asselin: excellent 17:16:16 hm, beaker looks interesting 17:17:08 asselin, anything else that you need help with pre-sprint? 17:17:17 krtaylor, http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/puppet-module-functional-testing.html 17:17:34 that's the spek for testing puppet modules ^^ 17:17:45 krtaylor, no 17:18:18 ah, that ties it together, thanks 17:18:29 #link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/puppet-module-functional-testing.html 17:18:45 any questions for asselin about the sprint? 17:19:10 next topic then 17:19:15 #topic Move spec to third-party-ci-tools repo 17:19:36 I didn't work on this partially because I wanted to get the spec done first 17:20:20 so just to clarify, there are 2 specs now 17:20:51 there really isn't a precedent for moving a spec to a different project, but we'll try to do it a seamlessly as possible 17:21:12 yes, one for hosting, one for the complete monitoring solution 17:21:17 asselin, ^^^ 17:21:25 yeah...looking for links 17:22:00 asselin, they are both in the agenda 17:22:01 in agenda :) 17:22:05 yes :) 17:23:10 ok, so I'm thinking I'll create a specs dir and copy sweston 's monitoring solution spec into it as-is 17:23:18 then we can work it there 17:23:41 then I'll ask sweston to abandon that one 17:23:54 any questions? 17:23:57 if you keep the change id, will gerrit move it? 17:24:08 I was wondering that 17:24:18 didn't have a chance to look into it 17:24:48 sweston's tired ears perked up ... krtaylor I'll work with you on this 17:25:00 sweston, hey 17:25:10 krtaylor: hello!! 17:25:14 thanks, asselin makes a good point 17:25:31 I think he is right 17:25:38 maybe you can just git add the spec to the new location 17:25:46 and keep all the history 17:26:11 that would be much preferred IMHO 17:26:58 sweston, let me know when would be a good time, I'll be happy to help with that process 17:27:10 I think gerrit patchsets have project associated with it in the db, so not sure that would work without direct db editing 17:27:35 krtaylor: ok, I think I will test it out on my gerrit server first, then move forward 17:28:05 mmedvede, I know you can add a file in an --amend 17:28:08 yeah...if there's an issue, git review would likely complain similar to updating an abandoned patch... 17:28:24 oh, the change id is associated with a project? 17:28:28 oh 17:28:40 ok, that might force the other way then 17:29:05 ok, either way, we'll get it done this week 17:29:24 sweston, thanks for looking at that, I know you are busy 17:29:32 anything elase on this? 17:29:36 else 17:29:39 k, we'll let everyone know how it shakes out, knowledge is good 17:29:51 * krtaylor can't type today 17:30:02 sweston, perfect 17:30:23 krtaylor: no worries, good to do something else than kernel drivers for a few minutes ;-) 17:30:35 ok, next then is 17:30:39 #topic Spec to have infra host scoreboard 17:30:56 I finished a rough draft here: 17:31:06 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/194437/ 17:31:21 I would really appreciate reviews and comments 17:31:55 krtaylor, is it will WIP? 17:32:00 still * 17:32:03 it is modeled after the codesearch hosting spec from fungi 17:32:13 asselin, yes, I marked it WIP 17:32:58 * fungi is not sure it's wise to copy from his specs. do so at your own risk ;) 17:33:23 fungi, it was very complete! 17:33:39 fungi, I really liked it... 17:33:59 anyway, I'd like to get some reviews done on it before allowing it to be considered for merge 17:34:28 I had some questions marked in the spec 17:34:54 should we have a storyboard story? 