12:00:30 <kshlm> #startmeeting Weekly community meeting 8/Jun/2016
12:00:30 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jun  8 12:00:30 2016 UTC.  The chair is kshlm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:00:30 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
12:00:30 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'weekly_community_meeting_8/jun/2016'
12:00:35 <kshlm> Hi all!
12:00:45 <aravindavk> kshlm: Hi
12:00:54 <post-factum> dobry den
12:00:57 <kshlm> aravindavk, Hi!
12:00:58 <rastar> Welcome back kshlm
12:01:06 <kshlm> :)
12:01:09 <kkeithley> namaskara
12:01:14 <rastar> :)
12:01:31 * ndevos is here, but also having breakfast in a hotel...
12:01:42 <kshlm> #topic Rollcall
12:01:48 <post-factum> o/
12:01:48 * kotreshhr is here
12:02:01 * atinm is in
12:02:03 * poornimag is here
12:02:06 * rastar is here
12:02:07 <kshlm> :\ the agenda isn't prepared.
12:02:19 <kshlm> Give me a couple of minutes.
12:03:19 * anoopcs is here
12:03:23 * rafi is here
12:03:28 * partner here
12:03:55 * msvbhat_ is here
12:04:05 <kshlm> Hey msvbhat_ !
12:04:09 <kshlm> Okay!
12:04:14 <kshlm> Let's start
12:04:18 <msvbhat_> Hello... :)
12:04:39 <kshlm> I'll host the next meeting, so I'm skipping the host selection
12:04:47 <kshlm> #topci GlusterFS-4.0
12:04:55 <kshlm> #topic GlusterFS-4.0
12:05:06 <kshlm> Time for some updates!
12:05:22 <atinm> I've seen few patches coming from DHT2, so that's a good progress :)
12:05:56 <kshlm> I'm getting back to GD2 again after my break.
12:06:11 <atinm> I don't have much updates from jdarcy on NSR side as I missed out a meeting with him
12:06:25 <kshlm> I'll be starting to extend the trasaction framework to work for multi-nodes.
12:06:41 <kshlm> Anyone else working on 4.0 here?
12:07:08 <kshlm> I don't see jdarcy overclk or shyam
12:07:18 <kshlm> So I guess I'll move to the next topic
12:07:20 <atinm> any volunteers for Brick Multiplexing? We need people to work on this part as well :)
12:07:57 <kotreshhr> kshlm: shyam posted the skeleton patches for posix and dht2-server side xlator!
12:08:04 <kshlm> I'd love to, but I've got things full already
12:08:13 <jdarcy> Sorry I'm late.
12:08:20 <kshlm> kotreshhr, Cool! thanks.
12:08:22 <post-factum> just in time
12:08:27 <atinm> jdarcy, no issues, your turn for NSR updates
12:08:28 <kshlm> jdarcy, Not too late.
12:08:31 <atinm> jdarcy, :)
12:08:56 <jdarcy> Sadly, not much to update.  I've been busy preparing for the SA Summit (where I am now) and Red Hat Summit.
12:09:19 <jdarcy> Oh, and talking trash about competing projects.  ;)
12:10:09 <atinm> jdarcy, I can sense that :D
12:10:48 <kshlm> They won't be competing any time soon.
12:11:40 <kshlm> Thanks for the updates jdarcy
12:11:46 <kshlm> #topic GlusterFS-3.8
12:12:14 <kshlm> ndevos, jiffin, Would you please share your updates?
12:12:18 <ndevos> some more progress was made the last weeks
12:12:22 <ndevos> more patches got merged
12:12:30 <kshlm> Any dates for the release yet?
12:12:39 <ndevos> but, as I'm travelling this week, I wont be able to do the release now
12:12:48 <post-factum> do we need mount option to set glusterfsd process niceness like i've already done for OOM score?
12:12:54 <ndevos> and, due to the Gerrit update, I was not able to releease anything earlier
12:13:20 <ndevos> post-factum: 'need' is flexible :)
12:13:51 <kshlm> I haven't been able to work on the socket fixes for encrypted and IPv6 connections yet. I would still like to get them in, but not sure if I can.
12:13:54 <ndevos> release date for 3.8 is now planned tuesday/wednesday next week
12:14:10 <poornimag> a concern here, wrt 3.8 and generally as well..., getting reviewer time is getting harder and harder
12:14:11 <kkeithley> so we're holding patches for release-3.8 branch for now?
