14:04:24 <mkonecny> #startmeeting Fedora Infrastructure Sustaining Standup Meeting 14:04:24 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Jun 9 14:04:24 2020 UTC. 14:04:24 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 14:04:24 <zodbot> The chair is mkonecny. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:04:24 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:04:24 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_sustaining_standup_meeting' 14:04:24 <mkonecny> #chair cverna mkonecny siddharthvipul jednorozec mboddu lrossett asaleh mobrien nils pingou 14:04:24 <mkonecny> #info meeting is 30 minutes MAX. At the end of 30, its stops 14:04:24 <zodbot> Current chairs: asaleh cverna jednorozec lrossett mboddu mkonecny mobrien nils pingou siddharthvipul 14:04:24 <mkonecny> #info agenda is at https://board.net/p/fedora-infra-daily 14:04:36 <lrossett> .hello lrossett 14:04:37 <zodbot> lrossett: lrossett 'Leonardo Rossetti' <lrossett@redhat.com> 14:04:47 <siddharthvipul> .hello siddharthvipul1 14:04:49 <jednorozec> .hello humaton 14:04:49 <zodbot> siddharthvipul: siddharthvipul1 'Vipul Siddharth' <siddharthvipul1@gmail.com> 14:04:51 <nils> .hello nphilipp 14:04:52 <zodbot> jednorozec: humaton 'Tomáš Hrčka' <thrcka@redhat.com> 14:04:55 <zodbot> nils: nphilipp 'Nils Philippsen' <nphilipp@redhat.com> 14:05:02 <mboddu> I am confused, isn't it supposed to start 30 min later? 14:05:05 <mkonecny> .hello zlopez 14:05:06 <zodbot> mkonecny: zlopez 'Michal Konečný' <michal.konecny@packetseekers.eu> 14:05:21 <mkonecny> mboddu: According to zodbot here, it shouldn't 14:05:26 <nils> mboddu, apparently some calendars have the meeting at 1400UTC, some at 1430UTC 14:05:35 <lrossett> mine is 2pm 14:05:36 <mkonecny> But I have in calendar that it will start in 14:30 UTC 14:05:41 <siddharthvipul> whhhattt 14:05:43 <mkonecny> .nextmeetings 14:05:43 <zodbot> mkonecny: One moment, please... Looking up the channel list. 14:05:46 <siddharthvipul> I see 1400 UTC everywhere 14:05:49 <siddharthvipul> sigh 14:05:50 <zodbot> mkonecny: In #fedora-meeting-2 is Fedora ARM & AArch64 status meeting (starting in an hour) 14:05:50 <mboddu> Okay, I am just confused 14:05:53 <zodbot> mkonecny: In #fedora-meeting-3 is Fedora Release Engineering (starting in an hour) 14:05:56 <zodbot> mkonecny: In #fedora-meeting is KDE SIG Meeting (starting in an hour) 14:05:59 <zodbot> mkonecny: In #fedora-i3 is Fedora i3wm SIG (starting in 2 hours) 14:06:02 <zodbot> mkonecny: In #fedora-meeting-1 is Fedora Cloud Workgroup (starting in 2 hours) 14:06:04 <mboddu> I prefer 14:00 UTC per say 14:06:06 <siddharthvipul> mboddu: what time do you see in cpe calendar? 14:06:21 <mkonecny> It should be in progress according to zodbot 14:06:25 <lrossett> it doesn't really matter to me, whatever is best for the team 14:06:31 <mboddu> siddharthvipul: Well CPE calendar has both 14:06:45 <siddharthvipul> mboddu: check CPE team calendar 14:06:51 <mkonecny> I see 14:00 UTC in CPE calendar 14:06:52 <mboddu> 14:00 UTC and 14:30 UTC and I thought 14:30 UTC is the new time 14:06:53 <siddharthvipul> I see just one and it's now 14:07:04 <lrossett> same 14:07:14 <siddharthvipul> mboddu: we decided new timing? 14:07:21 <siddharthvipul> sorry I missed it if we did :( 14:07:25 <mkonecny> But in infrastructure calendar it shows 14:30 UTC 14:07:26 <siddharthvipul> I didn't think there was a time change.. 14:07:50 <mobrien[m]> I just see the 14:00UTC in CPE calendar 14:07:55 <mkonecny> This one is showing it wrong for me https://apps.fedoraproject.org//calendar/ical/infrastructure/ 14:07:59 <mboddu> Oh sorry, CPE calendar has 14:00 UTC and infra calendar has 14:30 UTC 14:08:26 <mkonecny> We can solve this later, let's focus on the agenda for now 14:08:33 <siddharthvipul> yess! so I must have put infra calendar by mistake.. but it's all 1400 UTC everywher else 14:08:38 <siddharthvipul> zodbot says so, and CPE calendar 14:08:42 <siddharthvipul> no confusion 14:08:43 <mkonecny> #topic Item needing reviews 14:08:45 <siddharthvipul> I will remove the infra thing 14:08:51 <mboddu> Okay 14:09:07 <mkonecny> siddharthvipul: Just update it 14:09:16 <mkonecny> It will be good to have it there 14:09:25 <mkonecny> I don't have anything for review today 14:10:11 <siddharthvipul> I see 1400 UTC even in Infrastructure calendar :| 14:10:18 <lrossett> a pr of mine was reviewed and merged today, I started working on the shared