18:00:34 #startmeeting trove 18:00:35 Meeting started Wed Apr 13 18:00:34 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is amrith. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:36 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:38 The meeting name has been set to 'trove' 18:00:56 o/ 18:00:58 o/ 18:01:00 o/ 18:01:01 ./ 18:01:05 hello folks 18:01:07 ☺/ 18:01:21 o/ 18:01:27 o/ 18:01:39 ./ 18:01:40 o/ 18:01:45 johnma told me that she wouldn't be able to make it to the meeting 18:02:03 and yet here she is :) 18:02:09 o/ 18:02:09 i am here though :) 18:02:09 i know 18:02:15 just for the meeting 18:02:21 cool, thanks johnma 18:02:30 let's get started. 18:02:35 o/ 18:02:41 o/ 18:02:43 meeting agenda is at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TroveMeeting 18:02:45 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TroveMeeting 18:02:53 #topic Trove pulse update 18:03:00 #link http://bit.ly/1VQyg00 18:03:11 I'll let everyone look at the graph and collect their thoughts 18:03:22 o/ 18:03:28 _o/ 18:03:39 we have had a significant drop in the number of reviews 18:03:46 and the queue has grown a bit 18:04:02 the only reason it didn't grow more is likely because we abandoned a bunch of changes 18:04:03 o/ 18:04:21 but we've got to pick up the pace on reviews; especially of the specs which we are considering for newton 18:04:42 otherwise there's a very real possibility that we'll get closer to the N-1 deadline and have a rush of code and specs 18:05:05 so, I'm going to request everyone to take some time and catch up on reviewing the code and specs taht are out there. 18:05:34 if you have code that has a number of comments, please either push up a new change set, or indicate when you plan to. 18:06:13 anyone have anything else to add? 18:06:26 It would definitely be helpful to get the pace of review back to where is was in mitaka 18:06:40 i think there are some "low hanging fruit" reviews that we can get thru 18:07:05 but definitely getting specs reviewed before N-1 is important 18:07:13 amrith: another option is to recruit new core reviewer in most active contributors ;) (i'm not interested to become a core, it's just a suggestion) 18:07:22 haypo, we need reviews 18:07:33 I think monikers like core are a different thing altogether 18:07:48 or are you suggesting that making someone a core reviewer somehow increases the number of reviews they do? 18:07:53 we have 6 core reviewers. 18:08:05 five of who are here at this meeting 18:08:23 amrith, is workflow same between spec and bug for +2? 18:08:32 yes pmackinn 18:09:03 do others have thoughts, suggestions? 18:09:10 SlickNik, peterstac, johnma, vkmc 18:09:38 Maybe we should put top 10 list back. It did seem to make difference... 18:10:07 good idea 18:10:11 so # of reviews per item leads to more focus/+2? 18:10:12 amrith, I certainly like the idea of having a list of reviews that we are focusing on - like we did in Mitaka 18:10:15 in theory? 18:10:38 a couple of good thoughts there 18:10:43 a focus on specific reviews 18:10:50 putting back the list of top reviewers 18:11:14 pmackinn, I think an active discussion about a topic will lead to more people reviewing, and +2's, I think. 18:11:18 yeah, agree that having a focus could help 18:12:40 any other thoughts? 18:12:57 other than that... I've seen in some projects that the number of reviews decrease weeks after the summit 18:13:00 o/ 18:13:09 I think this happened in Trove in the past too 18:14:02 so, here's a list I've been using 18:14:19 https://review.openstack.org/#/q/%28project:openstack/trove+OR+project:openstack/trove-integration+OR+project:openstack/trove-specs+OR+project:openstack/trove-dashboard+OR+project:openstack/python-troveclient%29+AND+status:open+AND+branch:master+and+is:mergeable 18:14:23 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/%28project:openstack/trove+OR+project:openstack/trove-integration+OR+project:openstack/trove-specs+OR+project:openstack/trove-dashboard+OR+project:openstack/python-troveclient%29+AND+status:open+AND+branch:master+and+is:mergeable 18:15:12 there are several changes that I think we should be able to quickly approve 18:15:13 https://review.openstack.org/304316 18:15:21 https://review.openstack.org/286317 18:15:29 https://review.openstack.org/221480 18:15:48 there are specs that we need to get agreement on quickly 18:15:49 lie 18:15:51 like 18:15:58 https://review.openstack.org/294213 18:16:07 https://review.openstack.org/302416 18:16:14 https://review.openstack.org/295274 18:16:25 there are the changes for python3 18:16:38 now, when you say "focus", what are you looking for? 18:16:45 a 'starred' list? 18:16:47 a dashboard? 18:16:55 an email from time to time? 18:17:49 I wonder if something like having some known set time for code reviews (every week) where we can help drive focus will be helpful? Something like code-review office hours? 18:18:18 a dashboard is what I was thinking and I know flavio was working on something along that line 18:19:06 SlickNik, I'm open to the idea and would like to give it a shot. 18:19:11 that is also a good idea SlickNik. 