Tuesday, 2012-11-13

*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting00:00
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC00:00
*** danwent has quit IRC00:05
*** dendrobates has joined #openstack-meeting00:08
*** dendrobates has quit IRC00:08
*** dendrobates has joined #openstack-meeting00:08
*** metral has quit IRC00:10
*** metral has joined #openstack-meeting00:10
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC00:13
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC00:22
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting00:25
*** gatuus has quit IRC00:26
*** markmcclain has quit IRC00:27
*** jaypipes has quit IRC00:35
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC00:37
*** Sonny_ has quit IRC00:42
*** gatuus has joined #openstack-meeting00:50
*** jcooley has quit IRC00:56
*** dkehn_away has left #openstack-meeting01:00
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting01:01
*** dendrobates has quit IRC01:04
*** jcooley has quit IRC01:04
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC01:04
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul01:05
*** littleidea has left #openstack-meeting01:05
*** gatuus has quit IRC01:11
*** vbannai has quit IRC01:11
*** NobodyCam is now known as NobodyCam_afk01:13
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:13
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:13
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting01:14
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting01:15
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting01:15
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:18
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:18
*** egallen has left #openstack-meeting01:19
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn01:23
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:27
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:27
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:29
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:29
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting01:35
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting01:35
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:36
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:36
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC01:37
*** egallen has left #openstack-meeting01:38
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:42
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:43
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC01:43
*** hemna has quit IRC01:47
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:47
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:47
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:49
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting01:50
*** metral has quit IRC01:52
*** metral_ is now known as metral01:52
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:57
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:57
*** ywu_ has quit IRC01:58
*** ywu_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:59
*** metral has quit IRC01:59
*** notmyname has quit IRC02:02
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting02:05
*** stevebake has quit IRC02:06
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC02:07
*** vipul is now known as vipul|away02:07
*** markwash has quit IRC02:09
*** Shengjie_Min has quit IRC02:09
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting02:10
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting02:19
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC02:19
*** maoy has quit IRC02:21
*** metral has joined #openstack-meeting02:21
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul02:22
*** Mandell has quit IRC02:25
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting02:25
*** samkottler|bbl is now known as samkottler02:28
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:28
*** Mandell has quit IRC02:29
*** metral has quit IRC02:31
*** metral_ is now known as metral02:31
*** jog0 has quit IRC02:37
*** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting02:45
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:46
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz02:48
*** metral has quit IRC02:49
*** metral_ is now known as metral02:49
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC02:51
*** vipul is now known as vipul|away02:55
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul03:00
*** anniec has quit IRC03:08
*** samkottler is now known as samkottler|out03:10
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:15
*** adjohn has quit IRC03:15
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting03:16
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting03:16
*** metral has quit IRC03:18
*** metral_ is now known as metral03:18
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC03:22
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC03:24
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting03:25
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting03:28
*** ywu_ has quit IRC03:28
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC03:28
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting03:31
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting03:49
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn03:59
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC04:30
