08:00:10 <ifat_afek> #startmeeting vitrage
08:00:11 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Dec  5 08:00:10 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ifat_afek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
08:00:12 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
08:00:14 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'vitrage'
08:00:22 <ifat_afek> Hi :-)
08:00:32 <idan_hefetz> Nice day :)
08:00:49 <eyalb> \o/
08:03:19 <ifat_afek> #topic Status and updates
08:03:36 <ifat_afek> There are new guidelines regarding the cycle-with-intermediary release mode
08:03:47 <ifat_afek> In order to use this model, we must release at least twice each cycle, and more specifically we must release before the second milestone on January 7th
08:04:03 <ifat_afek> An alternative is to switch to cycle-with-rc release mode, where we need to publish one or more release candidates at the end of the cycle
08:04:12 <ifat_afek> I think we should stay with our current release mode of cycle-with-intermediary, and decide on the best time to publish a release
08:04:14 <mnajjar> Hi
08:04:20 <ifat_afek> What do you say?
08:06:52 <e0ne> hi
08:07:05 <idan_hefetz> I think it is better to release sooner then later if possible
08:07:23 <idan_hefetz> to include latest improvemnts
08:07:46 <ifat_afek> e0ne: Hi. I was talking about the change of the release mode policy. we should either release before Jan 7th, or switch to cycle-with-rc release mode. Any prefernce?
08:07:51 <ifat_afek> idan_hefetz: I agree
08:08:26 <ifat_afek> And I feel that it’s a good time to release. We should just wait for the Prometheus configuration fix that mnajjar is working on
08:08:28 <e0ne> ifat_afek: hi. I don't have strong opinion on this yet
08:08:45 <mnajjar> what is the real difference ?
08:08:53 <ifat_afek> BTW, we should also release Rocky once we have the Prometheus fix
08:09:02 <e0ne> ifat_afek: +1
08:09:02 <mnajjar> how each option will affect us ?
08:09:35 <ifat_afek> If we stay with the current mode, we must release at least twice. First time until Jan 7th. If we switch, we just need to tag a release candidate at the end of the cycle
08:10:00 <ifat_afek> I’m not so sure what is better, but I tend to release soon and remain in our current release mode
08:10:13 <ifat_afek> Which is cycle-with-intermediary
08:10:42 <mnajjar> ok, i got same feeling like you ifat_afek
08:11:04 <ifat_afek> I have no other updates. I was sick part of the week, so didn’t finish the Nova versioned notifications yet
08:11:41 <ifat_afek> Anyone else?
08:11:54 <idan_hefetz> yea
08:12:07 <idan_hefetz> I have a new commit regarding optimization of runtime and memory use for API calls.
08:12:15 <idan_hefetz> In topology i rewrote some of the code that creates the graph, so to avoid calling unnecessary copy() on the graph.
08:12:16 <e0ne> nothing from me this week. I worked on other projects:(
08:12:43 <e0ne> idan_hefetz: I'm sorry, I didn't have a time to test your patch :(
08:12:54 <idan_hefetz> And in vitragea-pi i added garbage collector configuration to collect more often
08:13:12 <idan_hefetz> e0ne: no worries, i'll try to share my results :)
08:13:21 <e0ne> idan_hefetz: great
08:13:48 <idan_hefetz> This change is almost ready, just have a few comments from eyal and ifat
08:14:06 <idan_hefetz> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/619623/
08:14:40 <idan_hefetz> After that i have some more cool improvements :)
08:15:01 <idan_hefetz> So stay tuned...
08:15:54 <e0ne> :)
08:16:23 <eyalb> I will update
08:16:35 <eyalb> I want to force the use of networkxx 2.0
08:16:42 <e0ne> eyalb: +1
08:16:47 <eyalb> but I am not sure other projects are ready
08:17:03 <eyalb> there is this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/diskimage-builder/+bug/1718576
08:17:05 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1718576 in Vitrage "Handle networkx 2.0 update" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Anna Reznikov (annarez)
08:17:11 <eyalb> to handle networkx
08:17:16 <ifat_afek> eyalb: I think it’s good for us, but not sure how it might affect other projects that might be installed together with Vitrage
08:17:23 <eyalb> some project are still in progress
08:17:36 <eyalb> but I am not sure it is updated
08:17:49 <ifat_afek> eyalb: Are they all still using launchpad? maybe we should check StoryBoard
08:17:50 <e0ne> eyalb: https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/master/upper-constraints.txt#L81 contains 2.2, so it's the version which is used on gates
08:17:52 <eyalb> vitrage for example is ready but it says in progress
08:18:18 <ifat_afek> #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/1718576
08:18:34 <ifat_afek> Vitrage status is updated here, but no other projects
08:18:59 <eyalb> also I couldn't find an rpm with this version for redhat or centos
08:19:07 <eyalb> so we need to talk to rdo guys
08:19:21 <eyalb> I found for fedora
08:19:26 <ifat_afek> You mean an rpm with networkx 2.0?
