Attendees: Lars, Lokesh, George, KB (eventually)

Docker update:
– – Docker 1.3.1 for virt7-testing

Xen update:
– Xen 4.4.1 in virt6-testing
– Can’t do a release of xen without libvirt because libvirt depends on a specific version of libxl
– Plan: update to libvirt-1.2.9 before test then release

Signing
– C7 we want to use the CBS signing system which isn’t up yet
– All SIGs will just wait to release C7 stuff until then
– x4c C6 is signed with distro key, so we’ll keep having Johnny sign those

Target:
C6 xen/libvirt beta release in mid-November, release early December C7 docker: release when sig ready C7 xen: beta maybe mid-December

Mid-December: Dojo schedule
– Biggest one: US in early Summer
– 30 Jan before FOSDEM – ~300 people
– Sponsorship?
– Talk / workshop / hack session re virt sig

Pre-FOSDEM dojo:
– kbsingh: It would be good to have virt-sig presence at dojo before FOSDEM
– gwd: I may not be able to make it; I’ll try to find someone to cover me.

IRC chat log:

Virt SIG meeting in 2 minutes
*** jonludlam (~jonludlam@guest-gw.chu.cam.ac.uk) has joined channel
#CentOS-devel [13:59]
*** tazz (~gaurav@triband-mum-120.60.128.133.mtnl.net.in) has joined channel
#CentOS-devel
*** dominic_ (~dgeevarg@59.93.70.149) has quit: Quit: Leaving hello [14:00]
OK, who have we got present? I see pasik and jonludlam [14:02]
kbsingh: You around?
lsm5? [14:04]
OK, well I guess let’s get started. [14:05]
*** agrimm (agrimm@nat/redhat/x-lypwfoeufylzzmdt) has joined channel
#CentOS-devel
gwd, is there an agenda? [14:06]
The main agenda was updates: update on Xen, on Docker, and on the CBS.
The CBS is the main blocker for a Docker release
And really for me doing anything useful as far as a Xen update as well.
[14:07]
I still don’t have my cbs account
And quaid had asked about oVirt joining the Virt SIG as well
jonludlam: Right, I didn’t realize you’d asked for one. [14:08]
* gwd tries to remember the nick of the guy who was working on that…
Well the Xen status is:
* I’ve got Xen 4.4.1 built in the CBS (unsigned)
* It’s using an “updated” blktap2.5, but I’m not sure how stable it is
(needs more testind) [14:09]
(tbh I hadn’t been pinging about it as I’ve had to work on other
things recently…)
* And before we can do a proper release, I’d need to rebuild libvirt
gwd, is it using the dkms blktap module?
Evolution: ping
jzb: pong [14:10]
I think the kernel probably is, not positive.
Evolution: where can I find minutes from last week’s meeting?
Evolution: Atomic SIG meeting, I mean, in case that was vague. :-)
jonludlam: Any reason for asking? :-)
everything should be at -> http://www.CentOS.org/minutes/ [14:11]
gwd, the dkms module is quite old, and I’ve had issues using it
under ubuntu. The newer kernel module source can’t be built out of
tree though
Yes, the whole blktap thing is something which needs to be sorted out.
[14:12]
given we’re providing a new kernel, it might make sense to have
the in-tree patches in the kernel
gwd, totally agree i think the current linux 3.10 kernel in xen4c6 is based on some
citrix patches for blktap2.5 [14:13]
That would make sense — I haven’t had time to actually get to look at
the kernel package and see what’s in it. i remember some discussions/emails with David Vrabel about those
patches
Evolution: found, thx
pasik, might be worth refreshing the patches – we’ve done a lot of
testing on them recently [14:14] jonludlam: ok, good to know jonludlam: can you point to a git tree with the latest patches?
pasik, not sure – I’ll have a look jonludlam: thanks! [14:15]
https://github.com/xenserver/linux-3.x.pg/tree/master/master I
believe
*** telex (teletype@freeshell.de) has quit: Remote host closed the connection
[14:17]
pasik: You haven’t tested the 4.4.1 patches in virt6-testing, have you?
[14:18]
*** telex (teletype@freeshell.de) has joined channel #CentOS-devel
gwd: here now
+1 for prepatching the kernel for needed support, dkms is never
worked for me in prod [14:20]
kbsingh: OK — I’ve just done a status update for Xen (basically not
much update since last time, except that I found a pretty nasty bug
upstream and fixed it)
on the CBS update : [14:21] gwd: hmm, i *think* i did test the rpms you linked gwd: but i’m not totally sure. i’ve been way too busy with other
things gwd: i’ll test again to be sure :)
pasik: Sure. :_)
lots of progress, MerlinTHP is working on closing up the lookaside
binary sources import script, and I am working on the gitblit update
for git.CentOS.org – having those two things done will allow
prettymuch the entire workflow to move from srpms to git
gwd: yup [14:22] kbsingh: any eta?
w.r.t signing packages, we have a sign process setup, need to sync
with the koji guys and workout a release process.
pasik: 2 weeks is a good eta to plan against
C6 isn’t going to use the CBS signing anyway, since the existing C6
packages use the CentOS signing key.
sorry about the delay, Re: docker, we have 1.3.1 up, nothing else to
update :\ [14:23]
we’ll likely have chunk of the work done for the next buildsys
meeting on Monday coming, and i’d give it another week for people to
break i
gwd: if we can find a migration path, would you prefer it went
through cbs ( c6 )
lsm5: and i’m back at RH if that matters :)
*** chorrell (~chorrell@72.15.63.49) has joined channel #CentOS-devel
lsm5: we;ll try not holding that against you
:) [14:24]