*** stevebake has quit IRC04:30
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting04:35
*** spzala has quit IRC04:44
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting04:45
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC04:48
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting04:50
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting04:50
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC04:51
*** markmcclain has quit IRC04:52
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting04:52
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting04:55
*** colinmcnamara has left #openstack-meeting05:02
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting05:09
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting05:20
*** afazekas|sleep is now known as afazekas05:20
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting05:21
*** afazekas has quit IRC05:28
*** mnewby has quit IRC05:39
*** fifieldt has joined #openstack-meeting05:40
*** danwent has quit IRC05:41
*** garyk has quit IRC05:45
*** notmyname has joined #openstack-meeting05:45
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting05:46
*** mnewby has quit IRC05:47
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting05:55
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:55
*** jdurgin1 has quit IRC05:56
*** metral has quit IRC05:59
*** metral_ is now known as metral05:59
*** roadTripper has quit IRC06:01
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting06:06
*** sarob has quit IRC06:06
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting06:08
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting06:08
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting06:15
*** jcooley has quit IRC06:20
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting06:20
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC06:21
*** jcooley has quit IRC06:25
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting06:26
*** jfriedly has quit IRC06:43
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting06:44
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz06:45
*** danwent has quit IRC06:46
*** markmcclain has quit IRC06:56
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting07:07
*** gongysh has quit IRC07:11
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting07:14
*** davidha has quit IRC07:17
*** notmyname has quit IRC07:27
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting07:30
*** egallen has left #openstack-meeting07:31
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting07:46
*** littleidea has quit IRC07:49
*** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting07:52
*** adjohn has quit IRC07:58
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting08:01
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov08:03
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:09
*** metral has quit IRC08:12
*** metral_ is now known as metral08:12
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz08:21
*** Dorogs has joined #openstack-meeting08:24
*** davidh_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:30
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:31
*** davidha has quit IRC08:32
*** metral has quit IRC08:33
*** metral_ is now known as metral08:33
*** danwent has quit IRC08:41
*** Razique has joined #openstack-meeting08:42
*** Mandell has quit IRC08:49
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting08:57
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:59
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting08:59
*** metral__ has joined #openstack-meeting09:00
*** metral has quit IRC09:01
*** metral__ is now known as metral09:01
*** metral_ has quit IRC09:03
*** derekh has quit IRC09:03
*** zhuadl has quit IRC09:07
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting09:11
*** fifieldt has quit IRC09:12
*** davidh_ has quit IRC09:14
*** afazekas has quit IRC09:17
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting09:21
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting09:31
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting09:33
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting09:35
*** egallen has left #openstack-meeting09:35
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting09:48
*** metral has quit IRC09:50
*** afazekas has quit IRC10:00
*** jhenner has quit IRC10:01
*** stevebake has quit IRC10:11
*** ozstacker has quit IRC10:12
*** iccha has quit IRC10:12
*** pvo has quit IRC10:12
*** jjm3lp has quit IRC10:12
*** sarob has quit IRC10:12
*** soren has quit IRC10:12
*** file has quit IRC10:12
*** pballand has quit IRC10:12
*** jeblair has quit IRC10:12
*** cp16net has quit IRC10:12
*** mnewby has quit IRC10:12
*** blamar has quit IRC10:12
*** rkukura has quit IRC10:12
*** annegentf has quit IRC10:12
*** devananda has quit IRC10:12
*** dragondm has quit IRC10:12
*** Toanster has quit IRC10:12
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** jjm3lp has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** pvo has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** iccha has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** ozstacker has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** 16SAAH75Y has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** soren has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** file has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** devananda has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** jeblair has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** cp16net has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** Toanster has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting10:17
