Tuesday, 2012-01-31

*** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting16:52
*** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack16:52
*** hggdh has quit IRC16:52
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting16:53
*** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting16:56
*** littleidea has quit IRC16:58
*** martine has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting17:00
*** dwalleck has quit IRC17:06
*** littleidea has quit IRC17:06
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting17:09
*** martine has quit IRC17:11
*** aclark_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:18
*** vish1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:19
*** mtaylor_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:21
*** littleidea has quit IRC17:24
*** markvoelker has quit IRC17:24
*** hggdh has quit IRC17:24
*** vishy has quit IRC17:24
*** AlanClark has quit IRC17:24
*** mtaylor has quit IRC17:24
*** aslp has quit IRC17:24
*** apontes has joined #openstack-meeting17:25
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC17:29
*** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting17:32
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
*** vincentricci has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
*** ravi has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
*** adjohn has quit IRC17:33
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting17:34
*** aclark_ has quit IRC17:37
*** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting17:39
*** derekh has quit IRC17:39
*** jog0_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
*** aclark_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:41
*** jog0 has quit IRC17:42
*** jog0_ is now known as jog017:42
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting17:43
*** dolphm has quit IRC17:48
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting17:49
*** dwalleck has quit IRC17:54
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting17:55
*** jog0 has quit IRC17:55
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting17:55
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** jog0 has quit IRC17:58
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting17:59
ayoungAnyone here for Keystone?18:00
*** mtaylor_ is now known as mtaylor18:01
ayoungwhat is o/18:01
*** mtaylor has quit IRC18:01
*** mtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
mtaylorayoung: it's a hand raised18:01
ayoungsuspected that18:01
mtaylorthe o is a head, and the / is an arm18:01
gyee\o for left-handed18:02
ayoungmtaylor, so no ziad,  joe....?18:02
*** zns has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
mtaylorgyee: :)18:02
zns#startmeeting Keystone Team Meeting18:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Jan 31 18:02:45 2012 UTC.  The chair is zns. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.18:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.18:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)"18:02
znsHi - anyone here for the Keystone meeting?18:02
mtaylorgyee: is a cyclops18:03
znsCool! Hi.18:03
zns#topic status update18:03
*** openstack changes topic to "status update (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)"18:03
znsHas everyone seen & read the ksl announcement?18:03
gyeezns: I am pretty deep into the keystone domains blueprint18:04
znsThe branch is now available in the repo. It's called "redux"18:04
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting18:04
znsgyee: cool. Have you had a chance to post any part of it? Or the contracts?18:04
gyeeI sent out the wadl and xsd, not sure if you guys have a chance to review it yet18:05
ayoungzns, what is the timeline for changing over to Keystone?18:05
znsgyee: by email or in a review?18:05
gyeezns, by email18:05
znsayoung: E4 if we can get the gaps filled.18:05
znsgyee: I'll go back and review...18:05
gyeewhat does KSL mean for blueprints that are currently in-flight?18:06
gyeewill the existing branch be deprecated at some point? when?18:06
* mtaylor thinks that in-flight blueprints should probably be developed on top of the redux branch at this point, no?18:07
znsgyee: E3 was the cut-off fir any new features. So, ostensibly, there are no new features in flight. Until KSL gets merged in, the current master branch is the supported branch. Blueprints and bugs against that should continue ahead.18:07
* mtaylor takes back what he said18:07
gyeewhat about the F branch?18:08
gyeeso F is the master or a separate one?18:08
mtaylorF will be the master once E is cut18:08
mtaylorscuse me18:08
*** apevec has joined #openstack-meeting18:08
mtaylormaster will be F once E is cut18:08
ayoungI'm guessing that we will want a branch off of redux for Fremont/Folsom/Francisco18:08
gyeeso I can't checkin new features till E5's done"18:08
znsmtaylor: I don't disagree with what you said, but KSL is not ready yet. So testing might be a challenge. BUt I do agree that new work shoud focus on KSL.18:09
gyeewe decided on Folsom already right?18:09
*** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
mtayloryes. we did decide on folsom18:09
znsgyee: correct.18:09
anotherjesseapologies for being late - in a meeting :(18:09
mtaylorthe where-does-new-features work go with our "make things stable" model at the moment is a bit of an unanswered/unaddressed issue18:10
znsmtaylor: do we have a folsom branch already in the repo? If not, we probably should base that on redux.18:10
gyeeso Folsom = redux?18:11
znsmtaylor: yes. It's a gap. I think that's what's confusing for gyee. He's coding against master.18:11
mtaylorno, we don't - we don't really have a model for opening a folsom before essex is released... I think I should circle up with ttx18:11
mtaylorzns: indeed. I think it's a gap we need to solve :)18:11
gyeeI am really confused now18:11
znstermie, anotherjessie: any thoughts on hwta Gyee should do? Code against master and port to KSL or code to KSL18:11
gyeewhat's the emoticon for confused? (_?_)18:11
ayoungWe are going to have to decide :push path to redux and then merge to Folsom or the reverse.18:11
znsThere are two challenges for gyee. One, he's building a new feature; so that should go in Ffolsom since we're feature frozen. Two, which branch should he be coding against given KSL is not baked yet.18:12
znsayoung, gyee: any preferences for which? My preference is to continue on master until KSL is ready.18:13
gyeethen do the porting?18:13
ayoungzns, I think I am going to focus on getting KSL feature compatible with curent master regardless.18:14
gyeeI want to have some idea what the scope is18:14
ayoungI'd say that we push changes to redux,  and then  merge them over to Folsom18:14
gyeeI can continue on master, but there will be porting effort right?18:14
gyeemaster to KSL18:14
znsayoung: for new efforts, maybe that;s a good path. But gyee has already started on master, so maybe finish that and then we work on the porting?18:15
anotherjessezns: my view is that we want to replace master with KSL asap18:15
znsgyee: correct. There will be work to port. But that applies to many of the features in master now that don't exist in redux (ksl)18:15
ayoungzns, I suspect that gyee will have a lot of work to do to make his changes work weith KSL,18:16
gyeeis the KSL code available now? I can go read the code and figure out the porting effort18:16
anotherjesseour team is 100% focused on KSL in essex18:16
anotherjessegyee: https://github.com/termie/keystonelight18:16
znsanotherjessie: you're saying cut over before compatibility is reached? What about existing deployments?18:16
gyeeanotherjesse, thanks18:16
mtaylorgyee: https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/redux18:16
ayounganotherjesse, it is in the redux branch, too18:16
anotherjessezns:  compatibility is within days of being finished - the missing list is: XML, pagination, token delete18:17
ayounganotherjesse, do we care about parity for keystone-manage?18:17
gyeeso token delete will be officially supported?18:18
anotherjessegyee: it is an extension I think18:18
gyeethat's the other issue I want to bring up18:18
anotherjesseayoung: the goal of other projects is to minimize the *-manage commands18:18
ayoungalso,  does that include the LDAP backend?18:18
gyeeDELETE /v2.0/RAX/token/tokenId?18:18
znsanotherjessie: what about LDAP, errors returned, URL normalization?18:18
anotherjessezns: url normalization?18:19
*** dolphm has quit IRC18:19
znsanotherjessie: should we put all the gaps in blueprints/bugs? Maybe prefix the name with redux: ?18:19
anotherjessezns: yep - that is in progerss18:19
zns.xml returns XML. .json reutnrs JSON.18:19
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting18:19
znsOK. SOunds like we've got good momentum then for a switch to KSL soon? How do we validate that? What's the fallback for someone having problems? Use E3?18:20
anotherjessefor LDAP the reason we haven't ported the existing LDAP code (that we originally wrote for nova)18:21
anotherjesseis that KSL has the approach that tokens, users, tenants, members, roles each have their own backing system18:21
anotherjessesince you might want to use users from company's LDAP for SSO18:21
mtaylorwell- the redux branch is tied in to gerrit now, so it will run all of the same tests that run against current keystone (or else new patches won't land) ...18:21
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
anotherjessebut you don't have write access for role/membership management18:21
heckjo/ (sorry for being late)18:22
gyeejust to clarify, new features WILL go into redux correct?18:22
mtaylorso hopefully that should help with some of the validation18:22
ayounganotherjesse, then what is the right approach for LDAP in the new arch?18:22
anotherjesseheckj: your team is focused on KSL right?18:23
znsgyee: new features will go into redux in the folsom timeframe.18:23
*** dolphm has quit IRC18:23
heckjanotherjesse: lately updating the docs in ksl and cleaning work on python-keystoneclient18:23
anotherjessezns: and that is because we are at feature freeze - regardless of ksl vs keystone?18:23
znsanotherjesse: correct.18:24
gyeezns: when can I start checking in domains code?18:24
znsgyee: the only way we should get new features in for Essex is if they are totally optional extensions (no schema changes, etc).18:25
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting18:25
gyeedomains feature is an extension, though we are extending users, tenants, roles, and services18:26
znsgyee: any time you are ready. As long as it is optional we can include it. But given we are in a feature freeze, we can't accept shcema or API changes.18:26
znsgyee: does it come with schema changes?18:27
anotherjessegyee: you are referring to https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/keystone-domains - correct?18:27
gyeenew domains APIs18:27
gyeeunder /v2.0/HP-IDM/v1.0/domains18:28
*** darraghb has quit IRC18:28
znsanotherjessie, termie: would it be easier to implement domains in KSL in a way that would not alter the schema? That might be a path forward for gyee (and a way to leverage the architecture of KSL).18:29
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting18:29
anotherjessezns: reading it now18:29
anotherjessegyee: are you around after the meeting to chat about it18:29
gyeeI can starting using KSL if you want18:29
