Monday, 2014-04-14

*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-300:12
*** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting-300:39
*** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting-300:48
*** wchrisj has joined #openstack-meeting-300:56
*** xuhanp has quit IRC01:00
*** banix has quit IRC01:01
*** wchrisj has quit IRC01:32
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-302:19
*** carl_baldwin has left #openstack-meeting-302:20
*** jcoufal has quit IRC02:28
*** coolsvap|afk is now known as coolsvap02:38
*** amotoki has quit IRC02:38
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-303:49
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting-304:10
*** eghobo has quit IRC04:37
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-304:38
*** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-304:40
*** rand738 has quit IRC04:43
*** rand738 has joined #openstack-meeting-304:43
*** eghobo has quit IRC04:44
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz06:16
*** lpetrut has quit IRC06:17
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-306:24
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-306:59
*** jtomasek_ has joined #openstack-meeting-307:01
*** jtomasek_ has quit IRC07:02
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov07:13
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-307:22
*** jtomasek has quit IRC07:23
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-307:23
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting-307:33
*** nacim has joined #openstack-meeting-307:37
*** eguz has quit IRC07:50
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-308:11
*** lpetrut has quit IRC08:15
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting-308:16
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting-308:33
*** lpetrut has quit IRC09:27
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-310:46
*** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk10:52
*** amotoki has quit IRC11:28
*** david-lyle has quit IRC11:41
*** enikanorov has quit IRC12:04
*** enikanorov has joined #openstack-meeting-312:04
*** YorikSar has left #openstack-meeting-312:18
*** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting-312:36
*** MaxV has quit IRC12:53
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-312:54
*** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-312:55
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-313:19
*** HenryG has quit IRC13:21
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC13:39
*** enikanorov_ has joined #openstack-meeting-313:57
*** mestery_ has joined #openstack-meeting-313:58
*** mestery has quit IRC13:58
*** wchrisj has joined #openstack-meeting-313:58
*** enikanorov has quit IRC13:59
*** wchrisj has quit IRC14:31
*** wchrisj has joined #openstack-meeting-314:32
*** mestery_ is now known as mestery14:32
*** jpomero has joined #openstack-meeting-314:32
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-314:47
*** HenryG has joined #openstack-meeting-314:48
*** banix has quit IRC14:54
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-314:54
*** cjellick has quit IRC14:56
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-314:58
*** corvus has joined #openstack-meeting-314:59
krotscheckWho’s here for Storyboard?15:00
krotscheck#startmeeting Storyboard15:00
openstackMeeting started Mon Apr 14 15:00:42 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is krotscheck. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:00
NikitaKonovalovhi everyone15:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'storyboard'15:00
krotscheckHey hey15:00
krotscheck#topic Work on Soft/Hard delete.15:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Work on Soft/Hard delete. (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:01
* corvus is aka jeblair15:01
krotscheckQuick update: We’ve got a patch in for tasks15:01
krotscheckthanks to NikitaKonovalov15:01
krotscheckI’ve got a broken tasks for stories.15:01
krotscheckBroken patch15:01
krotscheckAnyone been working on projects?15:01
krotscheckGuess not.15:02
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-315:02
krotscheckWell, mordred went through and deleted all the not-using-storyboard tasks on thursday, so that might not come up for a while yet.15:02
*** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting-315:02
krotscheck#topic Last meeting agenda15:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Last meeting agenda (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:03
krotscheckSorry, that’s a more appropriate topic.15:03
*** cjellick has quit IRC15:03
krotscheckRe: UX/UI resources, I’m in contact with HP’s internal resources, but they’’re just now hiring up that team, so unlikely to get much help re testing labs, etc from there.15:03
krotscheckRe: ElasticSearch/Sphinx.15:03
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-315:03
krotscheckNikitaKonovalov did a really good analysis of the advantages of ES15:04
NikitaKonovalovI guess we are considering only ES now, no Sphinx anymore15:05
corvuskrotscheck: did you get input from clarkb and mordred?15:05
krotscheckI took the time to talk to mordred about that as well, and between NikitaKonovalov and mordred’s comments it quickly came out that everyone (in OS) is using ES, and nobody seems to be using sphinx.15:05
corvuskrotscheck: who is 'everyone'?15:05
krotscheckI didn’t have the time to talk to clarkb - mostly because clarkb was in HeartBleed hell.15:05
krotscheckcorvus: Well, ruhe did a search across the openstack codebase and couldn’t find any references to sphinx15:06
krotscheckSo “everyone” to me means “the skill set in openstack seems to be heavily biased towards elastic search"15:06
krotscheckIn short: We have a bunch of information on the ES side, but little on sphinx.15:07
corvuskrotscheck: right, but we can't expect those people to just show up and start working on this; there's typically very little overlap.  moreover, they're extremely unlikely to show up and run it...15:07
krotscheckSo I’m not quite comfortable making a decision on that yet without additional ideas of what sphinx would buy us.15:07
corvuswe should also consider things like ease of deployment, extra dependencies for people running it, resources needed, administration, etc15:08
NikitaKonovalovcorvus: how hard is it to start a minimal ES installation?15:08
* ruhe is here15:08
krotscheckcorvus: I’m less concerned with them “running it”, and more of “Who can we annoy with questions when we try to build up our own skills in that area”15:08
ruheto start local ES for development you need three steps: 1. download archive 2. unpack it 3. run shell command15:08
corvusNikitaKonovalov: i don't know actually.  the only one i've seen in practice falls over all the time and consumes about 0.5fte just to keep it running.15:09
krotscheckcorvus: Sounds like you’re pretty invested in making sure that we make the right decision here, would you like to come up with an etherpad of pro/con arguments and make a recommendation?15:09
krotscheckAs I said, so far we’ve only got half of the picture.15:09
krotscheck(or one third, or one fourth, given that there may be other solutions we’re not considering)15:10
corvuskrotscheck: i don't have time for that in the next several weeks.  i think we should consult clarkb on es...15:10
corvuskrotscheck: what did you learn from mordred about sphinx?15:10
krotscheckGiven that the person I was going to ask about sphinx basically said : Ehn, everyone else is using elasticsearch...15:10
krotscheckcorvus: ^15:11
krotscheckI can dig through those logs.15:11
corvuskrotscheck: so we'll learn a lot just by asking clarkb.  i expect he'll say one of "no way man i'm not running another one of those" or "sure, a small one will probably be fine".  and then we'll have the ops story.  :)15:12
krotscheckExtract more information, but the only meaningful statement about sphinx was that it was the de-facto standard back when mordred was an sql consultant.15:12
corvusif anyone else knows someone who has run a small-scale es, that would be great to know.15:12
krotscheckcorvus: Well, I want to make sure that storyboard is as self-contained as possible, right?15:12
krotscheckRequiring a large dedicated ops team doesn’t lead to easy adoption inside of orgs, etc etc...15:13
krotscheckBut yeah, I’ll check with clarkb15:13
corvuskrotscheck: exactly; i think we should target being able to run this all on a single modest server15:13
krotscheckOk, so ES/Sphinx investigation to continue.15:14
corvus(for a small set of projects; and scale up after that)15:14
NikitaKonovalovAnyway, we may say that ES is optional and servers for a performance15:14
NikitaKonovalovIf some one does not use it then fall back to sql15:14
