14:04:15 <gwd> #startmeeting Virt SIG
14:04:15 <centbot> Meeting started Tue Aug  8 14:04:15 2017 UTC.  The chair is gwd. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:04:15 <centbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
14:04:23 <gwd> #chair sbonazzo carlwgeorge
14:04:23 <centbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge gwd sbonazzo
14:04:27 <sbonazzo> carlwgeorge: please add yourself on https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization SIG membership :-)
14:04:31 * lsm5 here
14:04:37 <gwd> #chair lsm5
14:04:37 <centbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge gwd lsm5 sbonazzo
14:05:13 <strigazi> strigazi here
14:05:19 <gwd> carlwgeorge Hello, I dont' think we've met.  Welcome!  What's your interest in the sig?
14:05:26 <gwd> #chair strigazi
14:05:26 <centbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge gwd lsm5 sbonazzo strigazi
14:05:53 <gwd> strigazi Also welcome, I dont' think we've met, what's your interest in the sig? :-)
14:05:54 <carlwgeorge> sbonazzo: just signed in on the wiki, i don't appear to have edit permissions on that page
14:06:32 <strigazi> gwd yeap, I want to help in maintaining the kubernetes pkg
14:06:41 <sbonazzo> carlwgeorge: strigazi: according to SIG rules you need approval by gwd :-)
14:06:47 <carlwgeorge> gwd: howdy.  i packaged up the latest version of docker-compose for el7 for my work (rackspace), and i would like to maintain it in the virt sig.
14:07:09 <gwd> strigzi carlwgeorge great!
14:07:14 <carlwgeorge> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/carlwgeorge/docker-compose/
14:07:43 <strigazi> gwd I'm Spyros Trigazis from the OpenStack Magnum and CERN cloud teams
14:07:54 <carlwgeorge> as long as it's allowed for a sig to override base packages, which are detailed in that copr description
14:08:10 <lsm5> carlwgeorge: yup, SIGs can do that
14:08:19 <gwd> carlwgeorge Xen certainly has to override base packages.
14:08:20 <carlwgeorge> that's what i thought
14:08:58 <gwd> Who was doing kubernetes before?  They basically stepped down, right?
14:09:02 <carlwgeorge> yeah rackspace is actually looking at using the xen kernel yall have for our centos 6 cloud images (in the guest) in order to get /dev/xen
14:09:15 <lsm5> gwd: it used to be me by default
14:09:24 <strigazi> gwd lsm5 did the latest build
14:09:35 <lsm5> gwd: but good to have someone else take care of it
14:10:08 <gwd> Oh, right -- so lsm5 took over from jchaloup.  As long as lsm5 is ok with strigazi taking over it's all good.
14:10:16 <lsm5> gwd: yup
14:10:41 <lsm5> gwd: please approve both carlwgeorge and strigazi if not already
14:11:20 <strigazi> lsm5 gwd thanks
14:11:43 <gwd> carlwgeorge strigazi Look at https://wiki.centos.org/SIGGuide#head-689830df3d9c683ef8998646a479fe25f4e91080 to see how to get accounts & apply for access
14:12:49 <gwd> OK, so what we normally do is go around the different projects (docker/kubernetes, ovirt, xen) and give a quick update
14:13:08 <gwd> Then bring up other topics we want to discuss.
14:13:11 <sbonazzo> gwd I would suggest to record we ahve 2 new members
14:13:34 <sbonazzo> gwd with an #info :-)
14:13:39 <gwd> check
14:13:49 <gwd> #info Two new members: carlwgeorge to maintain docker-compose, strigazi to help maintain the kubernetes packages
14:13:49 <strigazi> gwd I did Steps 1 and 2, 10 days ago.
14:16:03 <carlwgeorge> thanks for the link, i've had it open for a few days but haven't read all the way through yet
14:16:16 <gwd> strigazi I don't seem to have gotten a notification about that.
14:16:52 <strigazi> my acount name is strigazi
14:17:08 <gwd> kbsingh Do we need to file a ticket with you to get strigazi approved for the virt sig?
14:18:54 <gwd> OK, in the mean time, let's start the updates
14:19:01 <gwd> I'll go first because mine is really short
14:19:06 <gwd> #topic Xen update
14:19:15 <carlwgeorge> i do already have a centos account, same as my nic
14:19:54 <gwd> #info Considering using XenServer kernel for Xen, rather than upstream
14:20:28 <gwd> carlwgeorge Let me know if you have any opinions on ^
14:21:05 <gwd> XenServer is currently using Linux 4.4; but the main purpose would be to get more consistent driver support (which seems a bit spotty when just using a vanilla upstream kernel)
14:21:19 <gwd> That's about it for me.
14:21:32 <gwd> lsm5, you have anything?
14:21:35 <carlwgeorge> is the difference using a kernel fork, versus just a patchset?
14:21:43 <lsm5> yup
14:21:50 <lsm5> #topic Containers update
14:22:10 <lsm5> #info moving from "Docker" to "Containers" because we have other tools as well now
14:22:22 <lsm5> #info new package cri-o available
14:22:22 <gwd> Cool
14:22:27 <lsm5> #link http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=17551
14:22:34 <lsm5> #info new package buildah available
14:22:41 <lsm5> #link http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=17546
14:23:10 <lsm5> #info docker still on 1.13.1
14:23:39 <lsm5> #info moving koji tag set from virt7-docker-* to virt7-container-*
14:23:55 <lsm5> #info there will be a centos-release-container package released soon to include these repos
14:24:04 <lsm5> gwd: that's it from my side i guess
14:24:10 <gwd> OK, sbonazzo?