gyeeya know, clear the land mines for your guys :)18:30
anotherjessegyee: the major blocker would be XML support18:30
ayounggyee, how much code do you have in the domains effort thus far?18:30
anotherjessewhich we plan to land this week18:30
gyeeayoung, quite a bit18:30
gyee~20 files18:30
heckjgyee, anotherjesse: I'm trying to grok what its providing, not geting it from the blueprint description18:30
anotherjessegyee: my precursory read of the domain blueprint makes me wonder if it is accomplished with RBAC - having roles that allow "admin" api commands18:31
* heckj was wondering the same thing18:32
znsheckj: think of it as allowing multiple Admins, each managing their own slice of the Keystone pie without having access to each other's data.18:32
gyeeessentially domains are new containers for users, tenants, roles, and services18:32
heckja grouping around tenants - adding another level up to which we can apply policies, or is it one of those infinitely nested things?18:33
gyeejust one level, we don't support nested domains right now18:33
znsheckj: one level, no nesting.18:33
heckjthat sure sounds like it needs schema changes in the basic (a SQL) setup18:34
gyeejust a way to segregate resources for easier management18:34
anotherjessegyee: do services like nova/glance get the domain from the token validation?18:34
heckjYou'd be able to apply that nicely in KSL using the policy engine setup and base components that are already in there18:34
gyeedomain ID will be returned if hpdom extension is enabled18:35
heckjor is the domain even exposed to the services?18:35
gyeeyou can lookup services for a given domain18:35
ayounggyee, Is there any reason to call it a Domain as opposed to Nested Tenants?18:36
gyeeif hpdom extension is disabled, you can only operate on resources that is in the Keystone default system domain18:36
anotherjessegyee: I ask because if a user has an admin role in a domain - nova/glance would need to make it so admin-ness was scoped to only tenants within that domain18:36
gyeeanotherjesse, that18:36
gyees correct18:36
gyeedomain admin can only manage resource in his own domain18:36
gyeebut he can assign roles in his own domain to users from another domain18:37
anotherjessegyee: I'm concerned about adding it in the essex timeframe primarily due to changes required in other projects18:37
anotherjessesince nova doesn't have those concepts yet18:37
gyeeanotherjesse, it's extension18:37
anotherjesseI like the idea a lot though - what are your thoughts18:37
anotherjessegyee: but an extension in keystone that doesn't work with other open projects, perhaps we should time it for F1 (april)?18:38
gyeefully backward compatible18:38
heckjThats a pretty fundamental and far-reaching component - I think we might be better served by lining it up for a folsom-1 introduction rather than this late in the release cycle18:38
heckjer, yeah - what anotherjesse said...18:38
gyeeI am fine with Folsom18:39
gyeejust let me know when it is ready so I can push codes for review18:39
anotherjessegyee: it would be good for us to add to blueprint18:39
znsso that would mean gyee should port it to a folsom branch of ksl? Are we opening that branch?18:39
heckjzns: I think that would make a great deal of sense18:39
znsWHen would the right time for that be? Now, in a week, or on E4?18:40
*** vincentricci_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:40
*** vincentricci has quit IRC18:40
*** vincentricci_ is now known as vincentricci18:40
znszns: proposing we open up the branch next week when KSL has reached compatibility. Seconds?18:41
heckjI think we could make the ksl branch available at any time - right now, but we wouldn't want it as default yet18:41
anotherjesseheckj - it is https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/redux18:41
heckjeh, teach me to be late to the meeting18:41
anotherjessezns: the general project stance is that you don't open folsom until it is read18:42
anotherjesseso as to prioritize community working on current branches18:42
znsWe'd be creating a new one off of that; folsom branch (based on redux).18:42
anotherjesseso if you want to work ahead you would create a local branch against KSL and merge prop once open18:42
anotherjessethis happens in nova as well (when a team is working ahead due to internal deadlines)18:42
znsOK. SO gyee should work on a local branch of redux and wait for folsom to open up?18:43
ayounggyee, I'd just be aware that there are going to be many changes go in to redux between now and Folsom,  so if you are going to work off a branch from redux,  we will all want to make sure that it keeps up with all commits18:43
ayoungso rebase early and rebase often18:44
gyeeor pushing code often :)18:44
zns#info New features should go in local branches and wait for folsom18:44
heckj#info based on the redux branch in keystone now18:45
ayounggyee, well,  if you had somewhere to push to,  I'd agree....18:45
zns#info redux branch should be ready for merge by next week18:45
gyeewait, so redux is NOT open for writing right now?18:45
anotherjesseit is open for writing18:45
anotherjesseyou use git-review against redux18:45
znsI have one last quick question...18:45
anotherjessegoal is to be ready to merge into master asap18:45
ayounggyee, are you going to be pushing Domains changes into redux?  I thought we just agreed it would wait until Folsom?18:46
znsanotherjessie: should we prefix bugs and blueprints with "redux:" to separate them from master?18:46
znsor any other thoughts on how to separate them?18:46
anotherjessezns: use tags?18:46
znstags works!18:47
zns#info: tag bugs/blueprints with "redux" to identify the branch18:47
znsThanks everyone!18:47
*** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/"18:47
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jan 31 18:47:37 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:47
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-18.02.html18:47
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-18.02.txt18:47
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-18.02.log.html18:47
znsStill around if there are more questions...18:47
gyeeayoung, so i should wait till April timeframe?18:47
ayounganotherjesse, zns so do we need to come up with a series of tickets for the work to merge redux in to master?18:47
gyeeI am still confused18:48
ayounggyee, zns don't think we were done18:48
ayounggyee, that was what they meant by "Local branches"  yes18:48
heckjgyee: Make a branch of your own based on redux and shift the work to there18:48
anotherjessegyee: you can do it against redux now or in april - I recommend waiting for april - but in the meantime writing a blueprint for nova/glance/... about how they would integrate with these changes18:48
heckjgyee: rebase off redux periodically to keep up with changes (since it'll be moving to make it compatible), and plan to merge the whole set of changes in F1 timeframe.18:48
znsgyee: create a fork of the redux branch on your local/github repo. Do the domains work there. And we'll merge it in April. If you have it on github you can also share and discuss with others.18:49
joesavak\o - addt'l blueprint added for new use case18:49
joesavak#link https://www15.v1host.com/RACKSPCE/story.mvc/Summary?oidToken=Story%3A10834018:49
joesavakwrong link - 1 sec18:49
znsayong: we ran out of time. Meeting shceudle is 45 minutes. But we can keep discussing.18:50
znsayoung: ^^18:50
heckjgyee - glance and nova will definitely need new blueprints to match against this effort18:50
ayoungzns, I am interested in working on the LDAP backend for redux18:50
ayoungjust trying to get a sense of what that means based on the kvs approach18:51
gyeeheckj, I'll create blueprint for nova and glance18:51
anotherjessegyee: there is an openstack-common that it would make sense to place it18:51
znsayoung: I think anotherjessie mentioned porting the Nova auth LDAP code. anotherjessie?18:51
anotherjesseayoung: one sec18:51
heckjayoung: take a look at the KSL branch - it's got a driver/backend setup under "identity" that would be a good place to start18:51
ayoungheckj, I've looked at that.  There was a comment in this meeting:18:52
anotherjesseayoung: https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/redux/keystone/identity/backends18:52
znsDo we want to port both the Nova LDAP code and the Keystone master LDAP backend?18:52
anotherjesseyou can write different drivers - https://github.com/openstack/keystone/blob/redux/keystone/identity/backends/pam.py for instance doesn't implement CRUD (since you can't via pam)18:52
*** apontes has left #openstack-meeting18:52
anotherjessezns: I think we want to write a new more flexible one18:52
heckjanotherjesse - anyone in your crew already doing that porting work?18:52
gyeebut LDAP you mean a true LDAP hook right? not FakeLDAP impl18:53
anotherjesseheckj: ya - we are focusing first on LDAP read-only — but more flexible18:53
ayoung" for LDAP the reason we haven't ported the existing LDAP code (that we originally wrote for nova) is that KSL has the approach that tokens, users, tenants, members, roles each have their own backing system  since you might want to use users from company's LDAP for SSO"18:53
anotherjessegyee/ayoung: are you preferring read/write?18:53
heckjanotherjesse: sounds like we should get a blueprint made for that work, link it to an etherpad or something to track the design and work effort18:53
ayounganotherjesse, if we don't do read write,  I suspect PAM is sufficient18:53
anotherjesseayoung: agreed18:54
ayounganotherjesse, so is that going to be our approach:18:54
anotherjesseso - for ldap we will start a blueprint and share it out for updates on it18:54
gyeeanotherjesse, I probably need both read and write18:54
anotherjessegyee: k18:54
*** vish1 is now known as vishy18:54
*** LinuxJedi_cell has joined #openstack-meeting18:55
ayounganotherjesse, I'd think we would want the ability to push changes to LDAP,  but still maintain the tokens in a Keystone specific store.  That might not even have to be SQL18:56
anotherjesseayoung: memcached ?18:56
ayounganotherjesse, that is one approach,  sure18:56
ayoungor a replicated file18:56
znsayoung: that's what master did. I think KSL maintains the ability to store different entities in different stores.18:56
heckjanotherjesse: that was my instinct for a choice18:56
ayoungzns, right.  So in order to maintain that,  do we have to front ldap with KVS  ?18:57
ayoungso we can mix and match?18:57
anotherjesseayoung - no18:57
anotherjesseayoung - you specify your driver in the config18:57
ayoungper entity,  like the current keystone config?18:57
ayoungbackend_entities = ['Tenant', 'User', 'UserRoleAssociation', 'Role']18:58
anotherjessequick note - vishy is going to be working on a migration from nova's deprecated auth (pre-keystone identity system) to keystone18:58
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC18:59
ayounganotherjesse, do we keep the backend_entities keyword,  and have the dirver honor that?18:59
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting18:59
anotherjessewe should move to #openstack-dev since there are other meetings coming19:00
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting19:00
mtaylorlike me!19:00
mtaylorwho wants to talk about CI things?19:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Jan 31 19:01:07 2012 UTC.  The chair is mtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.19:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.19:01
