14:03:16 <fdegir> #startmeeting Octopus Weekly Meeting 14:03:16 <collabot> Meeting started Mon Aug 10 14:03:16 2015 UTC. The chair is fdegir. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:03:16 <collabot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 14:03:16 <collabot> The meeting name has been set to 'octopus_weekly_meeting' 14:03:21 <dneary> #info Dave Neary 14:03:24 * fdegir thanks dneary 14:03:25 <dneary> :-) 14:03:34 <fdegir> didn't notice the whitespace 14:03:44 <fdegir> #topic roll call 14:03:59 <fdegir> can we #info again please 14:04:04 <fdegir> sorry for the waste 14:04:08 <fdegir> #info Fatih Degirmenci 14:04:15 <meimei> #info meimei 14:04:24 <trozet> #info Tim Rozet 14:04:55 <fdegir> I think we have enough people to start 14:04:59 <fdegir> #topic Agenda Bashing 14:05:14 <fdegir> I'm still trying to catch things up so will use last week's agenda as below 14:05:46 <fdegir> #info action item review / lab compliancy / E2E CI / Jira Issues / B-Release CI work 14:06:11 <fdegir> #topic Action Item Review 14:06:56 <fdegir> #info First action item is on uli-k and trozet 14:07:02 <fdegir> #info uli-k and trozet to bring to the TSC whether Brahmaputra should be released using LF lab or differently. 14:07:16 <fdegir> trozet: did you have chance to look at this together with uli? 14:07:33 <trozet> #info we asked last TSC meeting, ChrisPriceAB said he would have to find out 14:07:51 <trozet> so still unknown 14:07:56 <fdegir> ok, then I keep action on you until we get answer from ChrisPriceAB 14:08:05 <trozet> k 14:08:52 <fdegir> #action uli-k trozet: report back once ChrisPriceAB clarifies the need of doing Brahmaputra release on LF Lab 14:09:08 <fdegir> next action is on chigang 14:09:11 <fdegir> chigang: ping 14:09:19 <fdegir> #info chigang to try on a POD to apply new naming scheme to a slave. 14:09:27 <meimei> renaming scheme? 14:09:29 <meimei> ok 14:09:32 <fdegir> yes 14:09:40 <meimei> About renaming scheme, I suggest we name the slave like this: [provider]-[CI/DEV]-[Virtual/Metal], 14:09:40 <meimei> Is that ok? 14:09:55 <meimei> for example, a node named huawei-ci-virtual is provided by huawei, and is CI-dedicated, and we can implement a virtual deployment on it. 14:10:17 <fdegir> I had some thoughts about it but not had time to come back yet 14:10:29 <fdegir> lets keep the discussion until next meeting 14:10:35 <fdegir> and finalize it then 14:10:42 <meimei> I have put this on ehterpad 14:10:58 <fdegir> the reason is that we might not be able to dedicate slaves to ci or dev only 14:11:02 <fdegir> or just for deployment 14:11:22 <fdegir> but we discuss it on etherpad 14:11:34 <fdegir> I assume chigang didn't have time to try naming scheme yet 14:11:38 <fdegir> so keeping action open 14:11:45 <fdegir> #action chigang to try on a POD to apply new naming scheme to a slave. 14:11:47 <meimei> I think the node for CI must be more stable 14:12:02 <meimei> If you donot have any other suggestion, I will have a try on huawei's lab, and drive pharos to put this naming convention into lab acceptance criteria. 14:12:12 <fdegir> meimei: I have suggestions 14:12:17 <meimei> ok 14:12:28 <meimei> wait for your suggestion 14:12:30 <fdegir> can we keep this for later - we might need to share community labs between ci and dev 14:12:34 <aricg> meimei: we will need to cordinate on name changes, they require a new secret. 14:13:02 <fdegir> and aricg says, lab contact should be around while doing the name change 14:13:26 <fdegir> #info slave name change requires coordination since it requires a new secret 14:13:43 <fdegir> #info slave naming scheme work is still going on 14:13:57 <fdegir> and the last action item is on uli-k regarding Octopus committer list 14:14:08 <fdegir> I think it is still open 14:14:21 <aricg> ? 14:14:32 <aricg> Not this? https://wiki.opnfv.org/releng 14:14:39 <fdegir> aricg: nope 14:14:47 <fdegir> aricg: octopus has many silent committers 14:15:08 <fdegir> and uli-k was going to check with them if they're going to help out or not 14:15:13 <aricg> Ah, 14:15:13 <fdegir> and then clean up the list 14:15:27 <fdegir> #action uli-k to contact silent committers and encourage them to start working. 14:15:43 <fdegir> I think this was the last action item 14:15:46 <fdegir> moving on 14:16:00 <fdegir> #topic lab compliancy 14:16:24 <fdegir> #info meimei put some input to etherpad regarding this 14:16:28 <fdegir> #link https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/octopusR2 14:16:45 <fdegir> #info Under the heading Octopus requirements on lab compliance 14:16:56 <meimei> yes,I have put a list in etherpad,this depends on the discussion result in TSC 14:17:21 <fdegir> please have a look at it and share your thougths 14:17:28 <meimei> ok 14:17:40 <fdegir> #info thx meimei for starting it up 14:17:54 <meimei> Octopus requirements on labs compliance: 14:17:54 <meimei> 1. Dedicated to E2E CI 14:17:54 <meimei> 1. We require your lab or specified POD in your lab be CI dedicated, that is it will be available for CI usage all time. If it will be used for development these activities can be interrupted by CI anytime, and E2E CI will be implemented on your lab on timer/daily, or maybe merge-triggered. 14:17:54 <meimei> 2. Automatic Reconfiguration 14:17:55 <meimei> We require your lab have specific scripts for automatic reconfiguration that will be executed by CI before a E2E CI job is executed on your lab. 14:17:55 <meimei> 3. Keep online 14:17:55 <meimei> We require your lab connected to jenkins and online 24x7. CI team shall be notified when some maintenance is scheduled. 