12:14:17 <ndevos> that means all changes need to be merged before Monday, LATEST
12:14:35 <spalai> agree with poornimag
12:14:51 <atinm> and I don't see that happening with a broken build system
12:15:09 <ndevos> not really holding patches, but changes should be carefully considered before merging, no risky things
12:15:26 <atinm> spalai, poornimag : could you send the list of patches to the maintainers list which need urgent attention?
12:15:48 <spalai> can we have something like review backlog for patches those were not reviewed for certain amount of time
12:15:50 <poornimag> atinm, beein doing it
12:15:53 <spalai> atinm: in general
12:16:05 <ndevos> indeed, any changes that REALLY REALLY REALLY need to get in 3.8.0 should be mentioned in emails to the maintainers list
12:16:44 <ndevos> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=glusterfs-3.8.0&hide_resolved=1
12:17:19 <atinm> I don't like emails with subject review needed with just a review link, if the mail explains why that urgency and a little background on the problem it helps maintainers to prioritize them, having said that I am not saying that maintainers shouldn't be actively checking the backlogs but it has to be a collaborative approach
12:17:19 <ndevos> only very few bugs in that list are not in MODIFIED or ON_QA state yet, add bugs that require changes in 3.8.0
12:17:28 <spalai> ndevos: can we do something on getting reviewers attention (not just for 3.8 in general)
12:17:57 <kshlm> spalai, We can.
12:18:20 <ndevos> spalai: there are many maintainers that should be responsive for doing reviews, send an email (format like atin just mentioned) to the list
12:18:45 <kshlm> One of the suggested ideas for updating our release timelines, is to have merge windows. This would be the time for reviews.
12:19:11 <ndevos> personally I do not click links to reviews, if the email does not contain a useful message/topic, I'm not reviewing patches for all components
12:19:34 <atinm> and also the option of peer reviews to be considered as well
12:20:19 <atinm> a maintainer would always have more confidence on a patch if it has been reviewed by someone else who works on that same component
12:20:23 <ndevos> developers working on components should watch out for patches, and do reviews on those too
12:20:45 <jdarcy> FWIW, here's my review "dashboard" - http://review.gluster.org/#/q/status:open+project:glusterfs+branch:master+-label:CentOS-regression%253C0+-label:NetBSD-regression%253C0+-label:Code-Review%253C0
12:21:01 <ndevos> it is easy to setup notifications, see http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Contributors-Guide/Guidelines-For-Maintainers/ for some examples
12:21:50 <jdarcy> I'll generally look at anything that already has a +1 from someone else (e.g. a team lead) first.
12:21:55 <spalai> ndevos: thanks for the link.
12:22:11 <poornimag> atinm, ndevos there have been several mails that have been sent, i can resend those for reference, mail is not good enough for tracking it.., bugging for months for review is not a good position to be in
12:22:21 <ndevos> anyway, 3.8.0 was delayed for more than 6 months now, and we really should release soon, I dont plan on delaying it more than until next week
12:22:27 <poornimag> ndevos, oh, ok i shall look at it
12:23:06 <kshlm> ndevos, I agree.
12:23:46 <ndevos> so, only the most urgent blocking patches need to get merged, others will get done for 3.8.1 a month later
12:23:57 <atinm> poornimag, so if you attach the release tracker to the bug corresponding to the patch it does your statement hold true (waiting for months) ?
12:25:07 <ndevos> for changes backported to 3.8, I plan to enforce http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.maintainers/694 where possiblie
12:25:14 <poornimag> atinm, the bugs are added to the tracker
12:25:16 <kshlm> Aren't we moving to the newer release schedules once 3.8 is released?
12:25:34 <ndevos> that describes the requirements etc of patches that may get backported, and which changes are banned
12:25:36 <kshlm> ie. new releases every 3 months, with a LTS release every year?
12:26:24 <ndevos> kshlm: with that new scheme, I still assumed we would do monthly bugfix releases for the active major releases
12:26:34 * kshlm wonders what happened to the release discussion.
12:26:49 <atinm> poornimag, that means the release can't go in without these patches
12:27:35 <kshlm> ndevos, That's an interesting mail.