mtaylor#topic meetbot19:01
*** openstack changes topic to "meetbot"19:01
mtaylorLinuxJedi_cell: we have access to the meetbot/meetinglogs server now, so we can work our puppet magic on it19:01
LinuxJedi_cellmtaylor: fantastic19:02
mtaylorLinuxJedi_cell: which _also_ means that I can get you to add a couple of features ...19:02
LinuxJedi_cellSure thing19:02
*** davlap has joined #openstack-meeting19:02
mtaylora) I'd like to see see #startmeeting take an optional parameter which is a launchpad team containing the people who should have voting rights for votes19:02
mtaylorb) I'd like to port in the voting feature from the ubuntu meetbot, so that someone can say "#startvote Do we like chicken"19:03
mtaylorand then the bot will tally and record the results of that vote19:03
mtaylorLinuxJedi_cell: more python for you!19:04
mtaylorspeaking of LinuxJedi ...19:04
LinuxJedi_cellLooking forward to it:)19:04
mtaylorbranch expiration has gone live, and we've also got the pastebin sucked in to config management now19:04
mtaylorLinuxJedi_cell: when you get bored, docs on the paste setup, yeah? (I think we should eventually have at least a top-level doc for each system/service we run/provide)19:05
*** _adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting19:06
mtaylor#topic multi-python support19:06
*** openstack changes topic to "multi-python support"19:06
LinuxJedi_cellI'll do it before I get bored, will do with backups tomorrow19:06
mtaylorwe've got multi-python testing rolled live for python-quantumclient (hi guinea pig)19:06
mtaylorand the build slaves for it created and added19:06
mtaylorso we should be able to start adding other projects to multi-python testing via tox this week19:06
* LinuxJedi_cell jumping in car19:07
mtaylorLinuxJedi_cell: have fun19:07
*** LinuxJedi_cell has quit IRC19:07
mtaylor#topic Open Discussion19:07
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion"19:07
mtayloranybody else got anything?19:07
*** jog0 has quit IRC19:08
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting19:09
*** littleidea has quit IRC19:09
*** adjohn has quit IRC19:09
*** _adjohn is now known as adjohn19:09
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting19:10
jeblairi've pushed the ksl branch19:11
jeblairalong with a merge commit for it19:12
heckjyeah!!! (thank you!)19:12
mtaylorhey! it's jeblair. w00t19:12
* heckj is heads down in that KSL branch19:12
jeblairthere's the commit.19:12
jeblairand the branch is called redux19:12
* mtaylor has a few commits to submit to make it work in jenkins19:12
jeblairso you can 'git checkout redux', and 'git review redux'19:12
heckjwe'll be doing work on the redux branch before merging it in -19:13
jeblairi figured so.  the merge commit is not straightforward to make, so i think the way to go is to just keep working on the branch and let me know when it's ready to go in and i'll update the merge commit change19:14
sorenOh, I've got a question:19:14
jeblairi mostly wanted to put in a strawman change so that people can see what the commit will do when we're ready19:14
* soren just stumbled in19:14
mtaylorhey soren19:15
*** martine has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
heckjjeblair: sounds good19:15
sorenWhat's the status on the implementing the "try every revision of openstack on a bunch of different people's infrastructure" thing?19:15
jeblair(and i'm volunteering to make the commit since we normally don't allow merge commits.  in this case, one wrong step would give us 296 open changes for review)19:15
LinuxJediphew, back19:15
*** vincentricci has quit IRC19:16
mtaylorsoren: so far, we keep getting to the point of getting a jenkins slave hooked in for someone, and then it just sits there19:16
mtaylorwe had an interesting chat with Daviey and jamespage yesterday about the Canonical OpenStack Jenkins19:17
heckjjeblair: I will totally take you up on that when we're ready - because I would clearly make that misstep… twice or three times :-) And the channel would be flooded with heck hate.19:17
mtaylorwhere I think an interesting first step (or possibly even long term approach) is for them to also run the gerrit trigger plugin on their jenkins19:17
mtaylorto trigger builds and vote on changes similar to how smokestack is working19:17
sorenmtaylor: I heard a rumour they started doing that today.19:17
sorenNot that.19:17
mtaylorand then if that goes well long term19:18
sorenOr.. Meh, it's just something I heard in passing. Ignore it.19:18
mtaylorperhaps we can add a review category for them so that their jenkins has to pass19:18
sorenHm.. It would really be ideal if we could somehow connect two Jenkins instances.19:18
mtaylorjeblair brought up good a point about consolidated information presentation though19:18
mtayloryes, it would19:18
mtaylorso far the plugin for jenkins that allows that isn't great19:18
sorenSo, at Cisco, I'll probably be setting up an automated test rig of some stuff, but I'd like to use the same ressources for these "upstream" sorts of tests.19:19
mtaylorsoren: you're at cisco now, right?19:19
soren...but it's hard to share the ressources between our own Jenkins and someone else's who is using our servers as slaves.19:19
sorenmtaylor: indeed19:19
mtaylorsoren: agree19:19
mtaylorsoren: well - perhaps the canonical approach of installing the gerrit trigger plugin would be a good start19:20
sorenmtaylor: Yeah.19:20
sorenmtaylor: It's not like we use Jenkins to monitor the status of things much anyway.19:20
mtaylorit does meet the criteria that we're interested in which is "vendors control and run the testing infrastructure they're donating"19:20
sorenWe tend to focus on Gerrit.19:20
mtaylorthat is very true19:20
sorenIt does seem like a natural place to aggregate the results.19:20
*** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting19:21
jeblairthe question is how they are aggregated in gerrit19:21
mtaylorwe'll need to figure out the 'right' way to do information display ... if we get 10 vendors doing their own gerrit voting, it's going to be very ugly to look at19:21
jeblairmy preference would be to see one report from jenkins with all the tests19:21
sorenHow does it work now?19:21
sorenDoes Smokestack have a special gerrit user?19:21
mtaylorsoren: it just has a gerrit user19:22
jeblaira hodge-podge of random comments from various test rigs all arriving unpredictably at different times isn't really information aggregation or display, it's information spam19:22
mtaylorsoren: and that gerrit user is unpriviledged and just votes like anyone else19:22
sorenjeblair: If we could silence the succesful ones, would that be helpful?19:22
jeblairit's better than no information, but it's not nearly as nice as a simple list of jenkins tests19:22
jeblairhow would you know they ran?19:22
sorenjeblair: You wouldn't.19:22
sorenjeblair: WEll..19:22
*** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting19:22
sorenI mean, sorry, yes of course you would.19:23
mtaylorI wonder if we could combine the multiple jenkins talking to gerrit approach ...19:23
jeblairpeople are now all the time asking whether smokestack has run on their tests, or how they can get it to do that19:23
soren...but you wouldn't get e-mailed about them.19:23
mtaylorwith the jenkins plugin that will report the status of jobs on another jenkins19:23
mtaylorso that we could have the gerrit interaction be federated19:23
mtaylorbut still have a single information display page19:23
* soren ponders19:23
*** dolphm has quit IRC19:24
jeblairrelying only on the gerrit trigger plugin, that extra info would not be aggregated, but if we could solve the problem of collecting output from a single gating job, that would work.19:24
sorenI mean, I can envision how it could work, but it would mean changing Gerrit's data model somewhat.19:24
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting19:24
jeblairgerrit's dato model?  how?19:24
sorenWell, if we let these test runnes report their results to gerrit, but not have it count as votes in the same fashion as human votes, we could present it differently.19:25
soren*test runners19:25
mtaylorsoren: yeah - that's what I meant earlier by adding additional review categories ... that part is actually reasonably easy19:26
mtaylorthe tricky part is that the default display of that isn't really designed to be largely scalable :)19:26
sorenWe could have another information box on the change page on Gerrit that shows a lot of green buttons and red dots that would be links back to the respective Jenkins instance's console output for the change.19:26
mtaylorso we'll have a grid with a bazillion checkmarks19:26
sorenIt could be collapsed by default.19:26
jeblairwhenever the topic goes to "reimplement jenkins in another system" i tend to think we should think about using jenkins.19:27
sorenJust an overall "25 succeses, 0 failures" that could expand to the full list.19:27
soren...or it could even show the failures by default and let you expand to see the full list.19:27
sorenIT all just gets so much easier if you have a simple programmatic way to tell them apart.19:27
sorenjeblair: I hear that.19:28
mtaylorthere may be a multi-step thing lurking in here19:28
sorenAnother benefit of doing it all in Gerrit:19:28
*** littleidea has quit IRC19:29
mtaylorperhaps doing the gerrit approach at first because it's pretty easy to get it going19:29
mtaylorand then set someone on the task of making the jenkins aggregation plugin properly19:29
mtaylorso that one jenkins can properly interact with another jenkins master19:29
jeblairwhat's missing there now?19:29
mtaylorbecause the use case of people contributing resources wanting to share those slaves with their own jenkins master is not going to go away19:29
sorenWe've always talked about having multiple tiers of platforms: Supported, not-quite-supported, if-it-works-it's-a-frickin-miracle, it's-not-supposed-to-work19:29
sorenOr whatnot.19:29
sorenThe "supported" ones might be privileged to give -2 votes.19:30
sorenThe others, only -1.19:30
sorenI dunno.19:30
mtayloryeah, that's interesting19:30
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting19:30
soren...but that could be done through Jenkins, too, I suppose.19:30
mtaylorjeblair: the main thing is proper federation ... as in, a slave jenkins that is itself a master19:31
sorenBut you'd lose quite a bit of detail.19:31
soren...and every time Jenkins got another test result from somewhere, it might have to go back and re-vote.19:31
soren..which will have won us nothing in terms of information spam.19:31
jeblairi'm wondering what's the hangup with the 'donated slave' model?19:31
jeblairwhy can't resources be shared?19:31
mtaylorthe thing I said above...19:31
sorenI explained that further up.19:31
mtaylorbecause you can't have a slave that's attached to two jenkins masters19:31
soren19:19 < soren> So, at Cisco, I'll probably be setting up an automated test rig of some stuff, but I'd like to use the same ressources for  these "upstream" sorts of tests.19:32
sorenmtaylor: Well, you can, but they won't know about each other. :)19:32
jeblairyou can run two slaves on a host.19:32
sorenWhich makes it very hard to do reliable tests for something like Nova.19:32
jeblairand you can externally mutex any shared resources they have19:32
soren...which rather expects exclusive access to certain resources.19:32
