22:00:48 #startmeeting zuul 22:00:48 Meeting started Mon Jan 30 22:00:48 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:00:49 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 22:00:50 bye 22:00:52 The meeting name has been set to 'zuul' 22:01:05 o/ 22:01:13 hiya 22:01:14 #link agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Zuul 22:01:25 o/ 22:01:36 #link previous meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/zuul/2017/zuul.2017-01-23-22.05.html 22:01:49 no announcements or actions so... 22:01:57 #topic Status updates: Nodepool Zookeeper work 22:02:06 o/ 22:02:07 * mordred waves 22:02:15 o/ 22:02:28 the zuul-nodepool integration job is running/working now 22:02:41 o/ 22:02:45 you can say 'check experimental' in a gerrit comment on either the zuul or nodepool repo to run it 22:02:51 o/ 22:03:05 it currently fails, correctly, because it's testing that it gets a node from nodepool 22:03:26 neat 22:03:32 will check that out 22:03:40 new integration test (that actually succeeds) needs merged (two +2's): https://review.openstack.org/425686 22:03:47 Shrews proposed this patch to add a test for a failed allocation: 22:03:49 yep that one :) 22:03:54 * phschwartz following along, somewhat. 22:04:21 so now it will have a test that passes as well 22:04:31 neat :-) 22:04:38 o/ 22:04:45 (also -- cool! nodepool can correctly *fail* a request!) 22:05:02 You should have asked me, I'm an expert at failing. 22:05:08 Lol 22:05:12 SpamapS: plenty of opportunities remain! 22:05:48 so you're saying I _failed_ to recognize the opportunities... 22:05:51 * SpamapS scores again 22:05:56 SpamapS: success 22:06:29 here's the result of that job run on Shrews's change: http://logs.openstack.org/86/425686/2/experimental/gate-zuul-nodepool/a83475e/ 22:06:40 nodepool logs are in the logs/logs/ directory 22:06:59 sorry about the double logs there. it works and i got tired of futzing with the config. 22:07:20 it's log! it's log! it's big, it's heavy, it's wood 22:07:36 Still pretty neat 22:08:03 nodepool builder and launchers run as real daemons. zuul runs inside of tox as a functional test driver, not as an actual daemon. so its logs are just in the testr subunit artifacts as usual for tests. 22:09:02 any questions or other nodepool related topics? 22:10:02 #topic Status updates: Devstack-gate roles refactoring 22:10:20 rcarrillocruz: is back! 22:10:31 o/ 22:10:34 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/403732/13 22:10:50 i just pushed a revision cos i realized the change did not do what i intended 22:10:59 with that, we can set CI_USER envvar 22:11:07 and will be replaced if set 22:11:13 otherwise, defaults to ansible_user_id 22:11:24 which is a fact that holds the user running ansible-playbooks 22:11:30 which in the gate is 'jenkins' 22:11:36 clarkb ^ 22:11:49 and should automatically switch to zuul when we start using that user 22:11:55 yep 22:12:23 after this, i'll rebase the network sanity check off this commit and we can flag the setup_host as completed 22:12:28 * fungi breaks radio silence to cheer the return of rcarrillocruz 22:12:44 :-P 22:12:47 which raises 22:13:00 what else do folks think we should refactor as playbook/roles? 22:13:04 * jeblair triangulates fungi 22:13:17 i held from doing other refactors till i completed this 22:13:17 rcarrillocruz: is that the end of the list we came up with in germany? 22:13:25 moshing on a plane over kentucky right now, i think 22:13:41 pretty much, but i can see a lot of ther things in functions that could be ansiblized 22:14:15 anyway, i guess we can get back to this when we merge the current patches 22:15:03 rcarrillocruz: personally, i'd say maybe this is a good stopping point and we can focus on other things for a bit -- at least until we're ready to start making a 'standard library' of roles.... 22:15:11 good 22:15:45 cos that way i can slot my free time for infra for the zuul secrets stuff 22:15:48 ++ 22:15:50 ++ 22:16:44 we have enough to demonstrate how we can structure some of our existing jobs in v3, and when v3 is ready to run jobs, this will be ready to plug in and we can demonstrate it. 22:16:56 that was slightly redundant, but you get the idea :) 22:17:20 rcarrillocruz: zuul secrets stuff? 22:17:45 I just learned about something really cool 2 days ago that is for automated decryption and I have been wondering about whether it can be used for zuul secrets.. 22:17:53 so perhaps we can loop back to that in open disc 22:17:54 SpamapS: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/zuulv3.html#secrets 22:17:59 ty 22:18:03 i started it 22:18:10 then was forced to take vaca as i was leaving hp 22:18:39 then started at ansible and got sidetracked with new house, new city and new job 22:18:57 right now I remember 22:19:00 * SpamapS has too many plates 22:19:05 ++ 22:19:23 anything else roles-related? 22:19:30 jeblair: i'm good for now 22:19:44 rcarrillocruz: thanks! 22:19:47 #topic Status updates: Zuul test enablement 22:19:58 sure thing! 