*** krtaylor has quit IRC10:20
*** asalkeld has quit IRC10:20
*** mikal has quit IRC10:20
*** rturk has quit IRC10:20
*** ogelbukh has quit IRC10:20
*** dolphm_zzz has quit IRC10:20
*** termie has quit IRC10:20
*** ameade has quit IRC10:20
*** darraghb has quit IRC10:20
*** dansmith has quit IRC10:20
*** shengjie has quit IRC10:20
*** briancline has quit IRC10:20
*** cburgess has quit IRC10:20
*** sleepson- has quit IRC10:20
*** torgomatic has quit IRC10:20
*** rainya has quit IRC10:20
*** creiht has quit IRC10:20
*** antonym has quit IRC10:20
*** dtroyer_zz has quit IRC10:20
*** primeministerp has quit IRC10:20
*** ywu has quit IRC10:20
*** bcwaldon has quit IRC10:20
*** rmk has quit IRC10:20
*** westmaas has quit IRC10:20
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** dtroyer_zz has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** rturk has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** dansmith has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** shengjie has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** ogelbukh has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** briancline has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** dolphm_zzz has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** antonym has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** torgomatic has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** westmaas has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** rmk has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** sleepson- has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** rainya has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** ywu has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** termie has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** ameade has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** carlp has quit IRC10:23
*** persia has quit IRC10:23
*** xtoddx- has quit IRC10:23
*** fnaval has quit IRC10:23
*** swifterdarrell has quit IRC10:23
*** spn_ has quit IRC10:23
*** krtaylor has quit IRC10:23
*** asalkeld has quit IRC10:23
*** mikal has quit IRC10:23
*** rturk has quit IRC10:23
*** ogelbukh has quit IRC10:23
*** dolphm_zzz has quit IRC10:23
*** termie has quit IRC10:23
*** ameade has quit IRC10:23
*** darraghb has quit IRC10:23
*** dansmith has quit IRC10:23
*** shengjie has quit IRC10:23
*** briancline has quit IRC10:23
*** cburgess has quit IRC10:23
*** sleepson- has quit IRC10:23
*** torgomatic has quit IRC10:23
*** rainya has quit IRC10:23
*** creiht has quit IRC10:23
*** antonym has quit IRC10:23
*** dtroyer_zz has quit IRC10:23
*** primeministerp has quit IRC10:23
*** ywu has quit IRC10:23
*** bcwaldon has quit IRC10:23
*** rmk has quit IRC10:23
*** westmaas has quit IRC10:23
*** stevebake has quit IRC10:23
*** ozstacker has quit IRC10:23
*** iccha has quit IRC10:23
*** pvo has quit IRC10:23
*** jjm3lp has quit IRC10:23
*** sarob has quit IRC10:23
*** soren has quit IRC10:23
*** file has quit IRC10:23
*** pballand has quit IRC10:23
*** jeblair has quit IRC10:23
*** cp16net has quit IRC10:23
*** mnewby has quit IRC10:23
*** blamar has quit IRC10:23
*** rkukura has quit IRC10:23
*** 16SAAH75Y has quit IRC10:23
*** devananda has quit IRC10:23
*** dragondm has quit IRC10:23
*** Toanster has quit IRC10:23
*** derekh has quit IRC10:23
*** Linuturk has quit IRC10:23
*** nijaba has quit IRC10:23
*** jgriffith has quit IRC10:23
*** jhenner has quit IRC10:23
*** rafaduran has quit IRC10:23
*** EntropyWorks has quit IRC10:23
*** NobodyCam_afk has quit IRC10:23
*** andrewbogott_afk has quit IRC10:23
*** dwcramer has quit IRC10:23
*** jrd has quit IRC10:23
*** Gordonz has quit IRC10:23
*** ndipanov has quit IRC10:23
*** GheRivero has quit IRC10:23
*** joearnold has quit IRC10:23
*** vipul has quit IRC10:23
*** yamahata has quit IRC10:23
*** enikanorov_ has quit IRC10:23
*** tasdomas has quit IRC10:23
*** Kiall has quit IRC10:23
*** _0x44 has quit IRC10:23
*** anotherjesse has quit IRC10:23
*** CaptTofu has quit IRC10:23
*** zykes- has quit IRC10:23
*** vishy has quit IRC10:23
*** afazekas has quit IRC10:23
*** ijw has quit IRC10:23
*** mestery has quit IRC10:23
*** chmouel has quit IRC10:23
*** garyk has quit IRC10:23
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC10:23
*** zul has quit IRC10:23
*** akscram has quit IRC10:23
*** pn has quit IRC10:23
*** jamespage has quit IRC10:23
*** jakedahn_zz has quit IRC10:23
*** LinuxJedi has quit IRC10:23
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC10:23