14:24:23 <sbonazzo> #topic oVirt updates
14:24:43 <sbonazzo> #info oVirt 4.1.4 bits landed in CentOS VIrt SIG release repo
14:25:15 <sbonazzo> #info it's CentOS 7.4 ready, except for the missing qemu-kvm-ev which will be built when CentOS 7.4 packages will be available in CBS
14:25:44 <sbonazzo> #info upstream 4.1.5 planned for August 22nd, Virt SIG packages will follow
14:26:19 <sbonazzo> #info working with mrunge and OpsTools SIG for metrics packages and an updated fluentd
14:26:45 <sbonazzo> I think that's all from my side
14:27:20 <gwd> OK thanks.
14:27:24 <gwd> #topic AOB
14:27:54 <gwd> carlwgeorge kernel> No, like every distro XenServer starts with a vanilla kernel and has a load of patches
14:28:12 <gwd> So the differences would be: 1) More patches, and 2) A number of out-of-tree drivers
14:28:39 <gwd> But the idea would be that there's a stable set of drivers that we can rely on working (i.e., XenServer's HCL)
14:29:21 <gwd> At the moment there are always random drivers that are broken int he upstream kernel, adn the Virt Sig doesn't really have the resouces to maintain that kind of hardware support.
14:29:57 <carlwgeorge> that seems fair then
14:30:21 <srn_prgmr> gwd: it makes sense to pool resources with another organization, are they any contenders other than xenserver?
14:31:47 <gwd> srn_prgmr: None that come to mind -- did you have any suggestions?
14:31:52 <gwd> #chair srn_prgmr
14:31:52 <centbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge gwd lsm5 sbonazzo srn_prgmr strigazi
14:32:26 <srn_prgmr> gwd: I
14:32:41 <gwd> The only orgs I know that both test Xen support and have a solid hardware HCL would be XenServer, SuSE, and Oracle.
14:33:39 <srn_prgmr> gwd: I'll think about it, I'm just not sure about what happens if we find issues with it
14:33:41 <gwd> Of those three, XenServer would feel the least competition from CentOS, I think, and so would mind the least giving us a hand
14:34:38 <srn_prgmr> I get the impression Debian has the most pure OSS users of Xen, could be wrong. I don't know how good their support actually is
14:34:42 <gwd> My perspective may be a bit skewed, though, by the fact that those are the developers I work with on a daily basis.  If there's someone I haven't thought of, do let me know.
14:34:54 <srn_prgmr> It would be too impolitic perhaps ;)
14:35:39 <gwd> So the upstream Xen support is actually really solid.  The thing people have been complaining about is driver support.
14:35:49 <gwd> I mean, Xen support in Linux upstream.
14:36:31 <gwd> I'm not sure Debian's kernel (or Fedora's kernel) would be *that* much more solid than a pure upstream version.
14:36:55 <gwd> (Solid from a consistent driver support standpoint, I mean.)
14:37:32 <srn_prgmr> I'm willing to do some research
14:38:02 <gwd> XenServer's kernel and drivers will have been tested specifically with their HCL to run under Xen.
14:38:29 <gwd> BTW I'm not proposing we do a straight repackage
14:38:35 <gwd> ...of XenServer's kernel packages.
14:38:49 <gwd> There will be some things in their queue we want to remove, and probably some things we want to add or change.
14:39:28 <gwd> So if there's an issue, we can try to find a patch that fixes it and include it in our own packages.
14:39:54 <gwd> Were there any other concerns you had w/ taking XenServer's krenel?
14:40:49 <srn_prgmr> gwd: I don't understand their release cycle well enough. I'm not diametrically opposed, and centos is already a tradition of repackaging commercial sources, so
14:41:50 <srn_prgmr> gwd: it's reasonable just would be helpful to have more information, maybe an email to the centos-virt list later?
14:42:30 <gwd> srn_prgmr OK, I'll send an e-mail.  It's about the right time -- up until now I've been mostly testing the waters with various stakeholders
14:42:38 <srn_prgmr> thank you
14:42:47 <gwd> Before making an announcement that might be controversial. :-)
14:43:49 <srn_prgmr> I don't have anything else on that
14:44:02 <gwd> carlwgeorge strigazi The guide doesn't seem very clear what the next step is -- in the past we've had to open a ticket with kbsingh.  If you don't hear anything in a few days try pinging him again
14:44:19 <strigazi> gwd ok
14:44:32 <gwd> OK, anything else to bring up?
14:44:39 * carlwgeorge nods
14:44:42 <strigazi> I pinged him 3 hours ago to.
14:44:46 <strigazi> I'm good
14:45:08 <srn_prgmr> gwd: would you like me to submit patches for 4.8 again
14:46:10 <gwd> srn_prgmr: I thought I had merged / reworked those
14:46:32 <srn_prgmr> gwd: for next tuesday
14:47:45 <gwd> Oh, right.  That would be helpful, I think, but I'll be on PTO.  You'll have to coordinate with hughesjr to get them built.
14:48:07 <srn_prgmr> will do
14:50:02 <gwd> OK, sounds like we're done -- thanks everyone!
14:50:04 <gwd> #endmeeting