15:03:32 <dmcbride> #startmeeting Colorado 2.0 Release
15:03:32 <collabot`> Meeting started Mon Oct 17 15:03:32 2016 UTC.  The chair is dmcbride. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:03:32 <collabot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
15:03:32 <collabot`> The meeting name has been set to 'colorado_2_0_release'
15:03:40 <dmcbride> #topic roll call
15:03:45 <dmcbride> #info David McBride
15:03:56 <dmcbride> hi team - sorry for the late start
15:04:51 <georgk1> #info Georg Kunz
15:05:27 <fzhadaev> #info Fedor Zhadaev
15:06:36 <dmcbride> hello georgk1
15:06:58 <dmcbride> georgk1: how is Col 2.0 looking from your perspective?
15:07:47 <georgk1> fine. I just have a question regarding how to handle the documentation for C2.0
15:08:03 <georgk1> similar to the question that has been posted to the list recently
15:08:38 <georgk1> basically, I am looking for a clarification of how to get unchanged documentation in the Colorado 2.0 release
15:08:43 <georgk1> for NetReady
15:09:23 <dmcbride> #topic documentation
15:09:56 <dmcbride> #info georgk1 asks about submitting documentation for Col 2.0 that has not changed since Col 1.0
15:10:41 <aricg> georgk1: I believe that a remerge of the latest docuementation changes should do it
15:10:50 <dmcbride> #info according to a recent email from Sofia W, even unchanged documentation must be submitted for Col 2.0
15:11:10 <dmcbride> let me see if I can find that email
15:11:30 <aricg> georgk1: can you try typing remerge as a gerrit comment on the last docuemntation patchset?
15:11:43 <aricg> or just submit some trivial change to the documenation, that should work as well
15:12:01 <georgk1> yes, I did the remerge, but it didn´t trigger a remerge...
15:12:12 <aricg> georgk1: can you link me the patchset?
15:12:18 <georgk1> now I am about to do a small version bump (trivial commit)
15:12:23 <aricg> okay.
15:12:39 <georgk1> one sec
15:13:03 <dmcbride> All project must re-merge their documentation so that it gets updated to Colorado.2.0.
15:13:03 <dmcbride> http://artifacts.opnfv.org/opnfvdocs/colorado/2.0/docs/documentation/index.html
15:13:03 <dmcbride> No matter if any updates has been made or not.
15:13:09 <georgk1> #link https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/21249/
15:13:29 <georgk1> i was wondering whyt the remerge didnt work
15:13:45 <dmcbride> that was from Sofia's email ^^
15:13:54 <georgk1> but i can maybe troubleshoot this with aric outside of this meeting
15:14:16 <dmcbride> georgk1: sounds like a plan, thanks
15:14:41 <dmcbride> georgk1: any other issues with Col 2.0 besides documentation?
15:14:48 <georgk1> nope
15:14:55 <aricg> looks like the remerge is working. https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/opnfv-docs-merge-colorado/188/console
15:14:56 <georgk1> we are good
15:15:19 <aricg> http://artifacts.opnfv.org/netready/colorado/2.0/docs/requirements/index.html
15:15:51 <dmcbride> #topic Functest results
15:15:51 <aricg> georgk1: not sure why your first remerge did not work. but mine did just now.
15:15:59 <georgk1> yes...
15:16:18 <georgk1> ok, thanks. if it happens again, I will contact you
15:16:51 <aricg> or just poke it twice, this happends occasionally, have not be able to track down why
15:17:20 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: looks like we continue to have issues with OVS and SFC scenarios
15:17:34 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: I'm referring to functest results
15:17:48 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: also odl_l3
15:17:54 <georgk1> aricg: ok, will poke it more next time ;-)
15:18:03 <fzhadaev> Hi dmcbride
15:18:12 <fzhadaev> we have couple open issues now
15:18:34 <fzhadaev> debugging in process
15:18:44 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: what's the impact on the release?
15:19:10 <fzhadaev> I hope we'll fix them before c2 release
15:19:17 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: test wraps up one week from today, with relerase one week from Thursday
15:19:59 <dmcbride> trozet: any updates on ODL issues that are affecting functest results?
15:21:02 <trozet> dmcbride: which ODL issues?
15:23:26 <dmcbride> trozet: I believe that you said last week that there are ODL issues that are affecting results for ODL_L3 scenarios, no?
15:24:59 <dmcbride> it seems really curious that we have such a discrepancy in results between Joid and other installers for os_onos_sfc_ha
15:25:44 <dmcbride> joid is solid for this scenario, but the same scenario on other installers is failing functest to one degree or another
15:25:46 <trozet> dmcbride: yeah for ODL L3, but we dont plan on fixing those for C2.0
15:25:59 <trozet> dmcbride: we were able to fix os-onos-nofeature
15:26:22 <trozet> dmcbride: os-onos-sfc doesnt seem to work right
15:26:57 <dmcbride> trozet: those won't be fixed for Col 2.0 because we have a dependency on the ODL project to fix those issues?
15:27:09 <trozet> dmcbride: right
15:27:33 <trozet> dmcbride: I dont think its going to be fixed until Danube
15:27:54 <dmcbride> dfarrell07_pto: still on vacation?
15:28:20 <dmcbride> phrobb: are you available?
15:29:59 <dmcbride> jose_lausuch: I noticed that the dashboard is not reporting a trend for os_onos_sfc_ha on Apex
15:30:17 <dmcbride> jose_lausuch: bug or feature ? ;)
15:30:25 <jose_lausuch> dmcbride: sorry, parallel meeting
15:30:27 <jose_lausuch> mmmm
15:30:58 <jose_lausuch> you mean the first scenario?
15:31:05 <jose_lausuch> yes you right
15:31:07 <dmcbride> correct
15:31:10 <jose_lausuch> I'll check that later
15:31:15 <dmcbride> ok
15:31:25 <jose_lausuch> maybe because we dont have enough iterations
15:31:57 <dmcbride> #info trozet reports that ODL L3 issues unlikely to be fixed for Col 2.0
15:33:13 <dmcbride> trozet: note that narinder` specifically avoids running ODL L3 scenarios on Joid to avoid messing with their perfect record on functest :)
15:33:54 <trozet> dmcbride: lol
15:34:02 <trozet> dmcbride: we take more risks on Apex :)
15:34:18 <dmcbride> trozet: no doubt
15:34:36 <dmcbride> ok team - we are out of time
15:34:50 <dmcbride> any other urgent issues that anyone would like to raise?
15:35:40 <dmcbride> ok - just to remind everyone
15:36:00 <dmcbride> testing and documentation must be complete one week from today (Oct 24)
15:36:21 <dmcbride> Col 2.0 release is three days after that (Oct 27)
15:36:55 <dmcbride> the release will likely go public the following week
15:37:01 <trozet> dmcbride: cool
15:37:21 <dmcbride> ok - regular release meeting tomorrow
15:37:51 <dmcbride> next Col 2.0 daily is on Thursday, Oct 20
15:38:18 <dmcbride> #endmeeting