22:20:52 i updated 409376 to remove one test around merge conflicts that uncovered an issue that had me down a rabbit hole. ill look into it again when i have more cycles to dig, and will probably start picking off lower hanging fruit in the meantime 22:21:20 adam_g: ok, should i be thinking about picking up that work? 22:21:21 where is the best place to record the issues i hit when reenabling some of the tests? storyb oard? 22:21:39 adam_g: yeah, i think SpamapS was developing a 'blocked' story procedure 22:21:47 We were early on 22:21:57 but we never hit it so I figured we'd make it ad-hoc until we see 2 or 3 blocks 22:22:17 The main idea was just to make sure we know _how_ blocked jeblair is. ;) 22:22:21 there's one blocked story (for a test) 22:22:28 from SpamapS :) 22:22:47 ok, i can put it there 22:22:51 Right and that's blocked on rcarrillocruz's secrets work I think 22:23:00 tho it smells more like a bug to me but ill record what ive found and let others decide 22:23:12 ah yeah, the swift test no? 22:23:13 adam_g: that sounds good 22:23:26 adam_g: yeah I'd say something that smells like a bug is story-worthy 22:23:28 rcarrillocruz: yep 22:23:41 with a zuulv3 tag to help automation 22:23:48 SpamapS: k 22:24:06 I rebased https://review.openstack.org/413768 and fixed the configs it is based on per jeblair's suggestions, so it is now ready for a second +2 22:24:29 SpamapS: thanks! 22:25:09 np, I started looking for another test to re-enable now 22:25:23 note for anyone working on tests: https://review.openstack.org/425810 and https://review.openstack.org/425450 may cause conflicts or new failures. the launcher now asserts that a playbook actually exists for a job, so all the tests now need (noop) playbooks. i'm thinking of adding an option to specify a playbook for a job (so you can override the implied playbook), which should reduce but not eliminate the need for a bunch of ... 22:25:23 ... noop playbooks in tests. 22:25:57 but look on the bright side: the launcher now actually cares about and runs playbooks. :) 22:26:40 Guard rails on this windy road are appreciated :) 22:26:45 Yay 22:26:50 that is exciting 22:27:05 so short actionable version of the above notice: your fake test job may need a fake test playbook from now on. :) 22:27:09 I was looking at how many more tests we have to do the other day.. 22:27:38 I believe there are 42 still disabled in feature/zuulv3 .. 22:27:54 but I can't find where I had looked at how many are in review.. I think it's 10 or so 22:29:18 we may also have found a point of scale failure in storyboard with https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000773 22:29:22 since it won't load for me right now 22:29:24 SpamapS: i wonder if some stuck in review should go in blocked, or if we need to ping people (possibly me? though i think i've been keeping up) 22:29:45 jeblair: Indeed, I think that's a worthwhile thing to do.. review them and see if there are some that need kicking out 22:30:00 I haven't looked closely 22:30:14 I can go back and look at the stories I created, to make sure I properly closed things 22:30:35 i know the layoutvalidator tests are another area that's different enough in v3 to need a rethink. 22:31:03 jamielennox: this one looks like it just needs work https://review.openstack.org/406699 22:31:27 SpamapS: yep, i was just thinking about that one, i'll try and re-propose today 22:31:38 ^5 22:31:47 i'll +0 that so i stop masking jhesketh's -1 22:31:50 other than that there's just Adam and my tests waiting 22:32:28 pabelanger: oh also this one https://review.openstack.org/396684 22:32:45 test_time_database 22:32:50 right, I can look at that again 22:33:13 i know there was a lot of travel recently so i refrained from +3ing those last week, but i'll do so tomorrow if no one else has yet. 22:33:27 feels like most of the ones left are the "hard ones" 22:33:59 though there might still be a few low hanging fruit growing 22:34:55 so likely good opportunities to do more substantial v3 dev work. i remain available to help guide anyone who wants to pick one of those. :) 22:35:41 and of course, happy to help with pre-filtering if you want to know "what would fixing this test entail?" 22:36:06 is that about it for tests? 22:36:26 jeblair: I like the idea of pre-filtering 22:36:40 I wonder if we could break the remaining ones out into a few classes. 22:36:51 and retire the current story. 22:38:06 SpamapS: possibly, but i think i'd prefer to continue to do it on demand. 22:39:01 jeblair: ACK, that's all I have then. 22:39:11 #topic Status updates: Zuul Ansible running 22:39:39 i added this to the agenda because i suspect there's going to be opportunity for more people to jump in on things soon 22:40:18 my current line of development is mostly around actually running playbooks (as mentioned earlier) 22:41:00 i'll be adding pre- and post- playbooks soon (which will need mordred's security context stuff from the v2 ansible launcher), and then i think we might actually write some ansible :) 22:41:50 yay ansible! 