sorenjeblair: How so?19:33
mtaylorbut the cisco jenkins already knows how to control how many things are supposed to be running on a given slave19:33
jeblairlockfile?  just thinking out loud. :)19:35
mtaylorsure - so, I think there's a possible design nirvana and then some intermediary steps we can take between now and then19:36
*** littleidea has quit IRC19:36
jeblairwell, there's one more thing i'd like to say:19:36
jeblairconsider contributing dedicated resources to the project19:37
mtaylorin a perfect world I don't think we want a quasi-jenkins dashboard in gerrit or a bunch of lockfile scripts running around to share slaves ... but both of those might be things we can do more quickly than implementing full-on jenkins federation19:37
jeblairbe a serious supporter of the openstack project by saying "we need to dedicate hardware to upstream testing"19:37
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting19:37
jeblairat least two companies have donated project-wide testing resources, i'd like to see more.19:37
mtaylorsure- but soren bringing this up isn't the first time it's been brought up as a concern by someone who is looking at donating resources19:37
sorenjeblair: I'm not going to say that that is an unreasonable request, but I believe a model where you can still use the resources for your own stuff if OpenStack doesn't need them is a sensible thing to offer.19:38
jeblairok.  i think we're all on the same page.  :)19:38
sorenWhat's best? Having 5 machines for "upstream" and 5 machines for everything else, or having 10 machines that you share?19:39
jeblairthat's a good point19:39
sorenMultiply/divide as needed.19:39
mtaylorand I think that there isn't huge disparity on step 1 here ... which is that canonical are trying their own gerrit plugin for non-binding voting19:39
mtaylorand I think we can sort of see how that goes for a little bit before we have to solve whether we add them as a category or not19:39
sorenYeah. I don't think the information level will be too overwhelming for at least a couple of months.19:39
sorenAnd even if so, I think it's a good trade-off.19:39
mtayloryeah - sort of like getting smokestack to vote - it's not perfect, but it's more than we had before :)19:40
sorenOk, great. This is enlightening.19:40
jeblairwe will shortly be up to 4 systems leaving feedback in gerrit, so i do think we need to go ahead and start solving the aggregation problem19:40
sorenThat would be very welcome for sure.19:41
sorenI'd just hate to be without test results just due to potential information overload.19:41
soren"First world problem" doesn't exactly apply here, but close.19:42
mtaylormaybe let's schedule time to discuss in person with a whiteboard at ODS?19:42
*** nati2 has quit IRC19:42
jeblairorganized testing > testing > no testing19:42
*** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting19:42
sorenRight :)19:42
sorenmtaylor: Let's do that. I hope we have some practical experience to base the chat on by then, though :)19:43
mtaylorsoren, heckj: speaking of ...19:44
mtaylorfwiw, jeblair, LinuxJedi and I will be meeting in Boston the week of Feb 1419:44
mtayloryou, or anyone else lurking, is more than welcome to come19:45
heckjsounds nice - but I'll be on the VERY other side of the USA (hawaii) on vacation :-)19:46
mtaylorheckj: BAH to vacation19:46
sorenI'll be in San Jose.19:46
mtaylorDaviey, jamespage ^^^ you too19:46
sorenI'll think of you when I fly over Boston.19:46
mtayloryeah, it's cool - just wanted to make sure we'd invited you19:46
jeblairmtaylor: i told you you should hold it someplace awesome19:47
jeblairnobody wants to go to _boston_ in _februrary_  :)19:47
sorenBoston's not awesome?19:47
sorenCome on, Boston has..19:47
sorenNo, you're right.19:47
mtaylorblame HP19:48
sorenI always do.19:48
sorenIt's company policy.19:48
sorenjk :)19:48
* Daviey reads context19:48
Davieymtaylor: Yeah, i don't think i can justify flying out to Boston just for a beer...19:49
Davieywould love to thou :)19:49
mtaylorcool. also, we were talking a bit about your jenkins19:49
mtaylormostly nice things19:49
Davieymtaylor: right..19:50
Davieymtaylor: We are maintaining it in silent mode for the time being.19:50
mtaylorDaviey: seems like a good starting place19:50
DavieyTesting trunk post commit, and stable/diablo pre-commit19:50
Daviey(as a comment only, not gate)19:50
sorenDoes the Jenkins gerrit plugin report back?19:51
sorenOr is that a custom built thing?19:51
jeblairit's built in19:52
jeblairyou can customize what it does on success/failure19:52
jeblairso what messages it leaves, whether/how it votes, etc19:52
jeblair(per job or jenkins-wide)19:52
Davieyyep, seems to be working well!19:52
mtaylorDaviey: you guys using our fork of it for now?19:53
Davieymtaylor: yep19:53
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting19:53
mtaylorgreat. we'll keep you in the loop if we update anything19:53
sorenOh, there's a fork?19:54
sorenThat's good to know.19:54
* soren hasn't a clue how to get custom plugins into Jenkins, though.19:54
jeblairi have clearance to upstream our changes, will be starting that soon19:54
mtaylorsoren: it's easy19:54
sorenTrigger on comment added? Seriously?19:54
Davieyjeblair: Is that your emoployer issues?19:54
mtaylorsoren: you build it, it makes a file, you drop it in to the jenkins plugin dir19:55
sorenWhy would you want to retest on every comment?19:55
mtaylorsoren: approval is a type of comment19:55
mtaylorsoren: so you have to be able to respond to comment types19:55
jeblairsoren: it has a filter, we test on "APRV +1"19:55
sorenSo the first approval sends it to testing?19:55
jeblairDaviey: yes, it apparently took them a bit to okay that.19:55
mtaylorthe +1 vote in the approval column19:55
mtaylorsoren: a normal +1 vote from a person in code review is "CRVW +1"19:56
mtaylorand a +2 vote is "CRVW +2"19:56
Davieywell.. it was my plan to do testing when anyone proposes anything to diablo/stable.19:56
DavieyThe idea being is that it smokes it before a human looks at it19:56
Davieythen the human can respond based on code review AND jenkins return19:56
sorenmtaylor: Oh. SO the tests don't run until someone has approved the patch?19:56
mtaylorsoren: for the openstack jenkins, yes19:57
Davieysoren: that is an option.19:57
mtaylorsoren: although we're going to add pre-approval pep8 testing real soon now19:57
sorenWhat Daviey says sounds smarter.19:57
mtaylorsecurity risk19:57
sorenI know.19:57
Davieydiscussing that atm.19:57
mtaylorit's not testing entirely the right thing19:57
sorenI've the one who's been saying that from day 1 when everyone else was saying "Just run the tests!" :)19:57
mtaylorbecause it's testing the patch submitted, rather than the patch as merged as it will be applied19:58
mtaylorhowever- if we get past the security issue, I think that what we might do is smoke test pre-approval19:58
Davieysoren: I need to protect against someone including "rm -rf /" in setup.py :)19:58
mtaylorand then re-test right before merge19:58
jeblairideally, we'll do both, as we address the security problem19:58
mtaylorwhat jeblair said19:58
sorenDaviey: I understand entirely19:59
Davieyi'm pondering a few things, one might be - creating the tarball in kvm.19:59
sorenDaviey: ...but that's the case even if it's been approved.19:59
mtaylordestroying testing slaves is less of a problem if we are blowing them away and re-creating them every time19:59
mtaylorwhich we're moving towards19:59
DavieyI don't trust chroot or lxc yet.19:59
Davieysoren: right19:59
mtaylorso then it's just a problem of catching spam bots19:59
Davieymtaylor: right.. i don't care about the nodes19:59
Davieyspambots worry me less.20:00
DavieyIt's a pretty sterile enviroment20:00
mtaylorpython is pretty powerful :)20:00
DavieyI had to get permission just to open up the firewall just to pypi20:00
sorenOh, we're imposing on the PPB meeting slot.20:00
mtaylorppb isn't meeting20:01
mtaylorour slaves are all public cloud images :)20:01
DavieyThye didn't meet last week either :/20:01
mtaylorhowever - I think we're probably good here.20:02
*** bengrue has joined #openstack-meeting20:02
mtaylorsoren: obviously let us know if you want help on getting the modified gerrit-trigger-plugin going20:02
mtaylorjeblair: we should probably get around to fixing the manual trigger page20:03
*** ravi_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
Davieysoren: What are you testing, and on what platform?20:03
jeblairmtaylor: yep20:03
DavieyI power-read scrollback, so might have missed that20:03
*** ravi has quit IRC20:03
*** ravi_ is now known as ravi20:03
Davieysoren: fwiw, we have 12 machines.20:04
sorenDaviey: Nothing yet. I already told you I'm waiting for access to hardware :)20:04
Davieysoren: right, but i'm guessing there is a plan?20:04
sorenYes. Yes, there is.20:05
Davieyi'm sure you are not just waiting on hardware to start thinking about what you are testing for, and on what platform. :)20:05
sorenI have a draft plan.20:06
sorenIt would be unlike me if it didn't involve Ubuntu.20:06
mtaylorsoren: I'm SHOCKED!20:06
Davieysoren: you are crazy.20:07
sorenDaviey: That's never been proved.20:07
znszns here - sorry for being late.20:07
zns* realizes the ppb is not meeting *20:08
sorenzns: You're excused. :)20:08
znssoren: thanks :-)20:09
DavieyDOes anyone have other ideas satisfying the security issue?20:09
*** adjohn has quit IRC20:09
sorenMy idea from the beginning was to only run tests from people we know who are.20:10
soren..and where they live.20:10
sorenSo we can hunt them down if they screw with us.20:11
jeblairyeah, we've been thinking about that as well20:11
DavieyWell yes, but can i trust you not to accidently break our ci lab with a rm -rf /? :)20:11
zulhell no20:11
soren..and the same group of people could send other people's branches off for testing once they're confident it's not a cracking attempt.20:11
sorenDaviey: No. No, you can't.20:11
*** martines has quit IRC20:12
Davieysoren: it needs to be a stronger model than that20:12
sorenDaviey: It works for Ubuntu?20:12
Davieysoren: Not really.20:12
*** ravi has quit IRC20:12
*** ravi has joined #openstack-meeting20:12
Davieysoren: Can you r00t a buildd ?20:13
sorenDaviey: Yes.20:13
Davieysoren: and you could break the host system?20:13
jeblairi think our approach is going to generally be to a) be protected if that does happen (throwaway bulid slaves), combined with a small amount of deterence for that happening (signup process (the CLA is filling this for now but i'd still like to get rid of it) or using the reputation of the submitter to decide to run a check on upload)20:14
sorenDaviey: On the Ubuntu buildd's20:14
sorenDaviey: Or the PPA ones?20:14
soren(not the same thing at all)20:14
DavieyRegardless, I want a stronger model.20:15
*** apontes has joined #openstack-meeting20:15
DavieyI also don't want to encourage levels of contributor20:15
*** nati2 has quit IRC20:15
Davieycontributor and core is enough of a split IMO.20:16
Davieyhaving degrees of contributor isn't ideal IMO.20:16
*** sandywalsh has quit IRC20:16
mtayloragree. I was originally advocating the only split being that you had to have landed at least one patch before we would run your stuff pre-approval20:17
mtaylorbetween having signed the CLA and having convinced someone to land something at least once, it's likely we at least know you're a real person and where to find you20:17