18:19:16 is there a specific time that we could set aside for this? 18:19:36 SlickNik time scheduling multiple timezones is usually tricky 18:20:11 If we put the 'top 10' list back, then by definition it'll become Tuesday afternoon ;) 18:20:27 dougshelley66: agreed — maybe doesn't need to be a time when everyone is available. 18:20:47 Slicknik how about 9am ET? :) 18:21:24 Maybe have a web-page for example I can publish what time I'll be doing reviews (weekly). 18:21:31 and others can do the same. 18:22:02 Maybe we could have 2 different days/times a week and people could join either times 18:22:22 ok, let's give that a shot 18:22:29 Not 100% sure — just brainstorming ideas :) 18:22:30 #action Amrith to add back the top-10 list 18:22:48 #action [amrith] figure out a way to communicate priority for reviews 18:23:14 top-10 list for what? just curious 18:23:15 #action [all] think more about the idea of review timings and see if we can get some way to move that forward. 18:23:29 johnma, there used to be a time when we published who the top-10 reviewers were 18:23:42 like: 18:24:09 oh ok, I remember that. we stopped doing that for some reason, not sure 18:24:11 and Heisenburg's theory of management said ... 18:24:45 ok, we have a couple of action items 18:24:55 if others have thoughts, let's keep talking on #openstack-trove 18:25:14 anyone else have anything else, let's move along 18:25:30 #topic Announcements 18:25:33 python-troveclient v2.2.0 has been released and is now on pypi. For newton, g-r and u-c have been set to v2.2.0 18:25:48 just wanted to pass that word along to all. 18:26:02 For newton, we'll be using at least 2.2.0 for the client 18:26:21 currently we're enforcing upper-constraints.txt so it'll 2.2.0 for now 18:26:31 anyone have questions about this? 18:27:23 ok, moving along 18:27:27 #topic Proposals for review 18:27:40 I have two proposals that I'd like to put to the meeting and discuss today 18:27:56 I propose that changes from the proposal bot (requirements, translations) can be approved on master by a single +2 18:28:16 I believe that these are (at this point) purely procedural 18:28:16 +1 makes sense to me 18:28:24 +1 18:28:26 and some of them have been hanging out for a while 18:28:42 +1, I agree 18:28:46 so, I'd like to put this to a vote ... but before I do that, I'd like to know if anyone objects. 18:28:46 ++ 18:29:32 hearing no objections ... 18:29:34 +1, but I don't think the bot reviews was ever much of a problem ... 18:29:38 #agreed that changes from the proposal bot (requirements, translations) can be approved on master by a single +2 18:29:58 Ok, on to the next one. 18:29:59 I propose that we approve https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304030/ 18:29:59 This change would make python34 a gating job 18:30:37 does it require a vote? Wasn't it part of the spec, which was approved time ago? 18:30:44 +1 it's part the (approved) python3 blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/trove/+spec/trove-python3 ;) 18:31:20 tosky: i would also prefer to avoid having meetings and use the regular reviews on gerrit ;) 18:31:55 +1 on the python34 gating job 18:31:56 does anyone object to this change being merged? 18:31:57 but i understood that amrith wanted to "warn" all dev that py3 is serisouly becoming "mandatory" for new changes 18:32:08 at this time ... 18:32:10 sounds like the right thing to do - guess we just need reviews on the project-config change 18:32:16 I'm sure we have to do python3 before long 18:32:30 amrith: i'm available for any question specific to python3 ;) 18:32:35 but ... I wanted to make sure everyone knew and we had a chance to discuss and decide it quickly. 18:32:46 i mean, if some dev start to have py3 questions for new changes 18:32:49 haypo, tosky decisions in a review can take much longer (if there is contention) 18:33:08 right now, only specific tests are run in the job, so the risks are low 18:33:15 ok, hearing no objectons 18:33:18 +1 18:33:23 i made it 18:33:23 +1 18:33:25 #agreed that we agree to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304030/ 18:33:31 +1 18:33:42 i just removed the WIP status of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304030/ -- go there to put your +1 ;-) andreas already voted +2 18:34:36 haypo, done 18:34:47 #topic Clearing up the review backlog 18:34:55 amrith: thx ;) 18:34:56 we started talking about this already (earlier) 18:35:05 and now we have some action items that I'll follow up on 18:37:07 I think the reno addition to troveclient is good to go 18:37:12 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/301894/ 18:40:02 oops 18:40:08 netsplit :/ 18:40:30 the openstack bot seems to be here 18:40:53 i think we lost our PTL... 18:41:16 indeed 18:41:39 seems so 18:41:54 amrith is telling me what to type... 18:42:04 you puppet 18:42:04 anyone have any project updates? 18:42:10 do not let the netsplit affect our meeting 18:42:20 pmackinn but i'm a really good puppet 18:42:35 dougshelley66, no doubt! 