08:19:32 <eyalb> yes
08:19:44 <ifat_afek> And your motivation is to simplify our code?
08:19:47 <e0ne> eyalb: ubuntu bionic contains 1.11
08:19:48 <eyalb> so if I fix the rpm spec it will probably fail
08:20:10 <eyalb> the latest ubuntu has networkx 2
08:20:33 <eyalb> so i dont know what is the procedure here
08:21:01 <e0ne> eyalb: http://paste.openstack.org/show/736690/
08:21:02 <ifat_afek> Maybe we can ask the requirements team
08:21:23 <e0ne> ifat_afek: if there is 2.2 in the upper-constraints, we can use that version
08:22:05 <e0ne> ifat_afek: unfortunately, we can't always use versions form rpm/deb packages
08:22:11 <eyalb> the only problem is with the packaging
08:22:20 <e0ne> eyalb: I agree
08:22:56 <e0ne> eyalb: usually, vendors make packages based on global requirements and upper-constraints
08:24:18 <eyalb> for ubuntu 18.10 there is networkx 2.1.1
08:24:33 <eyalb> https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=python-networkx
08:24:58 <e0ne> in our clouds we use only LTS versions
08:25:52 <eyalb> so we need to wait with this patch ?
08:25:56 <e0ne> and we build packages if they are not presented in ubuntu repos
08:26:41 <e0ne> eyalb: I already +1'ed on it. we can't wait for distros in this case. we have to force vendors/distros to get new packages
08:27:57 <e0ne> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622293/
08:28:20 <eyalb> ok
08:28:39 <ifat_afek> +1
08:28:55 <eyalb> so for now we will just force the use of networkx 2 but leave the code comptible with networkx 1
08:29:25 <eyalb> once all the vendors have the networkx 2 packages we will remove the code for networkx 1
08:29:54 <e0ne> eyalb: it doesn't make sence, because we won't test with 1.x once your patch will be landed
08:31:04 <eyalb> we dont test it now in the gate
08:31:10 <e0ne> if something is not tested, sooner or later it will be broken for sure
08:32:06 <eyalb> eOne: so what is your suggestion ?
08:32:34 <e0ne> drop 1.x support
08:32:55 <eyalb> but then it will break all the vendors
08:33:08 <e0ne> it should not
08:33:09 <eyalb> until they have a 2.0 package
08:33:37 <e0ne> vendors will create 2.x package once they will build packages for Stein
08:34:00 <e0ne> older versions must not be affected
08:34:39 <e0ne> and I do understand all the vendors  pain with packaging
08:35:09 <eyalb> ok
08:35:38 <ifat_afek> e0ne: but when will vendors build the Stein packages? now or in April? what if we release Vitrage now?
08:36:06 <e0ne> ifat_afek: it depends on vendors, I can't answer you
08:36:26 <ifat_afek> So maybe it is safer to make the change near the end of the Stein cycle?
08:36:28 <e0ne> in our case, we build packages after the release
08:36:47 <e0ne> but RedHat and Ubuntu could do it much faster
08:37:25 <e0ne> ifat_afek: IMO, it's safer to get such changed earlier to get more time for testing and packaging
08:38:02 <ifat_afek> I’m just not sure that I understand the effect of having a Vitrage release now without packaging support
08:38:41 <e0ne> ifat_afek: there could be some issues with Vitrage Stein and networkx 1.x
08:38:55 <e0ne> ifat_afek: we've got 2.2 in global-requirements
08:39:16 <e0ne> ifat_afek: so it's good to get the version from global requirements
08:39:31 <e0ne> ifat_afek: so all openstack components will use the same library
08:39:56 <e0ne> ifat_afek: it's extremely important if you install services from packages on the same node
08:40:15 <e0ne> ifat_afek: unfortunately, everybody doesn't use containers now :(
08:40:51 <e0ne> #link https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#why-do-we-have-a-global-requirements-list
08:41:59 <ifat_afek> e0ne: ok, I guess I’m convinced
08:42:14 <e0ne> :)
08:42:34 <ifat_afek> Any other issue for today’s meeting?
08:44:01 <ifat_afek> Have a nice day :-)
08:44:10 <eyalb> bye
08:44:12 <e0ne> see you next week
08:44:24 <mnajjar> bye
08:44:31 <ifat_afek> #endmeeting