12:27:38 <ndevos> poornimag: well, the tracker is to give some idea of what is still needed, but we can move bugs to a new 3.8.1 tracker too ;-)
12:28:30 <ndevos> kshlm: the intention is to get only bugfixes backported (except for experimental features in the release, they have more options)
12:28:34 <poornimag> ha ok, but i guess it will be the same thing for next release
12:28:41 <kshlm> ndevos, we should write up such a rule set for accepting patches into minor releases.
12:28:50 <kshlm> And enforce it obviously.
12:29:05 <ndevos> kshlm: yes, the email is a draft for it, but none of the maintainers replied :-(
12:29:14 <kshlm> I will once I've read it.
12:29:26 <kshlm> I've had a huge backlog of email to get through.
12:29:27 <ndevos> great, thanks!
12:29:33 <ndevos> sure, no worries
12:29:49 * ndevos suggests to move to the next topic
12:29:52 <kshlm> Okay.
12:29:57 <kshlm> I was thinking the same.
12:30:07 <kshlm> #topic GlusterFS-3.7
12:30:21 <atinm> ndevos, I think majority of the maintainers already replied, we are waiting on hagarth to send an email on this
12:30:36 * post-factum is hunting memory leak in 3.7.11 again
12:30:45 <kshlm> I've seen 3.7.12 RCs, but have no idea when the release is planned.
12:30:57 <kshlm> Is anyone near hagarth?
12:31:03 <post-factum> #link https://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/2016-June/049767.html
12:31:23 <partner> our memory leak issues dropped ~10x when moving from 3.6.9 to 3.7.11 but testings continue (libgfapi, openstack,..)
12:31:39 <partner> almost non-existing with 3.8 rc2
12:31:41 <aravindavk> georep patches blocked due to regression issues
12:31:42 <atinm> kshlm, maintainers have to ack the build
12:31:50 <kshlm> post-factum, I still keep thinking some crazy thread issues are happening.
12:31:53 <kkeithley> partner: that's great news
12:31:56 <atinm> kshlm, hagarth expects that to be done by this week
12:32:12 <post-factum> kshlm: i need extra info on how i could help in debugging that
12:32:21 <kshlm> But I'm just looking at it from behind very biased glasses right now.
12:32:39 <kshlm> atinm, Yeah. That's something I should do as well.
12:33:02 <kshlm> atinm, Do you have a link to hagarth communication regarding that?
12:34:40 <ndevos> atinm: hmm, I'm wondering which maintainers replied, I do not find any responses (this quickly), and the gmane archove also does not have them?
12:35:02 <atinm> kshlm, looking for it
12:35:12 <atinm> ndevos, give me couple of minutes to get to that thread
12:35:18 <kshlm> I seem to have lost emails to the maintainers list. I only see the regression-burn in mails.
12:35:51 <ndevos> atinm: take your time :)
12:35:55 <kshlm> I don't see either ndevos mail on backport rules or hagarth discussion on 3.7.12
12:36:55 <atinm> kshlm, http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-June/000847.html
12:37:17 <kshlm> atinm, Thanks.
12:37:30 <kshlm> My seach-fu is lacking this week.
12:37:39 <kshlm> #link http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-June/000847.html
12:38:19 <kshlm> I'll work with atinm and get the ack for GlusterD before the end of the week.
12:38:41 <kshlm> #action kshlm/atinm to ack 3.7.12 before the end of the week
12:38:58 <kshlm> Other maintainers, you need to provide your acks!
12:39:20 <kshlm> Okay.
12:39:27 <kshlm> #optic GlusterFS-3.6
12:39:36 <kshlm> #topic GlusterFS-3.6
12:39:52 <post-factum> optic makes sense too
12:40:13 <atinm> ndevos, http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/2016-May/thread.html#49597
12:40:16 <kshlm> But zodbot doesn't understand.
12:42:29 <ndevos> atinm: uh, sure it is the right link? for the backport requirements?
12:43:04 * ndevos needs to find the event room, things start in a few minutes
12:43:15 <ndevos> thanks kshlm!
12:43:31 <kshlm> ndevos, see ya later
12:43:31 <atinm> ndevos, doesn't the heading talk about "alternate release process" ?
12:43:51 <kshlm> Anyone want to talk about 3.6?
12:44:02 <kshlm> I'll skip if we don't have anything.
12:44:29 <kshlm> atinm, The link you gave is to new proposed release timelines.
