15:10:29 <anteaya> #startmeeting third-party
15:10:30 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Sep 12 15:10:29 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is anteaya. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:10:31 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:10:33 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'third_party'
15:10:36 <anteaya> hello hello
15:10:43 <eantyshev> Hello!
15:10:51 <wznoinsk> hi
15:10:53 <anteaya> I don't know why I always seem to get distracted at 2 minutes to 15:00
15:10:56 <anteaya> sorry about that
15:10:59 <anteaya> how are you today?
15:11:22 <eantyshev> Very well, thank you!
15:11:25 <mmedvede> o/
15:11:25 <anteaya> great
15:11:37 <anteaya> does anyone have anything they would like to discuss today?
15:12:27 <anteaya> I'm not hearing any topics folks would like to discuss
15:12:32 <eantyshev> get past of my issues with Jenkins version, having the review for that: https://review.openstack.org/367232
15:12:57 <eantyshev> reviewers welcome, but it is rather trivial
15:13:11 <anteaya> eantyshev: thank you for sharing that
15:14:34 <eantyshev> so my question is: who is the right person to ask for review for puppet changes?
15:14:59 <anteaya> ummmm, well EmilienM is a good puppet person
15:15:09 <anteaya> but he is also very busy
15:15:12 <EmilienM> hello
15:15:15 <anteaya> hey EmilienM
15:15:30 <anteaya> we were just discussing who is a good reviewer for puppet changes
15:15:31 <EmilienM> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/367232/ is about Infra
15:15:42 <EmilienM> I can review it but i'm not the best person
15:15:48 <anteaya> who might be?
15:15:48 <EmilienM> I would rather ask nibalizer
15:15:52 <anteaya> thank you
15:16:24 <anteaya> eantyshev: he isn't around much these days but try to find nibalizer
15:16:32 <eantyshev> thank you, will try
15:16:48 <anteaya> thank you for the patches
15:16:57 <anteaya> anyone have any other comments on eantyshev's patch (and dependency)?
15:18:21 <anteaya> does anyone have any other topic they would like to discuss?
15:19:18 <anteaya> does anyone have any objection to me closing the meeting?
15:19:40 <wznoinsk> I'm just interested is anyone else thinking of switching to using infra's CI suite
15:19:56 <anteaya> from what to what?
15:19:58 <mmedvede> wznoinsk: what do you mean by "infra CI suite"
15:20:21 <wznoinsk> mmedvede: zuul/nodepool
15:21:34 <eantyshev> wznoinsk: I tried to substitute zuul-launcher, but couldn't make it work with any version of JJB, and gave in
15:23:00 <mmedvede> wznoinsk: oh, you mean jenkinsless setup. I am no switching until my back is to the wall :) Just not enough time to be living on the edge, waiting until zuulv3 is somewhat stable
15:23:16 <mordred> yah - the intent from our side is that nobody use zuul 2.5 other than us
15:23:34 <mordred> we did _no_ work to make it usable by other humans - it's a short-term hack to get us out of the woods
15:23:41 <fungi> or rather, that we don't have the bandwidth to support its use
15:23:44 <mordred> yah
15:23:50 <wznoinsk> mmedvede: yes, was wondering whether ppl would go for v3 too
15:24:03 <mordred> now v3 ... that we hope for everyone to use
15:24:05 <fungi> i mean, we won't stop others from trying to use it, but we don't plan for it to be a stable interface since it's being replaced in zuul v3
15:24:10 <mordred> ++
15:24:49 <wznoinsk> I have 2.1.1 and not sure will I switch to the jenkins-less one soon either, it's not  hugely painful atm
15:25:09 <anteaya> wznoinsk: if you have something that works, keep it
15:25:29 <fungi> basically, _we_ needed to stop using jenkins for a variety of reasons (some lingering, some more urgent), so zuul-launcher in zuul 2.5 was the solution for us to be able to do that. but we don't intend to use that solution once zuul v3 is ready (though the solution in v3 has some resemblance to it)
15:25:30 <mmedvede> I can not wait to get off jenkins though :)
15:26:27 <fungi> so in short, if your need to drop jenkins and continue using zuul is urgent, zuul-launcher might also be the answer for you, but... if it breaks you get to keep both pieces
15:27:26 <fungi> it's possible avoiding documenting it wasn't the right way to indicate it's unsupported, and explicitly declaring in documentation that it's an experimental feature we don't plan to retain would have been a little clearer
15:27:56 <wznoinsk> what's the issues with jenkis you see?
15:28:49 <mordred> wznoinsk: stability, security
15:28:58 <mmedvede> not question to me, but I think jenkins is too complicated/heavy for what it is doing.
15:29:27 <mordred> wznoinsk: like, we _cannot_ run jenkins because the webui is unsuitable at this point for directly being on the internet and that's important for us
15:29:46 <mordred> wznoinsk: additionally, over the past few years we've had major issues everytime a security vuln has forced us to upgrade
15:30:13 <mordred> finally, it's just a thing that remotely executes shell scripts for us
15:30:25 <fungi> in particular, lack of sufficient security for running jenkins in the open on the internet and not in an isolated internal network is what pushed us to make zuul-launcher when we did, though being able to stop worrying about twice weekly reboots of all our jenkins masters was nice too
15:30:32 <mordred> and is massive overkill for that task, especially considering its stability and security issues
15:31:51 <mordred> however, it's worth noting that we've been working slowly towards getting rid of jenkins in the system for several years - the recent 2.5 release was really a quick reaction to the escalated security issue, and was largely made possible because we were already close to ready to be done with it anyway
15:32:08 <mordred> so it's not like we had an issue a few months ago and thought completely from scratch "oh, we should replace this" :)
15:32:54 <wznoinsk> yeah, I could imagine being the subject of all the vulnerabilities and changes you get with different jenkins releases compared to the fact what you actually get out of it I can understand why to look into a simpler/own solution
15:33:39 <mordred> wznoinsk: you said that much more succinctly than I did :)
15:34:10 <wznoinsk> ok, it's clear in my head now then, thanks
15:35:39 <mordred> \o/
15:35:42 <anteaya> thank you for asking the question wznoinsk
15:35:58 <anteaya> thanks mordred and fungi for participating on short notice
15:36:40 <anteaya> any more on this topic?
15:37:44 <anteaya> any other topics folks would like to discuss today?
15:38:10 <anteaya> any objection to me closing the meeting today?
15:38:47 <anteaya> thank you all for attending and participating today
15:38:58 <anteaya> enjoy the rest of your day/evening
15:39:03 <anteaya> see you all next week
15:39:07 <anteaya> #endmeeting