*** martines has joined #openstack-meeting20:17
sorenDaviey: I can root the Ubuntu buildd's. BUilds run as root.20:19
Davieynah, that is still crappy.20:19
Davieysoren: heh, yes - but can you BREAK the infra?20:19
sorenDaviey: To the best of my knowledge, yes.20:21
sorenI could be wrong, of course. And I'm not going to test the hypothesis. elmo knows where I live. :)20:21
sorenI depends on what you mean by "the infra", of course. I'm pretty sure I can take a buildd out.20:22
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC20:23
DavieyBut that is the 'node' that i don't care about.. because it can be recovered through out of band power management20:24
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting20:24
Davieyand pxe booting a re-isnstall20:24
DavieyThe issue is the ftp-master, breaking that.20:24
*** anotherjesse has quit IRC20:24
*** davlap has quit IRC20:25
sorenWell, if taking out a single node isn't a problem, then running arbitrary code from random crackheads shoulnd't be a problem either.20:25
DavieyI really don't worry too much about the node having woes, it's the incoming machibe20:25
Davieysoren: Yes, but the jenkins server isn't a throwaway machine20:25
sorenThe problem isn't someone doing an "rm -rf /".20:25
sorenYou will discover that immediately.20:25
DavieyWe could do the incoming process on a throwaway node i suppose, but an extra level of complexity and speed20:26
sorenThe problem is someone sneaking something in that will sit around and only much later add a backdor to Nova in an entirely unrelated commit or something.20:26
Davieysoren: /I/ won't discover it... because it's hands-off20:26
Davieya forkbomb is just as inconvient.20:26
*** dprince has quit IRC20:27
*** davlap has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** berendt has joined #openstack-meeting20:31
*** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting20:39
*** dolphm has quit IRC20:43
*** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting20:44
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting20:45
*** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting20:48
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting20:48
*** Raj_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:49
*** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting20:50
*** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting20:51
*** dwalleck has quit IRC20:52
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting20:54
*** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
ttxzns, jaypipes, vishy, devcamcar: around ?21:00
* bcwaldon is standing in for jaypipes21:00
*** bhall has joined #openstack-meeting21:01
*** bhall has quit IRC21:01
*** bhall has joined #openstack-meeting21:01
znszns here21:01
Daviey .21:01
ttxStill missing bloody Californians.21:02
danwentttx: hey...21:02
bcwaldonthat's what happens when they go to $Texas21:02
ttxdanwent: woops.21:02
danwentits just the bloody californias that you need for this meeting that are missing :)21:02
ttxok let's start. I'll pretend we have the meetbot, just in case we can refeed it the log21:02
mtaylorwe have it21:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/"21:03
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jan 31 21:03:10 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)21:03
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-19.01.html21:03
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-19.01.txt21:03
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-19.01.log.html21:03
openstackMeeting started Tue Jan 31 21:03:23 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.21:03
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.21:03
mtaylorsee - we can get stuff done sometimes21:03
ttxToday's agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting21:03
ttxmtaylor: I never (EVER) doubted it.21:03
ttx#topic Keystone status21:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status"21:03
ttxzns: o/21:04
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/essex-421:04
znsKeystone Light branch is in. It's called "redux"21:04
ttxit's in ? or jus tproposed ?21:04
ttxor just proposed ?21:04
znsanotherjesse said "everybody is working on getting ksl ready for merge by next week"21:04
*** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting21:04
*** dabo has quit IRC21:05
znsttx: it is a branch (https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/redux) and can be accessed through gerrit.21:05
*** mikeyp has joined #openstack-meeting21:05
ttxoh, I see21:05
znsSo we should be looking at a merge soon.21:05
znsMain items missing are:21:05
ttxWould be good to have the rearchitecture appearing as a blueprint for essex-421:05
zns- Versioning21:05
zns- Content-negotiation21:05
zns- Extension negotiation21:05
zns- Errors (with content sensitivity)21:05
zns- URL normalization21:05
zns- Pagination21:05
zns- LDAP21:05
zns- migration21:05
zns- os: extension for Quantum and Melange21:05
zns- OS-KSADM changes (support for password on user creation)21:05
zns- ./keystone in bin, I get error21:05
ttxthat way we could track that21:05
heckjttx: will do21:06
*** russellb has joined #openstack-meeting21:06
ttxheckj: cool, thanks. You can enumerate the gaps in the whiteboard21:06
znsttx: we also agreed to tag bugs/bps for ksl with "redux" in LaunchPad.21:06
heckjttx: will link it up to an etherpad that we're tracking21:06
ttxI'll keep close attention to this21:06
gyeewill other extensions also be ported?21:06
ttxheckj: perfect21:06
ttxDo the other two blueprints (keystone-logging and keystone-test-refactor) still make sense in keystonelight context ?21:06
*** dwalleck has quit IRC21:07
znskeystone-logging, no. tests, somewhat, because we have to work on tests in ksl.21:07
heckjttx: most of the work I've been doing to keystone-logging has been applying it to the redux branch21:07
*** spectorclan has quit IRC21:07
ttxheckj: so they are interrelated a bit21:07
heckjttx: zns and team have bolstered logging in the current branch as well21:07
ttxzns: Is keystone participating to the bug squashing day ?21:08
znsttx: IU want to confirm our position on new features. They should all be parked in local branches until folsom?21:08
znsttx: I believe so. I can't (was already booked out that day), but I think Dolph and joesavak will be.21:09
ttxzns: until we do RCs, which is for keystone shortly after E421:09
znsttx: and then we'll create the folsom branch? Need to know what tell folks (like gyee).21:09
ttxthen we create milestone-proposed to hold the release candidate, and trunk shifts to folsom21:10
*** edconzel has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
znsWe're doing that in E4 for Keystone?21:10
*** berendt_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
*** berendt has quit IRC21:10
zns* sounds good - just confirmin *21:10
ttxzns: yes, that's what we said at the last design summit21:11
ttxRCs statr after E4, and Keystone should be one of the first to get finalized21:11
ttx(and Horizon one of the last)21:11
znsttx: roger. On board with that.21:11
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting21:11
termiewhich meeting is this that we are discussing keystone status in?21:11
*** gregburek has joined #openstack-meeting21:11
ttxAny specific bug squashing objective you'd like to mention on http://wiki.openstack.org/BugSquashingDay/20120202 ?21:11
ttxtermie: the keystone meeting, probably21:11
heckjttx: #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/rearchitect-keystone21:11
ttxheckj: thx21:12
heckjtermie - general meeting21:12
znstermie: also http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting21:12
termie"project status meeting" okays21:12
ttxzns: Anything else ?21:12
znsttx: nope.21:12
ttxzns: for Keystone on bug squashing day it would be nice to review the list of bugs to see if they still make sense in KSL context.21:12
*** anotherjesse1 has joined #openstack-meeting21:13
ttxbut maybe thats too early if the main branch hasn't been replaced21:13
*** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman21:13
*** anotherjesse has quit IRC21:13
znsttx: OK. I'll relay to joesavak.21:13
ttxQuestions for Keystone ?21:13
joesavak\o got it21:13
deshantmso just to be clear, ksl is default going forward only or is it also going to be in the essex release?21:13
ttxgoing to be in essex, if it closes the identified gaps.21:13
anotherjesse1deshantm: assuming community votes yes as well21:14
gyee*all* existing extensions will be ported correct?21:14
termiegyee: if the extension writers port them21:14
deshantmok thanks, just want to make sure where to focus QA efforts21:15
anotherjesse1termie: we are working on porting them21:15
deshantmwe all want Essex to be solid21:15
ttxMore keystone / ksl questions ?21:15
*** Ryan_Lane has joined #openstack-meeting21:15
*** andrewbogott has joined #openstack-meeting21:15
ttx#topic Swift status21:15
*** openstack changes topic to "Swift status"21:15
ttxnotmyname: o/21:15
ttxnotmyname: Still expecting 1.4.6 on February 10 ?21:16
*** dwalleck has quit IRC21:16
notmynameno reason not to21:16
ttxnotmyname: When can we cut a milestone-proposed branch ? Tuesday next week ?21:16
ttxor Wednesday maybe ?21:16
notmynameprobably on wednesday21:16
*** dwalleck has joined #openstack-meeting21:16
ttxnotmyname: Could you reference the features that are expected to be merged in this release at: https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.4.6 ?21:16
ttxI know you've been working on object versioning...21:17
notmynameyes, I've been asked to do that by others...21:17
ttxwould like to know (as the rest of the world) if that's going to hit :)21:17
notmynameyeah, I've also been focusing on some rax stuff too. I'll get to it :-)21:17
ttxnotmyname: Any specific objective for Swift on the Bug Squashing day ?21:17
notmynameno. but we'll have some of the core devs keeping an eye on the patches in order to give rapid feedback21:18
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting21:18
ttxnotmyname: Anything else ?21:18
notmynameso if patches are submitted, we hope to get them merged if possible that day21:18
notmynameone more thing21:18
notmynameah. nm21:18
ttx#action notmyname to link blueprints corresponding to 1.4.6 features on milestone page21:18
ttxQuestions on Swift ?21:19
ttx#info &.4.621:19
ttx#info 1.4.6 milestone-proposed cut expected on Wed, Feb 821:19
ttx#topic Glance status21:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Glance status"21:19
ttxbcwaldon: yo21:20
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/essex-421:20
ttxWho will be working on glance-bittorrent-delivery ?21:20
*** martines has quit IRC21:20
ttxbcwaldon: (if anyone)21:20
bcwaldonno idea21:21
ttxbcwaldon: Any specific objective for the Bug Squashing day ?21:21
*** joesavak has quit IRC21:22
ttx#action jaypipes to assign or defer glance-bittorrent-delivery21:22
bcwaldonThe general idea of 'fix bugs' applies here21:22
bcwaldonjaypipes is going to send out an email w.r.t. low-hanging-fruit in glance and tempest21:22
bcwaldonno big news on the Glance front :)21:22
ttxbcwaldon: fwiw I set some numbers as objectives for Nova, so that we can define "success"21:22
*** anotherjesse1 has quit IRC21:22
ttxbcwaldon: feel free to do the same on the wiki page21:22
ttxlike "fall below N open bugs"21:23