*** alpha_ori has quit IRC10:23
*** kiffer84 has quit IRC10:23
*** comstud has quit IRC10:23
*** uvirtbot` has quit IRC10:23
*** cdub has quit IRC10:23
*** kpepple has quit IRC10:23
*** kmartin has quit IRC10:23
*** edleafe has quit IRC10:23
*** chalupaul has quit IRC10:23
*** Daviey has quit IRC10:23
*** dripton has quit IRC10:23
*** dtroyer has quit IRC10:23
*** Razique has quit IRC10:23
*** matiu has quit IRC10:23
*** mordred has quit IRC10:23
*** ttrifonov_zZzz has quit IRC10:23
*** med_ has quit IRC10:23
*** Dorogs has quit IRC10:23
*** Mr_T has quit IRC10:23
*** clarkb has quit IRC10:23
*** troytoman-away has quit IRC10:23
*** fungi has quit IRC10:23
*** lifeless has quit IRC10:23
*** almaisan-away has quit IRC10:23
*** glenc_ has quit IRC10:23
*** no`x has quit IRC10:23
*** russellb has quit IRC10:23
*** _cerberus_ has quit IRC10:23
*** sdague has quit IRC10:23
*** Adri2000 has quit IRC10:23
*** dabo has quit IRC10:23
*** ttx has quit IRC10:23
*** davidha has quit IRC10:23
*** adam_g has quit IRC10:23
*** jd__ has quit IRC10:23
*** DuncanT has quit IRC10:23
*** nikhil has quit IRC10:23
*** anderstj has quit IRC10:23
*** davidkranz has quit IRC10:23
*** spn has quit IRC10:23
*** bourke has quit IRC10:23
*** brianr-away has quit IRC10:23
*** devcamcar has quit IRC10:23
*** sleepsonthefloor has quit IRC10:23
*** tr3buchet has quit IRC10:23
*** alaski has quit IRC10:23
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ameade has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** termie has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ywu has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** rainya has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** sleepson- has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** rmk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** westmaas has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** torgomatic has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** antonym has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dolphm_zzz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** briancline has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ogelbukh has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** shengjie has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dansmith has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** rturk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dtroyer_zz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** alaski has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** med_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dtroyer has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** tr3buchet has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ttx has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** sleepsonthefloor has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** devcamcar has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** LinuxJedi has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** chalupaul has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jakedahn_zz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** nikhil has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jamespage has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** _0x44 has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ttrifonov_zZzz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** pn has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** edleafe has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** vishy has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** chmouel has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Adri2000 has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Kiall has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** kpepple has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** zykes- has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** carlp has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** mordred has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** spn_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** xtoddx- has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** akscram has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Daviey has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jd__ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dripton has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** _cerberus_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** russellb has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** no`x has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** brianr-away has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** uvirtbot` has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** comstud has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** glenc_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** adam_g has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** enikanorov_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** persia has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** almaisan-away has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** bourke has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** CaptTofu has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** andrewbogott_afk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** tasdomas has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** NobodyCam_afk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** lifeless has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** fungi has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** kiffer84 has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** vipul has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** EntropyWorks has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** troytoman-away