corvusNikitaKonovalov: oh that makes sense; would you fall back on a full table scan?15:14
corvusok cool15:14
* corvus reads etherpad quickly15:14
krotscheckOk, so that’s an appropach should we decide to go with ES15:14
* krotscheck speak good engrish15:15
corvusi wonder if we could trigger a background es update from the api?15:16
krotscheckHonestly, search isn’t a super pressing issue _yet_, since at best we’re a week out of actually implementing it, but let’s all keep it in mind as we continue.15:16
krotscheckAnything else re: es/sphinx?15:16
corvusso we're not blocking like the explicit flow15:16
corvusand we don't have to wait for esriver15:16
NikitaKonovalovcorvus: we can use evenetlet or even another process to do that15:17
corvusNikitaKonovalov: cool.  maybe we could start with explicit but then make that a future enhancement for performance...15:17
corvusoh, i just noticed the 'updated_at' part of es river15:18
corvusthat might not be so bad then.15:18
krotscheckWith any luck, we’ll be able to reduce the number of search queries anyway by being smart about determining what’s relevant to a particular user.15:19
corvusi think i still lean toward explicit or something like it because it's simpler (fewer dependencies)15:19
corvusheh, i can't really decide between those two; i'll keep thinking about it :)15:20
krotscheckFeels like y’all want to do some design discussion, let’s put search into the design discussion list and move on to the MVP 1.01 topics ttx didn’t get around to last time.15:20
corvuskrotscheck: ++15:20
krotscheck#topic Stories with all alnded tasks should not be in primary UI filter15:20
*** openstack changes topic to "Stories with all alnded tasks should not be in primary UI filter (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:20
krotscheckSo, I’m working on that right now.15:21
krotscheckBecause it annoys the living daylights out of me.15:21
krotscheckMy current approach is….15:21
krotscheckWell, I’d like some feedback on it.15:21
ttxFTR the MVP 1.01 stuff are all the things I *think* would make a better experience at our early dogfooding stage15:21
krotscheckttx: before I continue too much down that road, could you look at the patch and see if it does what you want it to?15:21
ttxfeel free to add more stuff to it15:21
ttxkrotscheck: sure15:22
ttxmight not manage to get to it today though15:22
ttxthis week is a bit busy15:22
krotscheckttx: That’s ok, I don’t know why it’s breaking anyway :)15:22
corvusof the things in ttx's list, the ones i most feel the need for are: ui filter, assignments, story activity15:23
corvusone that i would like to add is: some kind of priority.15:23
krotscheck“Tasks can’t be edited” is done.15:23
ttxthe projectgroup thing makes a better experience for storyboard specifically, since that allows to see "all of it"15:23
corvusi'm not sure where the priority discussions ended up at; i wasn't keeping up with that...15:23
ttxbut it's useless without the ui filter15:23
NikitaKonovalovkrotscheck: it should be easy to filter completed tasks on server side, and have a fetch_all_flag to get all the rest15:24
ttxpriority handling is still a bit up in the air15:24
krotscheckYou have to click on the actual task to bring up the edit form, so the UI needs to change, but you can do it.15:24
krotscheckOk, guys. One topic at a time please.15:24
ttxI mean, we know how to do it the dumb way (high/medium/low)15:24
* ttx freezes15:24
krotscheckcorvus: ttx I agree that priority should probably be mvp 1.0115:25
ttxkrotscheck: i'll mark it done15:25
krotscheckAnyone else?15:25
*** coolsvap|afk is now known as coolsvap15:25
ttxkrotscheck: the ideas we had for "priority" were a bit ambitious, with crazy kanbans and stuff :)15:26
krotscheckSorry, edited agenda15:26
krotscheckSupport for Project Groups15:26
krotscheck#topic Support for Project Groups15:26
*** openstack changes topic to "Support for Project Groups (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:26
ttxproject group is a key feature as we add more projects15:26
ttxat this point it's only useful to see storyboard (two projects) in one shot15:26
krotscheckttx: How many levels deep were you thinking on that?15:26
ttxkrotscheck: you mean, shall we have groups of groups ?15:27
NikitaKonovalovttx: shoud those groups match OS Programs15:27
krotscheckttx: Yeah, for instance: We could have “Openstack-Infra” as a group, “Storyboard” as a subgroup, etc.15:27