bcwaldonok, we have nowhere near as many bugs (only ~20 available)21:23
bcwaldon...to be picked up21:23
*** mcohen has joined #openstack-meeting21:23
ttxbcwaldon: ok :)21:23
ttxbcwaldon: Anything else ?21:23
ttxQuestions on Glance ?21:23
*** Tushar has joined #openstack-meeting21:24
*** martines has joined #openstack-meeting21:24
ttx#topic Nova status21:24
*** openstack changes topic to "Nova status"21:24
ttxvishy: hey21:24
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/essex-421:24
ttxLots of stuff in there. Are all of those feature freeze exceptions ?21:25
ttxor were some sneakily targeted ?21:25
vishymost but not all21:25
vishysome are just not really features21:25
ttxnetapp-volume-driver, essex-backup-for-ebs and nova-sweep do not have essex series goal set yet (or priority)21:25
ttxdoes that mean those are not accepted yet ? ^21:26
vishyfor example21:26
vishynetapp seems to be supported on the ml so that one will probably be FFe21:26
vishythe other two look new21:26
ttxno need to review them now21:26
ttx#action vishy to review essex-backup-for-ebs and nova-sweep and deny/grant FFe21:27
vishythe scaling zones one is probably going to miss21:27
vishyi'm going to talk to comstud tomorrow but it seems like it is too late to FFe it21:27
ttxvishy: yes, this is a bit big.21:27
vishyttx: I think they will just do a branch and propose for F21:27
ttxvishy: Anything else on the blueprints side ?21:28
vishyi think not21:28
ttxI'd like to quickly discuss dead wood... since the press makes their headlines on it21:28
vishymost of the FFe stuff is in21:28
ttxDo you agree with ajaxtermectomy and HyperVectomy ?21:28
ttxAnything else we should get rid of while we still can ?21:28
vishyajaxterm definitely21:28
vishydeprecated auth21:29
ttxvishy: could you add tha tto the thread ?21:29
vishywe need to fixup the migration script though21:29
vishym2crypto as well21:29
ttxDo you want essex-4 blueprints to track their completion ?21:29
vishyhmm, yeah that is probably a good idea21:30
ttxI think it can't hurt. We had blueprints when we added the feature after all.21:30
vishyalthough we have bugs for m2crypto and ajaxterm right?21:30
ttxI'll add the ajaxterm and hyperV one. We'll link the bugs in21:30
ttxajaxterm has several bugs linked21:30
ttxI'll propose the ajaxtermectomy. Anyone up to propose the HyperVectomy ?21:31
ttxsoren maybe ?21:31
berendt_what about removing bin/nova-manage? i read some note in a change request that it should be removed during essex-421:31
sorenttx: Yeah, I was meaning to do that.21:31
vishyberendt_: that is one of the hopes for focus for e421:31
vishyberendt_: we still need some of the functionality ported to admin extensions21:31
ttx#action soren to create a blueprint about surgical removal of HyperV and target to e421:32
*** mcohen_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:32
ttx#action ttx to create a blueprint about Ajaxtermectomy21:32
vishyberendt_: my team was planning on focusing on that next (after the stuff in our current email is done)21:32
jog0m2crypto bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/91785121:32
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 917851 in openstack-ci "replace m2crypto with shelling to openssl" [High,In progress]21:32
vishyberendt_: but help would be appreciated21:32
berendt_vishy: are there existing bug reports?21:32
ttx#action vishy to push deprectaedauth, m2crypto removal to ML and blueprints21:32
vishyberendt_:  I don't know21:33
ttxthough M2crypto was already discussed, I think21:33
vishyberendt_: there may be some, but i doubt it covers everything21:33
berendt_should be added as action too...21:33
vishyberendt_: live migration was moved21:33
vishyberendt_: and networks as well i believe21:33
*** mcohen has quit IRC21:33
*** mcohen_ is now known as mcohen21:33
ttxvishy: what replaces nova-manage ? plain nova + keystone CLI ?21:33
vishyttx: yes21:33
ttxwe still need db sync, I think21:34
rkukurais there a blueprint for nova-manage-ectomy?21:34
ttxrkukura: no21:34
vishyttx: any reason why we couldn't do that through an admin api?21:34
sorenSorry, wait, what?21:34
ttxvishy: sounds like the job of a specific helper.21:34
vishyttx: i guess we would have to make nova-api start without trying to load the models21:34
ttxsoren: what what ?21:34
sorennova-manage is going away altogether or just for user management?21:34
devcamcarnova-manage is going away?21:34
vishysoren: hoping to remove nova-manage21:35
ttx(that's news to me too, fwiw :)21:35
vishysoren, devcamcar: because all of the stuff it does should be admin extensions21:35
devcamcarbut … it's not21:35
DavieyThe first i saw this mentioned was on the prettytable merge.21:35
devcamcarso you can't remove it yet :)21:35
vishydb could be a special case21:35
sorenvishy: This is for Folsom, right?21:35
vishydevcamcar: hence the earlier comment: vishy: berendt_: that is one of the hopes for focus for e421:36
vishy[9:31pm] vishy: berendt_: we still need some of the functionality ported to admin extensions21:36
vishysoren: if necessary21:36
devcamcarsounds scary for essex21:36
sorenYou cannot seriously be suggesting that we replace nova-manage for Essex?21:36
ttxdevcamcar: +121:36
vishyfair enough. If it must stay it must stay21:36
devcamcari'm all for it for folsom21:36
vishyI still would like everything to become admin extensions21:36
* ttx breathes again.21:36
devcamcarits a good goal21:36
* vishy hates nova-manage21:37
ttxits a bit late to remove it. Even if we could do that in two weeks, it breaks a bit of docs.21:37
DavieyIf nova-manage is going away next cycle, it makes stable/'s team harder :)21:37
vishyand I wrote the first version so I'm allowed to21:37
sorenSo how would you consume these admin extensions?21:37
soren....if not through nova-manage?21:37
ttxDaviey: why ?21:37
vishysoren: python-novaclient21:37
Davieyttx: harder^D impossible to cherry pick :)21:37
mtaylorvishy: sorry, was away for a moment - LinuxJedi from my team was going to look at the M2Crypto removal bug if that's helpful21:38
ttxif it's folsom work, let's discuss that around a beer in April.21:38
vishyok so how about this way: goal is to get everything into extensions so that you can successfully run without nova-manage21:38
vishymtaylor: cool i think bcwaldon was looking at it too, so you might have to fight him21:38
sorenMy opinion: No.21:38
sorenGoal is: STable Essex.21:39
sorenThat's number 1.21:39
vishywe can leave nova-manage in21:39
mtaylorvishy: if bcwaldon wants it, i'm sure LinuxJedi isn't going to argue :)21:39
sorenIf we manage that, sure, knock yourself out. Write a million admin extensions.21:39
LinuxJedivishy: currently not my highest priority so happy for bcwaldon to play with it21:39
*** AndrewWeiss has joined #openstack-meeting21:39
vishysoren: goal hasn't changed there21:39
ttxvishy: that's a Folsom goal, right ?21:39
sorenvishy: Well, if you're diverting a lot of attention to writing admin extensions..21:39
LinuxJedibcwaldon: feel free to re-assign https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+bug/917851 to you21:39
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 917851 in openstack-ci "replace m2crypto with shelling to openssl" [High,In progress]21:39
vishyOK, I'm being to ambitious21:40
sorenvishy: ...then I beg to differ.21:40
bcwaldonLinuxJedi: kk21:40
vishy* too ambitious21:40
Davieyvishy: aim high, fall far :)21:40
vishyfair enough.21:40
ttxFolsom goal.deal.21:40
vishysoren: stability isn't my only concern21:40
ttxvishy: I set up basic objectives for Nova on http://wiki.openstack.org/BugSquashingDay/20120202 -- feel free to adapt/change.21:40
LinuxJediso that is why my wife always aims for the groin21:40
vishysoren: i also want it to be operatable21:40
sorenvishy: All our admin docs explain how to do things with nova-manage.21:41
vishysoren: yes, that is an excellent point21:41
sorenvishy: Things aren't going to automatically be more pleasant to work with because it gets APIified.21:41
Davieyisn't that just a grep away?21:41
annegentlewe can prioritize it if needed though (the docs changes). Means some tough decisions though.21:41
vishysoren: so I will push my nova-manage desires to folsom21:41
ewindischfyi, there have been suggestions of looking at encryption for the zeromq rpc driver. We might want m2crypto or similar when we get there.21:42
annegentleDaviey: Ha. No.21:42
sorenDaviey: I sure hope vishy's hatred towards nova-manage goes further than just the name of the command.21:42
Davieyannegentle: Sorry!21:42
ewindischthat won't be essex, though21:42
annegentleDaviey: :)21:42
ttxvishy: Anything else ?21:42
ttxwe need to move on.21:42
vishysoren: haha, the name of the command makes no difference to me. I just want it to be doing everything through the api21:42
vishyttx: nope, sounds like that one is settled21:42
ttxNova subteam leads: anything on your side ?21:42
sorenvishy: Right, so it's much more than just "a grep away" is my point.21:42
ttxOther questions on Nova ?21:43
ttx#topic Horizon status21:43
*** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status"21:43
ttxdevcamcar: o/21:43
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/essex-421:43
ttxLots of blueprints here, but that was kinda expected...21:43
*** edconzel has left #openstack-meeting21:44
devcamcari've already taken the first pass at removing a few of them and punting for folsom21:44
*** mjfork has joined #openstack-meeting21:44
ttxdevcamcar: Having 3 Essential blueprints on the last milestone make me a bit nervous21:44
ttxdevcamcar: when do you expect those to hit ?21:44
ttx"Essential" means "delay the release if not completed".21:44
ttxSo I'd rather see those completed yesterday.21:44
devcamcarone is 80% done already, one has been tracking the overall work being done and we can close soon, the third i will downgrade to high21:45
ttxdevcamcar: cool.21:45
ttxWho is assigned to ec2-credentials-download and image-upload ?21:45
ttxoh, recent fix21:45
devcamcarec2 credentials is jake dahn21:45
devcamcarimage upload has not been started21:45
*** jdg has joined #openstack-meeting21:46
ttxdevcamcar: Do you have specific objectives for the Bug Squashing day ?21:46
devcamcartres and i will be triaging today and marking all the low hanging fruit items21:46
devcamcarmain objectives are adding unit tests and reducing bugs21:47
ohnoimdeadthere's a lot of simple clean-up tasks new contributors can get their feet wet with21:47
devcamcarlots of the remaining 50 bugs are low hanging fruit at this point, some as simple as moving padding21:47
ttxdevcamcar: ok, so "get all low-hanging-fruit addressed" or something21:48
ttxFeel free to mention on http://wiki.openstack.org/BugSquashingDay/2012020221:48
ttxdevcamcar: Anything else ?21:48
ttxQuestions for Horizon ?21:49
lloyddefruit: nice21:50
ttxfruit is indeed nice.21:50
* mtaylor likes fruit21:50
ttx#topic Incubated projects and other Team reports21:50
*** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects and other Team reports"21:50
ttxdanwent, troytoman: yo21:50
danwentgot a couple of things.21:50
ttxdanwent: shoot21:50
danwentBug Squashing Day: focus is on getting some nova + quantum system integration tests written using devstack.21:50
danwent in person quantum bug squashing hangout @ Nicira in Palo Alto 2pm on thursday.  presos will be done on webex, so people can attend remotely.  will also try to have a virtual g+ hangout for those remote.21:50