has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** spn has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** davidkranz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** clarkb has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** swifterdarrell has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** alpha_ori has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ndipanov has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jrd has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Mr_T has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** kmartin has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Linuturk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** nijaba has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Dorogs has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Razique has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jjm3lp has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** pvo has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** iccha has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** ozstacker has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** 16SAAH75Y has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** soren has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** file has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** devananda has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** jeblair has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** cp16net has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** Toanster has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** dtroyer_zz has quit IRC10:25
*** primeministerp has quit IRC10:25
*** ywu has quit IRC10:25
*** bcwaldon has quit IRC10:25
*** rmk has quit IRC10:25
*** westmaas has quit IRC10:25
*** darraghb has quit IRC10:26
*** dansmith has quit IRC10:26
*** shengjie has quit IRC10:26
*** briancline has quit IRC10:26
*** cburgess has quit IRC10:26
*** sleepson- has quit IRC10:26
*** torgomatic has quit IRC10:26
*** rainya has quit IRC10:26
*** creiht has quit IRC10:26
*** antonym has quit IRC10:26
*** dtroyer_zz has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** ywu has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** westmaas has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** rmk has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** dansmith has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** shengjie has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** briancline has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** rainya has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** sleepson- has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** torgomatic has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** antonym has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** xtoddx- has quit IRC10:28
*** xtoddx- has joined #openstack-meeting10:28
*** fnaval has quit IRC10:30
*** swifterdarrell has quit IRC10:30
*** spn_ has quit IRC10:30
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting10:30
*** swifterdarrell has joined #openstack-meeting10:30
*** spn_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:30
*** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting10:46
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting10:49
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting10:51
*** bobmel has left #openstack-meeting10:51
*** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting10:54
*** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting10:54
*** anniec has quit IRC11:27
*** maurosr has quit IRC11:34
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting11:35
*** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting11:35
*** almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan11:37
*** anniec has quit IRC11:41
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting11:46
*** rafaduran has left #openstack-meeting11:52
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting11:54
*** arata has joined #openstack-meeting12:03
*** al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away12:08
*** rkukura has quit IRC12:08
*** egallen has quit IRC12:15
*** maurosr has quit IRC12:15
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting12:16
*** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting12:17
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting12:18
*** uncleofthestick has joined #openstack-meeting12:28
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:30
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:31
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting12:42
*** littleidea has quit IRC12:47
*** fifieldt has joined #openstack-meeting12:48
*** boden has joined #openstack-meeting12:49
*** dolphm has quit IRC12:49
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting12:49
*** littleidea has left #openstack-meeting12:49
*** hghazal has joined #openstack-meeting12:50
*** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting12:51
fifieldthi koolhead1712:51
koolhead17fifieldt, hello there12:51
fifieldtWe have doc meeting in 10mins yes?12:52
koolhead17Razique, hi12:52
koolhead17fifieldt, cool12:52
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting12:54
*** samkottler|out is now known as samkottler12:54
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:55