kbsingh: That would be fine with me, but I don’t know any of the details
there…
*** arielb (~arielb@fedora/arielb) has joined channel #CentOS-devel
gwd: ok, maybe we can thrash out the detalis on the virt-list. it
will involve shipping a xen that requires: CentOS-release-xen
; which then has the new key
and have the CentOS-release-xen conflict with the older xen
gwd: in terms of targets, are we looking for a 4.4 into c6 or c7 now
? [14:26]
as in, what are we doing first ?
*** BRLX (~Thunderbi@rtr.ak-p.at) has quit: Quit: BRLX [14:27]
kbsingh: Well I thought changing one thing at a time would be good. :-)
So I’m aiming at 4.4 in c6
cool
Also, updating to 4.4 in c6 doesn’t require kernel changes; just xen &
libvirt packages
*** BRLX (~Thunderbi@rtr.ak-p.at) has joined channel #CentOS-devel
second question i had was for jonludlam i guess, there was talk of
updating to a 3.14 kernel, is that still on the cards ? to better
align with upstream expectations [14:28]
kbsingh: Do we want to update to 3.14 in c6? We were definitely
planning on doing a kernel update for c7
if there is a good reason to, we can update in c6 as well as c7 –
specially if its going to mean only having to maintain one kernel
tree [14:29]
I have no particular opinion on kernel version
David V might though [14:30]
jonludlam: I can ask the Linux Xen crowd what they think is a good
option
maybe something to thrash out a bit then, for now for 4.4 into c6,
if its not a blocker then lets not bring it to the agenda
[14:31]
gwd, sounds like a good idea
col [14:32]
cool even
OK, so the plan is: First c6 xen+libvirt; then possibly c6 kernel
update; then c7 everything.
Anything else for Xen? libvirt status? [14:33] for xen4.4
pasik: I was planning on updating it to whatever the most recent
release.
But I haven’t had a chance to look at it. ok [14:35] libvirt obviously needs to be built and tested before we can push the
xen 4.4 update to c6 [14:36]
Yes, that’s basically the delay at this point…
*** smerrill-offline (~smerrill@ec2-174-129-193-80.compute-1.amazonaws.com) is
now known as smerrill
lsm5: Anything you’re blocked on for a c7 docker release, other than the
cbs being set up? [14:37]
do we want to include the upstream libvirt people as well ?
DV: ping
gwd: no blockers
lsm5: Cool.
*** mbrysa (mbrysa@nat/redhat/x-toigkxrcipgtvkod) has quit: Quit: Leaving
[14:39]
quaid also mentioned oVirt potentially wanting to do join the Virt SIG;
I presume to have a re-build of qemu with some extra features enabled
Is there anything to discuss about that?
*** blip (~dewey@unaffiliated/blip) has quit: Ping timeout: 258 seconds
kbsingh: Also, I have in the last meeting minutes something about dojos
and sponsorship? Was there an action item there for anyone? [14:40]
unsure, but there are a few ovirt people on the virt-list now, so we
can ping there
*** mattgriffin (~textual@99-181-54-51.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net) has
joined channel #CentOS-devel
gwd: we have a dojo on the day before Fosdem, I think virt-sig
should do something there, either a hack session or a talk session
kbsingh: quaid responded to my e-mail announcing the Virt SIG meeting on
CentOS-virt
Hrm
fosdem> It’s looking somewhat likely that I won’t be able to make it to
FOSDEM next year, due to some personal stuff I have to sort out in the
US around that time. [14:41]
gwd: ok, we should then try and find someone who can cover ? [14:43]
brb
back [14:44]
kbsingh: Yes, that would be good. [14:45]
kbsingh: Let me see if I can find someone to get involved. [14:46]
thanks
*** chandankumar (chandankum@nat/redhat/x-kxxugjygxkcyqqlh) has quit: Quit:
Leaving
OK, anything else to cover?
the cloudsig is starting to finally get off the ground, do we want
to cross polinate with them a bit ? [14:47]
maybe have someone from virtsig hangout in their meetings and ask
them to come along here as well jonludlam: would you like to email about the blktap2.5 kernel patches
once you figure it out?
kbsingh: They’re doing stuff like openstack, right?
pasik, if there’s anything actually to do, I will [14:48]
gwd: yeah, openstack and eucalyptus looks to be what they are
starting with, then cloudstack and opennebula miht comealong later.
it looks like the recent activity on the patch in our tree has
been to do with very large scalability
which might not be of much interest jonludlam: thanks! [14:49] jonludlam: well, at least all the bugfixes are of interest :)
pasik, for sure :-) [14:50]
kbsingh: Yes. I’ll see if I can start lurking on their meetings.
talking of other SIGs, what needs to happen to kick off the ocaml
SIG? [14:51]
Just real quick — any other business we need to cover before we close
the Virt SIG meeting?
jonludlam: not much, we just need to find a couple of problem
definitions that sig will try and solve, then propose it and bob’s
your uncle
*** lvv (~loganaden@RNT-ENG2.dhcp.mu.afrinic.net) has quit: Quit: lvv
gwd: not from me.
is ‘we need it for xapi’ a sufficient problem definiton? [14:52]
I’m sure there are more problems it solve too… :-) [14:53]
jonludlam: thats a good place to start from [14:54]
jonludlam: lets pickup on that over email, i need to rebase over to
another call
sure
*** santana (9f99820a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.159.153.130.10) has joined
channel #CentOS-devel
Great, thanks everyone! [14:55]
—–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—