danwentdetails on netstack list21:51
danwentalso: Quantum essex-3 tarball has a snafu if you install from source using 'setup.py install'.  New version of admin guide available with one-line work around: http://launchpad.net/quantum/essex/21:51
danwentwhoops, link got cut: http://launchpad.net/quantum/essex/essex-3/+download/quantum-admin-guide.pdf21:51
danwentSince Quantum is not core, we do not have a full freeze for E-4, but we are moving the feature freeze to a week earlier than normal, so Feb 2121:51
*** russellb has left #openstack-meeting21:51
danwentworking with horizon team to get quantum + horizon in shape as well21:51
ttxdanwent: ok.21:51
danwentFinally, I don't think this will be a surprise, but we're planning to propose Quantum as a core project for Folsom at an upcoming PPB meeting.21:51
danwenthooray for copy-paste :)21:52
danwentthat's all21:52
* mtaylor is surprised21:52
mtaylorthe other thing21:52
ttxdanwent: the secret is to copy-paste slow enough that people think you're typing.21:52
danwentah, but meeting is almost out of time :)21:52
ttxtroytoman: around ?21:52
troytomannot much to report on melange - we are focusing on some scale testing around quantum/melange/nova integration21:52
troytomanso, we'll fix bugs as we find them21:53
troytomanalso try to lock down the melange API for a v1 final21:53
ttxAny other team lead with a status report ? annegentle, mtaylor ?21:53
annegentleI've been working on "release notes" for Essex at http://wiki.openstack.org/ReleaseNotes/Essex21:53
annegentlenext will be doc priorities based on what we know to be in21:54
annegentleI'd like to learn more about KSL and the API21:54
annegentleso that we can properly source the content for api.openstack.org21:54
mtaylorvarious infrastructure things - moving some of the services around to new machines and whatnot21:54
mtaylormost interesting is that we're starting to roll out multi-python version testing, and we're about to start doing some pre-approval testing21:55
ttx#topic Open discussion21:56
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion"21:56
vishyI have a topic21:56
ttxvishy: go for it21:56
vishythis may be a summit discussion but i wanted to get people thinking21:56
vishywe have way too many drivers and such in nova-core21:56
*** salv-orlando_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:56
vishyit would be really nice to have a way to package up drivers/schedulers/ and api extensions21:57
vishyinto a single package that could be shipped separately21:57
vishy(perhaps with its own conf file)21:57
Davieyvishy: what is the benefit?21:57
reedany PPB member, please respond to the email I sent the board yesterday re: elections21:57
vishybonus for a 1-click installer via horizon21:57
ttxWe are at a netscape moment.21:57
vishyDaviey: the problem is maintaining all of that code in core is silly21:57
vishyexample: solidfire has an optimization to their driver21:58
vishythey have to propose it through core and wait for a release21:58
ttxreed: I don't think I received it.21:58
vishyif we made it really easy to ship and package it separately21:58
danwentvishy: we have similar issues with Quantum manager21:58
reedttx, I used the emailaddress monty gave me ... I blame him :)21:58
vishywe wouldn't have all of that overhead21:58
*** thingee has left #openstack-meeting21:58
Davieyvishy: wait, didn't we push more stuff into core to make it so trunk always worked?21:58
ttxreed: PM21:58
danwentour concern has been that if that code isn't in core, and interfaces change, no one will be running unit tests that catch the fact that they broke something in QuantumManager21:59
vishyDaviey: sure, but we don't really test the drivers that much21:59
Davieypython-novalcient was an example.21:59
danwentbut I agree with the goal21:59
vishyDaviey: the packages could include tests21:59
berendt_just as a side note: everything prepared for the FOSDEM?21:59
ttxvishy: ok, time is running short tpo discuss rearchitecting components :)21:59
devcamcarreed: confirmed, I didn't receive your message either21:59
ttxBug squashing day is Thursday !21:59
Davieyvishy: if they want it in diablo, we have the stable/ process :/21:59
ttxJoin us on #openstack-bugsquash, follow progress on http://wiki.openstack.org/bugstats/21:59
ttxberendt_: we'll have an OpenStack developers meeting at FOSDEM, Chavanne room, Saturday at 6pm.21:59
vishyDaviey: and we could still include packages + testing21:59
berendt_ttx: I now.. maybe someone forgot to prepare a talk ;)22:00
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting22:00
Davieyvishy: well, it impacts you more than most.. but from my PoV it seems like a PITA.22:00
vishyDaviey: but shipping them separately seems like it would get rid of a lot of overhead22:00
AndrewWeisshey guys, apologies for interrupting but I also wanted to bring up the latest research project on the Academic Initiative Group for those that are members and are interested22:00
vishyDaviey: the current thing is a pain22:00
Davieyvishy: it seems that it mostly will allow people to land code which breaks drivers, and /someone/ else has to fix it.22:00
Ryan_LaneI agree with vishy. the current way of things is painful22:00
vishyDaviey: we have a bunch of code that is unmaintained in core, then vendors update and try and ship it all at the last minute22:01
*** dwalleck has quit IRC22:01
jdgI think there are some benefits for everybody involved but we can pick up discussions later22:01
ttxvishy: ML ?22:01
Ryan_LaneI think we should go slightly further and have ways of directly extending core as well, though22:01
ttxWe need to clear the floor for netstack.22:01
vishyttx: ML sure,22:01
vishyttx: and discussion at the summit22:01
ttxand probably summit as well :)22:01
vishyhave fun netstack!22:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/"22:01
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jan 31 22:01:51 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)22:01
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-21.03.html22:01
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-21.03.txt22:01
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-21.03.log.html22:01
*** Gordonz has quit IRC22:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Jan 31 22:02:07 2012 UTC.  The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.22:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.22:02
*** LinuxJedi has quit IRC22:02
danwenthello all, this is now the netstack meeting22:02
danwent#info agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings22:02
*** AndrewWeiss has left #openstack-meeting22:02
*** mikeyp has left #openstack-meeting22:02
*** LinuxJedi has joined #openstack-meeting22:02
danwenteverybody here?22:02
davlaphi folks!22:03
*** Tushar has quit IRC22:03
*** apevec has left #openstack-meeting22:03
*** andrewbogott has left #openstack-meeting22:03
*** jdg has quit IRC22:03
salv-orlando_hi there!22:03
danwentOk, let's get started22:03
*** dolphm has quit IRC22:04
danwent#info bug-squashing day is this thursday, Feb 2nd.22:04
danwentwill will have an in-person meetup in Palo Alto at 2pm (email was to netstack list).22:04
danwentdebo + I will be presenting at the start, with a focus on people getting devstack setup and used to write more interesting system/integration tests.22:05
danwentany questions, please contact me.  webex and g+ hangout will be available.22:05
danwentif you are remote.22:05
salv-orlando_I'll be with you remotely for the first hours22:06
danwentmy goal is to end the day with some basic integration test / smoke test code that someone can check in and can be run on a devstack host.22:06
danwentI will send webex info to the ML22:06
danwent#TODO #danwent send bug squashing webex info to ML22:06
danwentis debo here?22:07
danwentanything to add?22:07
danwentdon't see him.22:07
danwentOk, one other topic that I just added to the agenda22:07
danwentthe deadline for applying to be a core project in Folsom is coming up very quickly22:08
danwentmid-Feb, essentially.22:08
*** rnirmal has quit IRC22:08
*** Ryan_Lane has left #openstack-meeting22:08
danwentI think its been our goal to apply for core project status for Folsom, and plan to do that, but wanted to give people a chance to voice any opinions on the topic22:08
*** mcohen has quit IRC22:08
danwentso, feel free to chime in22:09
*** hggdh has quit IRC22:09
danwenti'll work with jbryce and others to put together application.22:09
danwentare people excited?22:09
bhalldanwent: very22:09
salv-orlando_what does the application process require?22:09
salv-orlando_in human words, which are the requirements for becoming a core project?22:10
danwentnot much, in fact, its roughly equivalent to our incubation application, updated, I believe.22:10
*** debo-os has joined #openstack-meeting22:10
danwentI think the main criteria is that the openstack PPB sees value in the project and is willing to stand behind it.22:10
danwentso their metrics will be around quality, team, docs, etc.22:11
danwentI will also start a thread on the ML about this, but wanted to bring it up in the meeting as well.22:12
danwentmore important, do people have concerns around this?  If so, I'd like to start working to address them asap.22:12
salv-orlando_my only concern is that we need to address much better documentation.22:13
danwentsalv-orlando: which type?  admin, dev?22:13
danwentas a core project, you get the help of the openstack docs team, but obviously we still need to shoulder a lot of the load.22:14
salv-orlando_both of them. People often resort to the mailing list because they cannot find information about installing quantum or developing for it. And also we keep a lot of obsolete stuff on the wiki, which creates confusion.22:14
*** _adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting22:14
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting22:14
danwentI actually think the quantum admin guide is quite up to date… i think the emails to the ML are as much about people's tendency to not read documentation as they are about the docs being out of date.22:15
annegentlesalv-orlando_: I think you guys are in good shape, docs-wise.22:15
danwentdev docs is definitely something we need to improve though.22:15
annegentledanwent: yep, agreed22:15
annegentledanwent: agreed on the tendency people have not to read docs :) Your dev docs sorta "have" to be on the wiki for now. Since there's no quantum.openstack.org.22:16
danwentsalv: are there particular wiki pages that are out of date and we need to clean up?  wikis indeed have a tendency of getting stale.22:16
*** adjohn has quit IRC22:16
*** _adjohn is now known as adjohn22:16
*** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting22:16
danwentannegentle:  that's a good point.  in fact, because quantum is not yet core, its fairly hard to find the docs on the openstack site, which might explain why there are so many questions to the ML.22:17
annegentledanwent: yes, the search for incubated docs has bit us before...22:17
salv-orlando_I know about the pages I've created... most of them contain information which are not fully valid. The incubation status might explain people having difficulties finding docs, actually. I did not think about that.22:18
annegentledanwent: but this time around, the docs.openstack.org search box has included quantum admin docs22:18