pvc issue for mbox 14:10:29 <siddharthvipul> ugh, nevermind 14:10:37 <siddharthvipul> nothing to review 14:10:59 * jednorozec have nothing to review 14:11:49 <mkonecny> lrossett: I added one note after merging, that we should remove the PVC from koji-hub, if it's done by the mbox component now 14:12:03 <lrossett> it is being working on another issue (53) 14:12:24 <lrossett> there is anotehr issue for the shared ca usage as well 14:12:59 <mkonecny> lrossett: Ok, thanks for info 14:13:14 <mkonecny> Let's move on 14:13:15 <mkonecny> #topic Work In Progress 14:13:22 <lrossett> working on mbox issue 53 14:13:40 <mobrien[m]> Trying to deploy osbs in iad2 14:14:10 <mkonecny> I started working on syncing up the ansible playbook and vagrant environment for Anitya and continue working on the mbbox 14:15:05 <nils> Still working on #8931 "Ansible-review doesn't catch syntax errors", our use of absolute path references makes using "ansible-playbook --syntax-check" nigh impossible in CI 14:15:51 <siddharthvipul> we are working on deploying stg cluster for CI openshift.. it's not super fluid as we hoped it would be when we started >:( 14:16:12 <nils> I'm looking for different ways to tackle this, from what I've heard we're not married to using absolute paths there. 14:16:16 <siddharthvipul> rewriting the playbooks as these machines != prod machines, different ways. ugh 14:16:37 <mkonecny> siddharthvipul: I want to discuss the mbbox env in questions topic 14:17:02 <mkonecny> siddharthvipul: Always fun when the staging != prod 14:17:38 <mkonecny> Anything else? 14:18:49 <mkonecny> #topic Blockers 14:18:57 <mkonecny> Anyone is blocked? 14:18:57 <siddharthvipul> mkonecny: we are trying to keep them very close.. just the machines are a different bit 14:19:03 <siddharthvipul> mkonecny: what did you want to discuss :) 14:19:34 <siddharthvipul> just the deployment bits (which doesn't matter for under openshift parts) and using ansible to automate them all 14:20:02 <siddharthvipul> call it deploy-prod or deploy-stg (of course not so straight forward) but the basic idea 14:20:20 <siddharthvipul> lrossett: asaleh_ mkonecny, do ask if you have anything to discuss related to ^ 14:20:23 <lrossett> is there anything we can do do help? 14:20:46 <lrossett> *to help 14:20:50 <mkonecny> #topic Questions 14:21:10 <siddharthvipul> lrossett: hmm, not really unfortunately :( we caught fabian to answer some thing we were stuck with.. but David and I are working on it (the reason you can't help "Access") 14:21:54 <asaleh_> siddharthvipul, mkonecny lrossett ... like our main goal is to have env where we can create CRDs, and afaik, that means admin 14:22:02 <siddharthvipul> but if you want access to prod cluster, we can give you that (it will only last a week or 2) them we can move you to stg 14:22:09 <mkonecny> We still have some development work going on on MBBox, but this should be ready by end of the week and we want to try deployment of operator on OpenShift 4 next week 14:22:31 <lrossett> it is not a blocker for now 14:23:05 <mkonecny> If you provide us prod cluster, how long we will have it till you tear it down? 14:23:08 <siddharthvipul> that's good then.. so access to staging directly? 14:23:09 <lrossett> asaleh_ I think you can cerate a service account with crd and pvc perms 14:23:11 <lrossett> *create 14:23:20 <siddharthvipul> mkonecny: until we have deployed the staging 14:23:33 <siddharthvipul> we need to redeploy the prod cluster because it needs subscription change 14:23:37 <mkonecny> So it will be better for us to wait for staging directly 14:24:25 <asaleh_> lrossett, siddharthvipul ... well we still might need siddharthvipul on standby for the 'wait, one more permission' :) 14:24:28 <mkonecny> We still have work to do and we could see how is the situation at the start of the next week 14:24:43 <asaleh_> mkonecny, seconded waiting till the eow 14:24:58 <lrossett> yep, we are still pretty busy for this week 14:25:05 <siddharthvipul> great, so will inform you all once the staging cluster is ready :) 14:25:36 <mkonecny> I will reply to the e-mail with the decision and add asaleh_ and lrossett to cc 14:26:05 <mkonecny> I think we are done or is there anything else we want to discuss? 14:27:57 <lrossett> nothing from me 14:28:12 <mkonecny> #topic Ending meeting 14:28:12 <mkonecny> #info Thank you all for coming. See you next on next meeting. 14:28:12 <mkonecny> #endmeeting