22:41:57 I heard it was a thing 22:41:59 jhesketh: i pulled https://review.openstack.org/385964 into that stack -- your commit message was spot on -- it is very useful for those things. :) 22:42:18 jeblair: yeah, when I was looking at that I was looking at adding the pre/post playbooks as you are now 22:42:29 but I got distracted by other commitments to follow up 22:42:45 I'm hoping to return to some of it now, but will chat to you later so not to step on your toes 22:42:51 I'm pretty sure it's a thing, because my socks say "Ansible" on them. 22:43:23 jhesketh: cool, thanks :) 22:43:33 jhesketh: it was very helpful :) 22:44:13 #topic Progress summary 22:44:42 do I get to link? 22:44:47 SpamapS: all yours 22:44:51 #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/board/41 22:45:08 Apologies for my absence the last few meetings, I haven't been able to attend much to this board or talk about it. 22:45:28 What I see there is mostly that we have _a ton_ of work still. 22:45:34 But progress has definitely been made. 22:46:47 rcarrillocruz: some ansible tasks are in backlog -- is that correct? 22:46:54 If you're working on v3, and you don't see your name on that item above, please make sure there's a story or a task on a story, and that the story is tagged 'zuulv3' 22:47:44 yeah looks like rcarrillocruz tasks are all over in backlog. Probably shoudl be switched to in progress right? 22:48:01 the installer is def. backlog 22:48:07 the write localrc too 22:48:12 but log collector 22:48:16 i don't remember 22:48:23 i'll check and update SB accordingly 22:48:39 rcarrillocruz: sounds good 22:49:06 AWESOME 22:49:08 oops 22:49:10 capslockfail 22:49:18 anyway that's all I have. 22:49:25 SpamapS: i think you had it right 22:49:31 true 22:49:37 #topic Fedmsg reporter (pabelanger) 22:50:36 ohai, so i start hacking on this today, because of some discussions at devconf.cz. I wanted to simply highlight the fact some code is online, but opens the topic of how to report data into fedmsg. 22:51:05 I was going to propose a simple json format, of the string we have today, but wasn't sure if we should talk more about it 22:51:33 patch is working BTW, I am hoping to add something to our integration testing too 22:51:40 pabelanger: you might want to consult the sqlalchemy reporter too, that formalizes some data structures 22:51:52 okay, I will poke into that 22:52:03 pabelanger: tbh, i'd prefer some good fakes for this. :) 22:52:33 yes, I could use some help with it. I have something going today, on how we do smtp reports. But feedback is most welcome 22:52:57 that is about it, just getting it on the radar of people 22:53:31 pabelanger: (if it's easy to spin up a fedmsg system with a fake broker, that could be done in unit tests) 22:53:58 fedmsg-tail is what we would use. threebean suggested that 22:55:09 pabelanger: but does that require a zeromq running? 22:55:19 nope, it works in passive mode 22:55:30 ok cool. that sounds plausible then. :) 22:55:39 ya 22:55:49 #topic JJB to ansible-playbook (onetime) converter (pabelanger) 22:56:17 I'm very curious about that one. 22:56:34 So, I'd like to start work on out 1 time converter, i have no code started yet. I think it is something we might be ready to get going in parallel 22:56:41 i know mordred expressed interest in this topic too 22:56:46 this would be for our openstack-infra JJB 22:57:01 yah - my initial thoughts were that we are _currently_ converting on the fly at runtime 22:57:02 however, other JJB people are curious on this converter too 22:57:30 so I was going to start with the code in zuul ansiblelauncher and use what it's doing to run the conversion on _everything_ 22:57:32 then see the carnage 22:57:53 pabelanger, mordred: it may be worth designing it so that it can handle our limited use of jjb, but expandible to handle more jjb so that other folks can enhance it? 22:57:54 Yeah the real question is, does Zuul want to maintain that code long term, or would the world be better if v3 just did a one-time converter and left it behind. 22:57:55 then iterate on special cases 22:58:08 jeblair: yes, my thought too 22:58:53 yah - I think other people will need a migraiton tool, so maintaining it to some definition of maintain is likely friendly of us 22:59:00 SpamapS: i think that we don't want to maintain a general jjb -> ansible tool in perpituity. but considering that there are other v2 zuuls out there that may benefit from it, continuing to support a one-time tool for a while may be useful 22:59:09 yah. what jeblair said 22:59:30 Or even people just running Jenkins with no zuul, they would be interested to see how JJB -> ansible looks like 22:59:43 ack 22:59:47 yup. and what of their jjb would break things :) 22:59:55 time 22:59:57 5s 23:00:21 we can continue in #zuul if needed 23:00:23 thanks everyone! 23:00:25 #endmeeting