ohnoimdeaddanwent: sending you some email wrt quantum ui but basically: we should take a design pass at the ui based on the new QuantumManager model and then add some bugs in horizon for the implementation. given everything on horizon's plate right now for e4 though i'm worried about getting this done before folsom.22:19
danwentohnoimdead:  thx, happy to sync up via email22:19
*** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates22:20
danwentannegentle:  that's good.  my guess is that people just go to docs.openstack.org and don't look a lot deeper.  but assuming quantum becomes core, that issue should go away22:20
ohnoimdeaddanwent: cool22:20
danwentannegentle: and by that I meant the landing page, and not much deeper22:20
*** mcohen has joined #openstack-meeting22:20
danwentOk, anything else on this topic?22:20
danwentI think everyone is asleep today :)22:21
danwentOk, one note about the Essex-3 tarball22:21
danwentwith the packaging changes, installing quantum from source using "python setup.py install" was broken with the E-3 tarball.22:22
*** jog0 has left #openstack-meeting22:22
danwentI don't think many people use this, so we just documented a work-around in an updated version of the admin guide.22:22
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting22:22
danwentwe considered posting a new tarball, but that's a bit problematic with the official release process, so current thinking is that workaround is ok.22:22
danwentany concerns?22:22
danwentI believe this is fixed in master already (or at least in code review)22:23
mtaylorin code review - it _should_ work22:23
mtayloralthough I'm _definitely_ in the market for feedback :)22:23
danwentonly time (or testing + time) will tell :)22:23
bhallor just testing? :)22:23
cdubwhat would a tarball be w/out special updated admin guide workaround? ;)22:24
danwentbhall: yes, mainly testing22:24
*** edgarmagana has joined #openstack-meeting22:24
danwentcdub: sigh…22:24
danwentOk, anything else on E-3 before we start talking about E-4?22:24
edgarmaganahi, sorry for joining late.. i was having some connection issues!!22:24
*** martine has quit IRC22:24
danwenthi edgar :)22:24
bhalledgarmagana: that's ok.. we just volunteered you to provide food at the bug squash22:25
bhalledgarmagana: j/k22:25
edgarmaganaI will bring the beer!22:25
edgarmaganaforget about food!22:25
danwentmore beer can't hurt!22:25
danwentgreat idea22:25
danwentOk, so Essex-422:25
danwentfinal release date is 3/1/201222:25
salv-orlando_Januray 3rd?22:26
bhallno :)22:26
danwentsalv-orlando:  so european :)22:26
salv-orlando_oh... sorry I'm too european sometimes :)22:26
danwentMarch 1st22:26
salv-orlando_is March 1st GA date or release branch point date?22:27
danwentplan is to avoid any large changes near to the end (as as the case with E-3) so we will code freeze a week ahead of usual, to make sure people have time to test sufficiently before the release:  feeze will be Feb 21st.22:27
danwentsalv-orlando: GA22:28
danwentso our freeze date for E-4 is a week ahead of the normal freeze date, which is usually two days before release.22:28
danwentsince a big focus of E-4 should be testing + bug fixes, having an early freeze point should be no problem, right?22:29
danwentso let's take a look at features that we'll need to do before Feb 21st: https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-422:29
danwentdebo: you're the main for system test?22:30
danwentmain -> main guy22:30
danwentdamn… he was here a few mins ago.  always seems to disappear when I need him22:31
salv-orlando_it's an heisen-debo22:31
danwentI will follow-up with debo specifically on that.  We're seeing a lot of issues due to nova + quantum integration, so this needs to be a key focus22:31
danwentsalv-orlando: oh, i like that nickname22:31
debo-osSorry I had to step out a bit22:31
danwentdebo-os:  just mentioning important of system test BP for e-422:32
cdubhow about horizon integration?22:32
danwentcdub: its on the agenda list, but not yet a BP.22:32
danwentohnoimdead and others will be creating bugs/BPs.22:32
cdubah, oops, jumping ahead (saw nova + qunatuum integration and made me think of it)22:32
danwentthere was also a thread on the email list.22:32
debo-osI think it is .... and its going to be out soon ... was evaluating the different options ...22:32
danwentdebo-os:  "out soon"?22:33
debo-ossoon for sure ....22:33
danwentyou're talking about basic system test framework?22:33
debo-osyes .... the basic test framework that we can use right awat22:34
*** berendt_ has left #openstack-meeting22:34
danwentOk, sumit, linux bridge plugin is ready for review already, correct?22:34
SumitNaiksatamyeah...for more than a week now :-)22:34
SumitNaiksatamalready put 6 patches22:34
SumitNaiksatamany takers??22:35
danwentok, great.22:35
danwentI will definitely review this week22:35
SumitNaiksatamok great, thanks!22:35
danwentI also want to talk with the Ryu controller team.   If they are planning on committing their plugin and creating a generic base class for ovs plugin and their plugin, I want that change in pretty early.22:36
danwent#todo #danwent ping ryu controller team about plugin for E-422:37
*** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting22:37
danwentnext item is updating the client (and CLI?) for API v1.122:37
danwentdo this issue have an owner yet?22:37
danwentwe also need to update QuantumManager in nova to use v1.1, so it can take advantage of filters.22:38
danwentOk, I will shop around for an owner for the v1.1 client work.  Definitely want to make sure that the existing v1.1 work can be leveraged.22:38
danwent(Nova + Horizon are obvious users)22:39
danwentSalv-orlando:  what are plans for documenting v1.1?22:39
salv-orlando_no owner for client at the moment. I would put it as highest priority. I'm willing to do it (client), but will have to defer some of the other work.22:39
*** sleepsonthefloo has quit IRC22:39
salv-orlando_For 1.1, I was thinking about doing the same thing I did for 1.0. And then there's the wadl. Some work was done, I need to check the current status.22:40
salv-orlando_And unfortunately I do not remember who did the initial work on the WADL.22:40
danwentsalv-orlando:  great.  do you want to create an issue to track 1.1 docs?22:40
danwentwas it nachi?22:40
salv-orlando_yeah nachi ueno!22:40
danwentI think we can dig through email archives22:40
salv-orlando_#action salv-orlando to file blueprint for API v1.1 documentation22:41
danwenthorizon integration was brough up earlier by cdub.22:41
danwentsome folks from the horizon team are on board for doing work here during e-4, as is mjfork22:41
danwentcdub, anyone from your team able to pitch in?22:42
danwenteveryone's quite when we ask for something :)22:42
cdubdanwent: it's possible, we have bridge review/testing as first priority after e3 package is complete22:42
danwentsounds good22:42
cdubdanwent: but, we can add to queue, i was actually not sure what the status was (hence the earlier question ;)22:43
danwentOk, anything big item is the Authz work.  Somik is traveling, so he can't check in, but I'm not sure how much progress has been made there.22:43
danwentcdub:  i'm hoping for a lot of responses on the ML.  that discussion should flush out some more concrete issues that people can volunteer to tackle.  I'll make sure things get broken down into launchpad tasks22:44
cdubdanwent: perfect, thanks!22:44
*** anotherjesse has quit IRC22:44
danwentfinally, VPN.  based on comments from vishy during e-3, we think there may be new VPN capabilities in nova that will "just work" with quantum.22:44
danwentbut we should check.22:45
danwent#todo #danwent contact vishy about VPN + quantum22:45
danwentany items that already should be on our radar for E-4?22:45
*** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting22:46
danwentok, any other quantum issues?22:46
*** sandywalsh has quit IRC22:46
danwentcdub, is everything in good shape for red hat/fedora packaging?22:46
cdubdanwent: rkukura pushed e-3 package today22:46
rkukuradanwent: initial F17 E3 package was pushed today22:47
danwentrkukura: awesome, link?22:47
*** spectorclan has joined #openstack-meeting22:47
rkukurastill need to look at ovs agent, and a few other items22:47
danwentcan we download the packages manually to check them out?22:47
danwentrkukura: let me know if there's any help you need packaging ovs agent.22:48
danwentOk, well, any open discussion?22:49
davlapi have a quick announcement…22:49
davlapi'll be giving a talk tomorrow night on quantum at the openstack boston meetup (6:30 pm in Harvard):  www.meetup.com/Openstack-Boston/22:49
davlapif you're in the area would be great if you could make it!22:49
rkukuraF17 package is http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=29656822:49
danwentdavlap: spreading the word, great!22:49
davlapshould be a good crowd!22:49
rkukuradavlap: planning to drop in if possible22:50
davlaplook forward to meeting you!22:50
danwentrkukura:  great, thanks.  do you all coordinate with stackops (they're fedora/rhel based, right?)22:50
*** bcwaldon has left #openstack-meeting22:50
rkukuradanwent: not sure of that - would need to ask markmc or someone22:50
danwentok, I was going to ping them about quantum packaging, but wanted to see if you were already working with them.22:51
danwentOk, last call for open items22:51
danwentOk, thanks folks.  Hopefully I will see/hear many of you at the bugsquashing event thursday!22:52
*** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/"22:52
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jan 31 22:52:12 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)22:52
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-22.02.html22:52
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-22.02.txt22:52
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-01-31-22.02.log.html22:52
*** markvoelker has quit IRC22:52
SumitNaiksatamthanks, bye!22:52
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC22:52
salv-orlando_bye bye22:52
*** Raj_ has quit IRC22:52
*** mcohen has left #openstack-meeting22:53
*** vincentricci has joined #openstack-meeting22:56
*** dabo has quit IRC22:59
*** apontes has quit IRC22:59
*** dolphm has quit IRC22:59
*** spectorclan has quit IRC22:59
*** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting23:00
*** vincentricci has quit IRC23:00
*** vincentricci has joined #openstack-meeting23:00
*** rkukura has quit IRC23:01
*** maoy has left #openstack-meeting23:02
*** ayoung has quit IRC23:04
*** debo-os has quit IRC23:09
*** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting23:10
*** debo-os has joined #openstack-meeting23:10
*** spectorclan has joined #openstack-meeting23:11
*** sleepsonthefloo has joined #openstack-meeting23:22
*** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting23:34
*** debo-os has quit IRC23:41
*** _adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting23:41
*** vincentricci_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:41
*** debo-os has joined #openstack-meeting23:43
*** vincentricci has quit IRC23:44
*** vincentricci_ is now known as vincentricci23:44
*** adjohn has quit IRC23:44
*** _adjohn is now known as adjohn23:44
*** mattray has quit IRC23:54
*** anotherjesse_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:54
*** anotherjesse_ has quit IRC23:55
*** anotherjesse has quit IRC23:56

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!