*** hghazal has quit IRC12:55
*** dolphm has quit IRC12:56
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:56
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting12:57
fifieldthi Daisy!~12:57
*** dolphm has quit IRC12:57
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting12:58
DaisyI'm here !12:58
DaisyI tried several times. The network is not good here.12:58
fifieldtI have to use secure IRC to connect12:59
DaisyI use web IRC. :)12:59
zykes-irssi <312:59
koolhead17cool. are we ready then?13:00
fifieldtI think we need Anne13:00
fifieldtshe has to wake up early for this13:01
koolhead17fifieldt, ooh.13:01
*** hghazal has joined #openstack-meeting13:01
fifieldtit's 7AM in TX13:01
*** One-Man-Bucket has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
Daisyyeah, very early time.13:02
fifieldthopefully she has done the timezone conversion correctly13:03
fifieldtI get it wrong so often!13:03
*** davidha has quit IRC13:03
*** A[D]minS has joined #openstack-meeting13:04
fifieldtdoes anyone know her contact number?13:04
Daisyno, I don't know.13:05
*** annegentle_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:05
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting13:05
annegentle_hey sorry I'm a little late, anyone here for the Doc meeting?13:06
DaisyAnne comes ! Welcome !13:06
fifieldthi annegentle_!13:06
koolhead17annegentle_, waoo. GM :)13:06
annegentle_I'm up but lost track of time, with all the kiddos getting ready :)13:06
fifieldtsorry for making you wake up so early :)13:06
annegentle_ok, yay, let's get started13:06
annegentle_#startmeeting Doc/Web13:06
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 13:06:38 2012 UTC.  The chair is annegentle_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.13:06
koolhead17Razique, ^^13:06
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.13:06
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'doc_web'13:06
*** itarchitectkev has joined #openstack-meeting13:07
fifieldtAgenda is at : http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/DocTeamMeeting13:07
annegentle_#topic Action items from last meeting13:08
*** openstack changes topic to "Action items from last meeting"13:08
fifieldtI didn't see any action items from last meeting13:08
annegentle_There were none13:08
annegentle_woo, moving on13:08
fifieldthttp://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/doc_web_meeting/2012/doc_web_meeting.2012-10-08-20.02.html FYR :)13:08
annegentle_#topic Folsom release branch now available13:08
*** openstack changes topic to "Folsom release branch now available"13:08
annegentle_I think you all saw that we were planning to make it on the mailing list, CI made the branch shortly afterwards13:08
annegentle_There is one bug uncovered -- PDF links are broken13:09
annegentle_the file names are blah-folsom.pdf for /trunk docs13:09
annegentle_bug 107807613:09
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1078076 in openstack-manuals "FOLSOM : Unable to download PDF version of the documents" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/107807613:09
annegentle_I haven't seen anything else though, and I can fix that today I believe. Might be a CI thing, might be in the book file (the PDF name)13:09
fifieldtthis is because docs.openstack.org still points at /trunk for docs?13:10
fifieldtso a new /www/folsom/* needs to be created?13:10
annegentle_fifieldt: my first guess is that I need to change the master branch book files to not have -folsom for pdf names in the book file13:10
annegentle_fifieldt: I think there is a new www/folsom13:10
fifieldtmy bad13:10
annegentle_#link http://docs.openstack.org/folsom/13:10
annegentle_also related to the new branch is that the Folsom branch and forward do not contain API docs13:11
annegentle_so the openstack-manuals repo is much more lightweigth13:11
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting13:11
annegentle_#info openstack-manuals repo does not contain any API docs now, see openstack/api-site for those docs13:11
annegentle_I like the separation for my own mental sanity13:12
fifieldtwe also have the new launchpad for it too13:12
fifieldtthink that popped up since last meeting13:12
annegentle_Also related is that there are many DocImpact bugs now logged for Grizzly - thanks fifieldt for keeping up with those13:12
annegentle_ah yes13:12
fifieldt#link https://launchpad.net/openstack-api-site13:12
annegentle_#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-site13:13
annegentle_and it's also nice so that we can see DocImpact affecting API separately from install/config/run13:13
Daisygreat !13:13
annegentle_the API bugs are definitely going up in numbers13:13
annegentle_Daisy: I think this move also helps with translation? Not really sure though13:13
koolhead17annegentle_, and i hope we get some core devs from team helping us out with it13:14
annegentle_koolhead17: yes I am very concerned with the lack of maintenance on API docs.13:14
annegentle_ok, any questions on the Folsom release branch?13:14
koolhead17annegentle_, we need some helping hand in docs too :P13:14
fifieldtQuantum, Cinder  ?13:14
koolhead17fifieldt, +113:14
annegentle_#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Documentation/HowTo#How_to_a_cherry-pick_a_change_to_a_stable_branch13:15
DaisyAnne: not sure13:15
annegentle_^^ that's how you add to the stable/folsom branch… need to update that page with folsom examples13:15