NikitaKonovalovif so, let's call them programs also?15:27
corvusNikitaKonovalov: that's a neat idea15:28
ttxkrotscheck: in my view we can model everything with a single level15:28
krotscheckWorks for me15:28
ttxi/e/ storyboard-webclient would be part of several groups ("storyboard", infra, official openstack stuff, etc)15:28
ttxthat said, groups of groups would make specifying those groups easier15:28
ttxi.e. if you add a project to "infra" it could automatically appear in "official stuff"15:29
ttxso I can see the benefit of that15:29
krotscheckYeah, but if one project can be a part of many groups, then we could have a parent group composed of subgroups and individual projects, and quite frankly that’s a set of edge cases that may be a little too complex for how young the project is.15:29
ttxthe only "needed" part is the ability for one project to belong to multiple groups15:29
* krotscheck is just trying to keep our features and commits digestible :)15:30
ttxbecause some of them just won't be a subgroup of another15:30
ttxfor example you could have a "UI project group" that goes Horizon, Storyboard-webclient etc15:30
krotscheckOh man, that would make me so happy15:30
krotscheckI could create a “Javascript only” project group and ignore all the silly python stuff.15:31
corvusi agree, groups of groups would be nice; we can probably start with just direct membership and expand it later15:31
ttxkrotscheck: ideally we would also support "personal project groups" which would be like your personal list15:31
corvusshould just need an extra mapping table15:31
krotscheckAlright, so any disagreements with keeping project groups in MVP 1.01?15:31
ttxthat can be baked into the same system, or be done more like a subscription thing15:31
corvus(gerrit lets you compose group membership, and we use it quite often)15:31
krotscheckcorvus: You suggested that it might be less important than UI filter, activity, and assignments?15:32
corvusttx: ++; i lean toward subscription there for ease of end-user use15:32
corvuskrotscheck: only because we only have 4 projects now, but yes15:32
krotscheckSubscription is definitely a better metaphor.15:32
ttxkrotscheck: I think projectgroup is not very useful until we have ui filter15:32
krotscheckBut still MVP 1.01?15:33
krotscheckOr not?15:33
ttxthe idea being to get to the relevant information15:33
ttxfor me yes15:33
krotscheckSergeyLukjanov? ^15:33
corvuskrotscheck: yes, we'll be able to use it in mvp1.01 when it exists15:33
ttxjuggling between storyboard and storyboard-webclient is my #1 pain with SB at the moment15:33
ttxso projectgroup would fix that for me15:33
krotscheckttx: Quick side question: Is that for creating tasks, or for listing things?15:33
ttxfor listing things. Tasks should always point to a specific project15:34
krotscheckGood to know.15:34
krotscheckOk, Project groups stays in MVP 1.0115:34
krotscheck#topic Story Activity15:34
*** openstack changes topic to "Story Activity (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:34
SergeyLukjanovprobably we should start from simple filtering on ui15:34
krotscheckSergeyLukjanov: I agree.15:34
ttxI added this one because it's still difficult to follow what happens on a story15:35
* SergeyLukjanov batch processing meeting logs like Hadoop 15:35
ttxstatus changes, who did what is as valuable as the discussion15:35
ttxwe can emulate it by leaving comments, but the time info is still missing15:35
NikitaKonovalovttx: yes, but should it be mixed with comments in one flow?15:36
krotscheckttx: Part of me thinks that this is a part we really should give a lot of design attention to, because it’s going to be the primary way in which we engage our users.15:36
ttxNikitaKonovalov: that would be my preference, I think. Could be convinced otherwise I guess15:36
krotscheckDeltas on tasks and stories are going to drive things like emails, notifications, etc.15:36
ttxusually a comment can only be parsed as part of the story  history15:37
ttxreading comments out of context of what happened to that story would imho be difficult15:37
ttxbut maybe I'm spoiled with Launchpad habits here15:38
NikitaKonovalovso we are replicating LP behavior as is15:38
ttxso I'm willing to hear alternate suggestions15:38
NikitaKonovalovI didn't say it's bad15:38
krotscheckI haven’t thought enough about the problem to have alternate suggestions.15:38