17:35:06 krtaylor, yes we should 17:35:16 it makes sense 17:35:34 storyboard migraton spec will copy over 17:35:52 ok, I'll take that as a todo 17:36:30 #action krtaylor to create dashboard hosting story and revise the spec 17:37:04 also, it would be good to have a primary assignee 17:37:14 I am open to suggestions :) 17:37:39 I listed me there, and I don't mind doing it, just open to anyone else driving it 17:38:46 * krtaylor imagines everyone else taking one step back 17:39:09 ok, I'll drive it then 17:39:28 at least for now 17:39:33 krtaylor, some other people might be interested just not present here now 17:40:31 krtaylor: what should primary assignee do? 17:40:35 asselin, true, I'll be happy to hand over at some future date 17:41:00 krtaylor, also once the tasks are in storyboard it's easier to divide and conquer 17:41:01 s/do/does 17:41:09 marcusvrn, it's the person responsible for making sure it happens, including patches, docs, etc 17:41:18 asselin, good point 17:41:37 any questions about the content of the spec 17:41:55 has anyone read it yet? :) 17:42:13 * asselin read draft 1 :) 17:42:47 krtaylor: I got it. I'll read it after this meeting 17:42:53 pretty straight forward, new vm, spin up apache with puppet to serve it 17:42:56 sry was afk for a few min 17:43:01 * patrickeast looking at spec now 17:43:07 patrickeast, no worries 17:43:52 I have only skimmed it 17:44:31 not sure we can review it section by section in 15 mins left 17:44:53 so, I'll ask everyone to go through it carefully and comment please 17:45:01 will do 17:45:07 +1 17:45:08 its a chance to increase your negative reviews :) 17:45:13 krtaylor: +1 17:46:10 once it gets a few reviews and corrected, I'll take the WIP off 17:46:30 and, if it needs, I can discuss at an infra meeting 17:46:50 any questions about the hosting spec? 17:47:12 else onward 17:47:21 #topic Open Discussion 17:47:30 so I'll open the floor 17:48:23 any thoughts on how to increase the involvement in these meetings? 17:48:45 that was my todo from summit 17:49:09 weekly reminders to openstack-dev, check, what else? 17:49:12 free cookies? 17:49:15 hehheh 17:49:19 hahaha 17:49:53 I need to get more teams to come and tell us about their system, I think that has been a big success 17:50:09 krtaylor, +1 17:50:10 yea thats a good way to get others involved 17:50:10 we've only done a handfull of those 17:50:16 those are great 17:50:21 we could just go down the list of ci systems and reach out 17:50:32 asking them to talk to us 17:50:32 patrickeast, exactly 17:50:50 +1 17:51:00 maybe in the cinder channel which CI is "new" and too many teams are working on it 17:51:40 marcusvrn, I agree that a lot of teams are new and using all their time to get it running 17:52:31 but there is a lot of benefit of using that tension to better what we have, a huge part of that is the influence we have made on the common-ci effort 17:53:16 * krtaylor applauds asselin 17:53:36 thanks 17:53:46 but it is a common theme that teams don't have time to do anything "extra" 17:53:59 krtaylor: yep... 17:54:27 not sure how we can fix that, except to help the teams explain to their management that this is a big commitment 17:54:50 much bigger than anyone realizes just starting out 17:55:11 krtaylor: that what I did.....It was not easy....hehehe 17:55:20 yes....that's why common ci is so important....waste less effort reinventing the wheel and chasing bugs 17:55:50 asselin, agreed, and with the TPCIWG repo, we can also share everything else 17:56:20 now we just need to get more involvement, with 100+ teams it is bizarre that we have 5 or so regulars 17:57:01 * krtaylor gets off his soapbox 17:57:12 anything else in the last few minutes? 17:57:42 i do...one sec 17:57:55 hello 17:58:06 please take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/192819/ 17:58:14 * krtaylor looks 17:58:16 Add the ability to abort jobs on a patch merge 17:58:26 #link Add the ability to abort jobs on a patch merge https://review.openstack.org/#/c/192819/ 17:58:38 asselin, yes, good patch, I'll comment 17:59:06 thanks 17:59:11 asselin: that's really interesting... I'll review it too 17:59:12 On the question of getting people involved, a "how-to" document can go a long way. 18:00:13 peristeri, can you elaborate in -infra? 18:00:13 that's all for today, thanks everyone! 18:00:28 #endmeeting