18:43:04 dougshelley66, either he needs to speak faster or you need to type faster ... ;) 18:43:18 SlickNik, any thoughts on those SuperConductor notes? am i way off base? 18:43:19 well, i'm waiting for project updates 18:43:20 :) 18:44:01 dougshelley66, image builder spec at patch set 6; assume it will land in top 10 list 18:44:03 pmackinn: I had a chance to look over it — it seems pretty on point. I had a couple of minor notes that I'm in the process of writing up, will send it to you. 18:44:10 pmackinn thx 18:44:12 #topic Ongoing review of projects. 18:44:17 I'm back 18:44:18 HE'S BACK! 18:44:19 ok ... 18:44:21 dammit 18:44:26 so I should add superconductor to the list 18:44:41 #action [amrith] add superconductor to the list 18:44:46 pmackinn, you have notes? 18:44:52 great ... 18:44:54 let's chat 18:44:59 any word on trove image build? 18:45:19 dougshelley66, image builder spec at patch set 6; assume it will land in top 10 list 18:45:24 for the "Port crypto_utils to Python 3" review, i suggest to wait until the 2 other python 3 changes are merged, and peterstac gives its feedback ;) 18:45:33 amrith, just level setting with SlickNik on SC; he has some pending notes 18:46:00 ok, anything new on CEPH? tellesnobrega is that still a project you'll be working on or should we strike it? 18:46:10 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/256057/ 18:46:22 I believe there is a BP/Spec for image upgrade now - the agenda can be updated 18:46:23 vkmc, is sonali going to do the couchdb stuff or is she gone? 18:46:26 amrith, nothing new on that now, but im still working on it 18:46:41 amrith, she is gone, I'll be taking where she left 18:46:42 tellesnobrega, working on it ? CEPH or cinder snapshot? 18:47:04 thanks vkmc 18:47:08 np 18:47:17 amrith, im rushing to get cinder snapshot spec up this week, but I hope to get back to ceph soon, so we can discuss better in austin 18:47:27 amrith, I am going to abandon the couchdb replication work for now. 18:47:37 johnma, ok. 18:48:21 we have a number of other projects including locality for cluster, couchbase clusters, upgrade (which now has a spec), postgresql replication and incr b&r, volume-type and datastore association, multi-region support and so on 18:48:31 could everyone please take a look at these specs as a priority 18:48:43 and make sure that you provide feedback tat you have as soon as possible and before summit 18:48:50 so the conversations at summit can reflect that feedback. 18:49:10 +1 18:49:31 I will include a list of specs in the email that follows this meeting 18:49:40 #action amrith include list of reviews in meeting notes email 18:49:51 any other updates on projects ... 18:49:52 +1 18:50:25 #topic Summit planning 18:50:35 session list is now at http://bit.ly/trove-newton-design-summit 18:50:37 #link http://bit.ly/trove-newton-design-summit 18:50:55 please mark your calendars and update etherpads for sessions that you are leading 18:51:14 SlickNik, amrith, dougshelley66 https://www.google.com/url?q=https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/trove-newton-summit-management-client&sa=D&ust=1460577036050000&usg=AFQjCNEbK_j9z1PYj5PovQ6EukcxNY_czg 18:51:29 sorry, bad link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/trove-newton-summit-management-client 18:51:31 oh, i expected that we would discuss each "Ongoing review". anyway, my two python 3 patches are waiting for your review ;) https://review.openstack.org/279119 & https://review.openstack.org/298952 but there is no urgency ;) 18:51:41 haypo, go ahead 18:52:16 haypo, I'll look at those two reviews but it is also important that others in the trove team review them. 18:53:05 anyone have anything to add about summit sessions ... 18:53:07 amrith: i don't have anything to say about my changes, just review them ;) (if you have questions, ask them directly on the reviews) 18:53:23 amrith: you asked me to talk about python3, but i don't see exactly what do you expect 18:53:44 amrith: the plan is quite simple. pick an unit test, port it to py3, send a patch, wait for the review, then move to the next test ;) 18:54:10 haypo, nothing specific now. at summit, I have the notes from Abhishek that I'll share with the team ahead of time 18:54:27 amrith: do you have a specific question? the status is also quite simple: a few unit tests pass, we are at the beginning of the port (i would say a random 20%) 18:54:34 there's nothing more that I'd expect in an update, just that if people have questions they'd know how to get in touch with you. 18:54:36 amrith: ok, nice 18:54:54 to be clear haypo ... python3 is a little different from the other projects. 18:55:02 I think it is on a very clear path. 18:55:10 and if people have questions they know to get in touch with you. 18:55:34 ok, cool 18:55:52 that's all I had for the meeting today 18:56:02 but I want to leave time for any other things that people may want to talk about 18:56:07 #topic open discussion 18:58:22 anyone have anything to add? 18:58:51 going once ... 18:59:22 going twice ... 18:59:46 #endmeeting