krotscheckBut I really want to have them.15:38
corvusttx: i like the updates in comments flow;  if we put enough metadata in the db, we can change it later15:39
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-315:39
ttxI think they should appear in the same timeline -- we could have timeline filters if people really don't want to see certain things in that15:39
corvusbut maybe planning for that basic functionality now is a reasonable approach15:39
SergeyLukjanovpersonally, I like the LP-way with status change == comment but with ability to filter only service comments15:39
NikitaKonovalovttx: +1 for filtering comments15:39
ttxbut I never heard the complaint that LP discussion contained extraneaous info15:39
ttxkrotscheck: would you keep both comments and activity in the same table, or try to mix two tables ?15:40
krotscheckttx: Honestly, I agree with you on UI completely, I just have strong opinions about the implementation.15:40
corvuskrotscheck: in what way?15:41
krotscheckI feel that it should be modeled as a stream of events of different types, which then carry with them references to the appropriate records.15:41
krotscheckI don’t feel overloading the comments table is the right way to go about it.15:41
krotscheckAnd that a story event could be, say “status changed”, or “comment, status changed”, etc etc.15:41
ttxkrotscheck: fair enough. i just fear we would duplicate the comment in the activity table saying "dude left a comment"15:41
corvuskrotscheck: so a timeline with ids and timestamps, and then 'comment' and 'event' tables link to that?15:41
ruhejira has a nice way to separate different type of events/comments. it has a tab for full-history changes, tab for user comments, tab for status changes15:42
krotscheckcorvus: ….maaaybe.15:42
krotscheckcorvus: As I said, haven’t had much time to think it through.15:42
NikitaKonovalovkrotscheck: possibly a TimelineEvent table for status changes, and comment_id field to link a comment to it15:42
krotscheckcorvus: Immediate concerns are holy crap big table of ID’s is that going to be performant15:42
ttxkrotscheck: don't have strong opinions on how to do it under the hood. I think by default it should show up in the same timeline, but that's about it15:43
krotscheckNikitaKonovalov: Yeah, something like that.15:43
ttxkrotscheck: oh, one thing15:43
ttxkrotscheck: in LP there was the ability to leave a comment when you changed status, like to justify your change15:43
corvuskrotscheck: ok.  i don't have terribly strong feelings about the implementation at this point; i do think we all agree that what's stored in the db should be expressive enough to support the kind of filtering,etc we might want to do later15:44
ttxand then it would appear on the same event in the timeline15:44
krotscheckttx: Yeah, already flagged that as a consideration.15:44
ttxIt was a good thing because it forced people to explain why they had changed something15:44
ttxI fear if we sperarate them too much we would encourage the wrong behavior15:44
krotscheckttx: That’ll be interesting to figure out since status happens on tasks and comments happen on stories :)15:44
krotscheckttx: And it’s not very RESTful to modifiy two resources in one call :)15:45
*** enikanorov_ has quit IRC15:45
ttxyes, that'w why I bring it up. I hope we can preserve it, but it may not fit that well15:45
krotscheckttx: I feel we SHOULD preserve that, even if it doesn’t fit well.15:45
krotscheckBut given those constraints I think we can figure something out.15:45
ttxfor example, someone removing a task should almost always explain why15:45
ttxbecause otherwise you just don't understand what happened15:46
ttxhe could leave a comment after the fact... but good UI would let him do it in one go. Might be a REST nightmare with two calls :)15:46
krotscheckOk, so summary sounds like: “Yes we all want this, possibly in one filterable timeline, but design needs some offline gray metter.” Sound about right?15:46
krotscheckHonestly, I don’t think we have enough people right now to assign someone to it.15:47
krotscheckAt least not before next monday15:47
krotscheck#agreed We all want a story timeline/activity history, possibly in one filterable timeline, but design and implementation needs oflfine gray matter15:47
ttxarguably less urgent than the ui filter15:48
krotscheckttx: Yeah, taht’s why I’m focused on that :)15:48