14:17:56 <meimei> 4. Maintainable 14:17:56 <meimei> We require the admin access to your lab to troubleshooting CI issues. 14:17:57 <meimei> 5. Standard name 14:17:57 <meimei> We require your lab connected to jenkins master by a standard name, just like: [provider]-[CI/DEV]-[Virtual/Metal], for example, a node named huawei-ci-virtual is provided by huawei, and is CI-dedicated, and we can implement a virtual deployment on it. 14:17:58 <meimei> Based on this specification, we can easily put these nodes with the same purpose into a pool, e.g. for E2E CI , and implement E2E CI using a round-robin mechanism. 14:18:28 <fdegir> #info once it is settled, it will be provided to pharos and the OPNFV community as input 14:18:47 <fdegir> anyone wants to add anything regarding lab compliance? 14:19:17 <fdegir> moving on to next item; Definition of E2E CI 14:19:26 <fdegir> #topic E2E CI 14:19:41 <fdegir> #info We've been having some discussions within Octopus team regarding E2E CI 14:20:04 <meimei> Last week we disccussed about E2E CI, but have not finished. 14:20:16 <meimei> I think we must reach an agreement to work better on release-B. 14:20:31 <fdegir> #info due to lack of resources, current E2E CI is quite limited; done by timer /daily and limited in scope 14:20:52 <fdegir> and it is not close to what E2E CI tbh 14:21:04 <meimei> I also have put some of my thoughs in etherpad 14:21:37 <meimei> Could we have a further disscussion at this meeting? 14:21:40 <fdegir> yes 14:21:46 <meimei> the scope and concept of E2E 14:21:46 <meimei> 1th End: 14:21:46 <meimei> E2E CI will still be triggered by timing (because lack of resource) 14:21:46 <meimei> and then if we can run E2E CI sequentially(reconfiguring LF lab) , we will run E2E CI after merge and it will be sequential 14:21:46 <meimei> After more official labs are functional, E2E CI will be triggered by each code change or test case change. 14:21:46 <meimei> 2ed End: 14:21:46 <meimei> run build/develop/test sequentially 14:21:47 <meimei> collect all the outputs(report/log) of build/develop/test 14:21:47 <meimei> show a uniform report of full chain(build/develop/test) 14:22:08 <fdegir> meimei: can we paste the link instead please? 14:22:19 <meimei> ok:P 14:22:23 <fdegir> pasting 10s of lines wouldn't help but make irc harder to follow 14:22:37 <meimei> sorry 14:22:39 <fdegir> np 14:23:05 <fdegir> #info as meimei points out on etherpad and I quite agree the CI should start with a change 14:23:36 <fdegir> #info and different jobs should be triggered based on the nature of the change, realizing our loops in CI 14:24:18 <fdegir> #info all the changes that are sent for review should travel our CI, creating feedback to developer and the wider community regarding the quality of the change 14:24:52 <fdegir> #info and if any change that fails to pass certain loop should not be allowed to merge to master 14:25:21 <fdegir> #info when it comes to longer loops such as our daily loops and perhaps later on weekly 14:25:59 <fdegir> #info we should perhaps employ some kind of promotion mechanism to carry artifacts known to have better quality to longer loops 14:26:23 <fdegir> and this is pretty high level definition of CI for me 14:26:40 <fdegir> meaning that we always try to do things when things happen; triggered by change 14:27:00 <fdegir> and test them as much and as quick as possible in shorter loops 14:27:32 <fdegir> increasing the scope of testing while we move towards to longer/more extensive loops 14:27:59 <fdegir> anyone else wants to share his/her thoughts? 14:28:43 <fdegir> it seems not 14:29:08 <meimei> yes , very high level 14:29:18 <fdegir> #info please go ahead and share your thoughts on etherpad under the heading of "the scope and concept of E2E CI" 14:29:26 <fdegir> #link https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/octopusR2 14:29:53 <fdegir> moving on to the next topic if noone objects 14:30:19 <fdegir> #topic Jira Issues and B-release CI Work 14:30:43 <fdegir> I haven't been able to check the Jira yet 14:30:58 <fdegir> anyone created any stories/tasks in the backlog for B-release work? 14:31:48 <fdegir> #info We need to start cleaning up the backlog and populating the new one on Jira for B-Release 14:32:34 <aricg> here you go fdegir -> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/RELENG/ 14:32:45 <fdegir> #info Please have a look at Jira and close/cancel the Jira issues that you fixed already but haven't closed yet 14:32:54 * fdegir thanks aricg 14:33:24 <fdegir> trozet aricg: it would perhaps good to have a quick status update regarding LF Lab Reconfiguration 14:33:34 <fdegir> since CI needs to do some work 14:33:48 <fdegir> #topic LF Lab Reconfiguration Status 14:34:06 <trozet> #info the lab reconfig works for Foreman, and there were some updates made for Fuel. Fuel still needs to finish a few changes and still test before we take down POD1 14:34:24 <fdegir> thx trozet 14:34:25 <trozet> #info szliard_ is working on it from the FUel side 14:35:03 <fdegir> #info fuel verification/adjustments are needed in order to be able to maintain/support Arno release for both Foreman and Fuel 14:35:28 <fdegir> anyone wants to know more can join bgs meeting right after this one 14:35:55 <fdegir> #topic AoB 14:36:02 <fdegir> anyone wants to bring anything? 14:36:45 <fdegir> then I thank you all for joining 14:36:51 <trozet> thanks fdegir 14:36:52 <fdegir> and have a nice day 14:36:56 <fdegir> #endmeeting