12:46:08 <kshlm> No 3.6 updates this week.
12:46:09 <atinm> I believe that's what I was looking for
12:46:15 <atinm> LTS and non LTS stuffs
12:46:28 <kshlm> Onto the  AIs from last week
12:46:37 <kshlm> #topic Last weeks AIs
12:46:43 <kshlm> I don't think any of them is done.
12:46:57 <kshlm> So I'll just carry them forward.
12:47:27 <kshlm> #topic Open floor
12:47:41 <atinm> misc, are you around?
12:47:43 <kkeithley> oh, you don't want status on NFS-Ganesha or Samba?
12:47:52 <kshlm> kkeithley, Ah!
12:47:55 <kshlm> Forgot that!
12:47:59 <atinm> misc, do we have any luck on build system?
12:48:04 <kshlm> I've not been used to the new agenda yet.
12:48:18 <kshlm> #topic Ganesha
12:48:24 <kshlm> kkeithley, You're up!
12:48:43 <kkeithley> nfs-ganesha continues slow march toward 2.4 GA.  DanG has been running valgrind on next (2.4) branch. Found some things that will apply to 2.3.x
12:48:49 <misc> atinm: what do you mean ?
12:49:32 <atinm> misc, I believe nigelb was working with you on the regression failures what we have been noticing since last couple of days
12:49:36 <kshlm> kkeithley, And anything new about ganesha+gluster?
12:49:45 <misc> atinm: we had a few of them
12:49:53 <atinm> misc, I am talking about that as we still see the regressions are not getting through
12:49:57 <misc> and i also had to handle a few emergencies for others projects
12:50:15 <misc> so speaking of "the problems" is not really helping me to answer
12:50:25 <kkeithley> nothing specific for ganesha+gluster, no
12:50:27 <misc> we fixed the issue regarding crash of nss
12:50:33 <kshlm> Thanks kkeithley
12:50:37 <misc> I looked at the netbsd issue with builder full
12:51:00 <kshlm> Is anyone around for Samba updates?
12:51:07 <misc> and I am now hardening the servers since 1 of them participated in a ddos yesterday
12:51:08 <atinm> misc, are you guys aware of that the job is picking a different patch all together?
12:51:22 <misc> atinm: yes, cf gluster-infra
12:51:27 <misc> but I didn't look much at that
12:51:57 <atinm> misc, ok
12:52:00 <kshlm> I'll skip Samba updates for today.
12:52:06 <kshlm> #topic Open floor
12:52:37 <kshlm> I think atinms discussion with build issues is done.
12:52:58 <kshlm> To add a little more information to what's happening.
12:53:22 <kkeithley> Q: it's not clear to me.  Which version is going to be the LTS?  3.7?
12:53:34 <kshlm> What I've observed is that for some reason Jenkins is voting for very old jobs, on new patches.
12:53:43 <kshlm> Still haven't figured out why this is happening.
12:53:54 <kshlm> kkeithley, I believe it's going to be 3.8
12:54:29 <atinm> kshlm, and it's the other way around as well, its picking patches on adhoc basis, no?
12:54:42 <kshlm> atinm, Not what I've seen.
12:55:01 <kshlm> Do you have an example?
12:56:04 <atinm> kshlm, ok so what you are saying may be correct, when I open a patch and go to the regression link I see a different patch there (which is a old job), so basically your statement is correct
12:56:22 <kshlm> atinm, That is what is happening
12:56:53 <kshlm> I'm now wondering if its possible that the old jenkins server has come back from the dead.
12:56:56 <atinm> kshlm, ok, thanks for the correction, I misunderstood it
12:57:38 <kshlm> kkeithley, Are you happy with the answer?
12:57:47 <kshlm> We're nearly outta time.
12:59:12 <kshlm> I think kkeithley's happy.
12:59:30 <kshlm> Thanks every one for attending today's meeting!
12:59:34 <kshlm> And remember
12:59:44 <kshlm> If you're attending any event/conference please add the event and yourselves to Gluster attendance of events: https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-events
12:59:44 <kshlm> Put (even minor) interesting topics on https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-weekly-news
12:59:45 <kshlm> Use the following etherpad for backport requests  https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-backport-requests
12:59:56 <kshlm> Goodbye!
12:59:59 <kshlm> #endmeeting