krotscheckActually, NikitaKonovalov, what are you working on right now?15:48
krotscheckWant to take this on?15:48
NikitaKonovalovI'll take it15:48
krotscheck#action NikitaKonovalov Implement story actions/timelines15:48
krotscheckOk, next topic15:49
krotscheck#topic Story priority15:49
*** openstack changes topic to "Story priority (Meeting topic: Storyboard)"15:49
* krotscheck unfreezes ttx15:49
ttxstory priority?15:49
ttxthat's one of the areas where we actually want to get smarter than Launchpad15:50
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz15:50
ttxand let different groups of stakeholders have different priorities for stuff15:50
ttxtrick is it's easily said, not so easy to design15:50
ttxMy last try at it was at
ttxi.e. use several ordered task lists instead of a "priority"15:51
ttxso let's take a practical example15:51
ttxfor that MVP 1.0115:51
krotscheck(quick aside: I can probably knock out Task Assignments pretty quickly, I think it’s already supported by the API)15:52
ttxwe could have had a task list where we would have listed all the things we want there, and then play with their ordering15:52
krotscheck(since we’re running low on time)15:52
ttx(relative priotity by ranking)15:52
ttxIt's a bit ambitious and we are not exactly following on clear footsteps here15:53
NikitaKonovalovkrotscheck: the assignee_id is pretty availbel to use15:53
ttxso it might just be a bit crazy / unusable15:53
ttxIt's also quite a bit of work to do the crazy trello-like UI15:53
krotscheckttx: So, to me this sounds like priority is an integer rather than a specific status.15:54
krotscheckAnd that the basic UI decision is “This is more important/less important” than it currently is.15:54
krotscheckThe question is whether we care about explicit priority, or relative priority.15:55
ttxkrotscheck: right, but also priority is only relevant in the context of a specific task list15:55
krotschecki.e. “This task is more important than that one” vs. “This is in the same group as these”15:55
ttxi.e. the priority for release management may not be the priority for the core devs etc.15:55
corvus(fwiw, i'm very open to experimentation here; i don't mind at all of we go through several completely different iterations.  i'd rather have something sooner, even if we throw it out and have to reprioritize everything)15:56
ttxhence the idea of having multiple task lists, and infdicate priority by ordering that subset of tasks15:56
krotscheckttx: How many different task lists do you think there will be?15:56
ttxkrotscheck: i expect people to have their own task list, then at least one project-level one for milestone planning15:57
*** xuhanp has quit IRC15:57
ttxbut i also expect people to run with them and start listing their little group priority15:57
SergeyLukjanovsorry for offtopic: any thoughts when we could add subscriptions?15:57
ttx(see types of task lists in the wiki doc)15:57
krotscheckWe have two minutes15:58
krotscheckSergeyLukjanov: As soon as someone builds it :). Which, given our current backlog, looks about… 3 weeks?15:58
ttxkrotscheck: to simplify first I would keep task lists at the project level15:58
krotscheckttx: Ok, priority by project first.15:58
ttxi.e. a project could have multiple task lists in a table15:59
krotscheckFTR: I love having personal vs. project priority15:59
ttxkrotscheck: might be worth baking in a personal task list (same as the personal project group)15:59
krotscheckYeah, but not MVP 1.01 :)16:00
NikitaKonovalovkrotscheck: do you mean the tasks that you have created have a bigger priority than other in the same project?16:00
ttxOh sure, I'm not sure we can do something with priority in 1.01 :)16:00
krotscheckHonestly, this is one place where not having FK’s is going to be magical, because we can do fun overloady thingies in the ORM.16:00
ttxtask lists could also live at projectgroup level, fwiw16:00
ttxi.e. "storyboard priorities" rather than "storyboard-webclient priorities"'16:01
krotscheckAnyway, we’re out of time. Any last comments before we get kicked out?16:01
*** jcoufal has quit IRC16:01
corvusttx: :( we need some kind of priority soon16:01
ttxnope thx!16:01
ttxcorvus: 1.02?16:01
krotscheckcorvus: We can do a really stupid task-level priority to start with if you need something RTFN16:02
corvusi find it _very_ hard to work without some kind of sorting16:02
ttxcorvus: maybe it can be done incrementally, starting with a unique per-project list16:02
corvuskrotscheck: yeah, anything would help :)16:02
*** coolsvap1 has joined #openstack-meeting-316:02
krotscheckOk, so let’s start with that for 1.01 and then give it some love next release16:02
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"16:02
openstackMeeting ended Mon Apr 14 16:02:50 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)16:02
openstackMinutes (text):
ttxkrotscheck: also we should hit all the weird stuff -- like the fact it's tasks you actually add to task lists, not stories :)16:03
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-316:03
ttx(see unsolved issues in the wiki page)16:03
krotscheckGot it16:03
*** coolsvap1 has quit IRC16:03
*** coolsvap1 has joined #openstack-meeting-316:04
*** coolsvap1 has quit IRC16:08
*** nacim has quit IRC16:33
*** MaxV has quit IRC16:44
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC16:56
*** corvus is now known as jeblair17:11
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-317:12
*** eghobo has quit IRC17:12
*** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-317:12
*** eguz has quit IRC17:12
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-317:13
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-317:15
*** MaxV has quit IRC17:23
*** SumitNaiksatam_ has joined #openstack-meeting-317:39
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC17:39
*** SumitNaiksatam_ is now known as SumitNaiksatam17:39
*** enikanorov_ has joined #openstack-meeting-317:52
*** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk17:54
*** ruhe has left #openstack-meeting-318:00
*** rand738 has quit IRC18:16
*** rand738 has joined #openstack-meeting-318:16
*** rand738 has quit IRC18:17
*** rand738 has joined #openstack-meeting-318:19
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting-318:21
*** jtomasek has quit IRC18:29
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-318:38
*** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:51
*** eghobo has quit IRC18:55
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-318:57
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting-319:15
*** baojg has quit IRC19:15
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting-319:17
*** baojg has quit IRC19:18
*** enikanorov_ has quit IRC19:26
*** enikanorov_ has joined #openstack-meeting-319:27
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-319:37
*** MaxV has quit IRC19:43
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-319:44
*** MaxV has quit IRC19:45
*** jcoufal has quit IRC19:46
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-319:53
*** jtomasek has quit IRC19:56
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC20:22
*** sarob has quit IRC20:40
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-320:47
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-320:49
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-320:57
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-321:00
*** mfer has quit IRC21:01
*** MaxV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-321:09
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-321:10
*** lpetrut has quit IRC21:12
*** MaxV_ has quit IRC21:18
*** sarob has quit IRC21:28
*** MaxV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-321:49
*** Sukhdev_ has joined #openstack-meeting-321:55
*** Sukhdev__ has joined #openstack-meeting-321:57
*** Sukhdev_ has quit IRC21:57
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC21:58
*** markmcclain has quit IRC22:01
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-322:02
*** sarob has quit IRC22:07
*** Sukhdev__ has quit IRC22:14
*** banix has quit IRC22:16
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-322:21
*** sarob has quit IRC22:26
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-322:37
*** sarob has quit IRC22:57
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-322:57
*** MaxV_ has quit IRC23:00
*** yamahata has quit IRC23:01
*** sarob has quit IRC23:01
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-323:11
*** MaxV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-323:31
*** MaxV_ has quit IRC23:37
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-323:47
*** yamahata has quit IRC23:56
*** wchrisj has quit IRC23:59

Generated by 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!