uvirtbot`annegentle_: Error: "^" is not a valid command.13:15
annegentle_#topic Bug creation and process with DocImpact flag13:15
*** openstack changes topic to "Bug creation and process with DocImpact flag"13:15
annegentle_So far fifieldt and I have kept up with the process of: 1) DocImpact email comes in 2) Read it and create a doc bug in the appropriate Launchpad place 3) Triage with as much info as is available13:16
fifieldtSeems like it's going well  - we've tagged 13 bugs with grizzly milestone so far13:16
fifieldt#link https://launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+milestone/grizzly13:16
annegentle_To me there is one part I'm unsure of - how will we know when it lands and the code changes?13:16
fifieldtI believe this is part of bug triage  ...w13:17
Daisyoh. It's not a small workload.13:17
fifieldtwhen the patch is merged, we set the status to confirmed13:17
fifieldtand can in theory start working on it13:17
annegentle_fifieldt: okay, fair enough. I will also ask CI if they have ideas13:17
*** Dorogs has quit IRC13:17
fifieldtI try to include the link to the gerrit page for patches in the launchpad bugs13:17
annegentle_fifieldt: ok, I think I set one or two to Triaged, are you leaving them as Status: New?13:17
fifieldtso you can easily click through to merge13:18
annegentle_fifieldt: yep, me too13:18
fifieldtSo far I was leaving them as new13:18
annegentle_any other process improvements there?13:18
fifieldtuntil they are merged13:18
DaisyCan the tag trigger email after the patch is merged?13:18
fifieldtbut I'm happy with whatever works13:18
annegentle_fifieldt: ok sounds good. I'll also see if there's any additional improvements.13:18
koolhead17annegentle_, for the folsom release of docs is our arch diagrams and stuff modified covering the new components?13:18
annegentle_#action Anne to ask CI team if there's notification capability with a patch with DocImpact actually merges13:18
annegentle_koolhead17: not with new cinder?13:19
*** Dorogs has joined #openstack-meeting13:19
annegentle_koolhead17: log a bug if you know of a diagram missing cinder13:19
fifieldtPotential action point: Send an followup email to the dev list thanking them for their response to the ":use docimpact" email ?13:19
annegentle_fifieldt: perfect, yes13:19
koolhead17annegentle_, i already have13:19
koolhead17annegentle_, i don`t see even Quantum in the arch :(13:19
annegentle_#action fifieldt to send an followup email to the dev list thanking them for their response to the ":use docimpact" email13:19
annegentle_koolhead17: bug number please? for the notes?13:19
* koolhead17 checks13:20
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1076282 in openstack-manuals "Modification needed in Architecture Diagram" [Low,Confirmed]13:20
annegentle_koolhead17: can you add an Agenda item to talk about the gaps you still see?13:20
annegentle_we'll keep going through the Agenda we have13:20
annegentle_ok anything else on DocImpact?13:20
koolhead17annegentle_, ok13:20
annegentle_#topic Doc tools update - 1.5.1, 1.6.0 purposes and explanations13:20
*** openstack changes topic to "Doc tools update - 1.5.1, 1.6.0 purposes and explanations"13:20
annegentle_Okay, needed to explain what's going on with the 1.5.1 update13:21
* fifieldt sits on edge of seat13:21
annegentle_I've been going through and changing as many pom files as I can to point to 1.5.1 so that the Google Analytics tracking can track across *.openstack.org13:21
annegentle_it required a change to the maven plugin13:21
annegentle_exciting stuff, yes!! :)13:21
annegentle_Yesterday I found I can't build the Identity API 2.0 guide with 1.5.0 or 1.5.1. Sigh.13:22
Daisywhat could Google Analytics track?13:22
annegentle_bug 107810813:22
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1078108 in openstack-api-site "Identity API 2.0 guide won't build on 1.5.0 or 1.5.1 version of Clouddoc tools maven plugin" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/107810813:22
annegentle_Google Analytics tracks visitors, visits, that sort of thing13:22
annegentle_it's helpful for knowing how readers navigate all the sites13:23
annegentle_The Foundation staff requested the change for better usability, etc.13:23
Daisytracking even within DocBook pages?13:23
annegentle_I can send another brief summary to the mailing list of what we see in our web analytis.13:23
fifieldtthat would be cool13:23
annegentle_#action Anne to send summary report of Google Analytics info to openstack-doc mailing list13:24
annegentle_Daisy: yep the pom.xml contains the GA code and then embeds it in each page13:24
Daisythat's great!13:24
annegentle_ok so that's the reasoning for 1.5.113:25
annegentle_now the actually exciting one is 1.6.013:25
annegentle_we won't have all these pesky PDF links break any more13:25
annegentle_it contains fixes for the manual file naming for PDFs13:26
annegentle_but, it means all the pom.xmls must change when using 1.6.013:26
annegentle_#link https://github.com/rackspace/clouddocs-maven-plugin13:26
fifieldtpom.xmls are easy enough to change ... I think13:26
annegentle_that has the release notes for what's coming in 1.6.013:26
*** A[D]minS has quit IRC13:26
annegentle_Another feature we may want to think about is the "Automatically handle images"13:27
*** zhuadl has quit IRC13:27
annegentle_you know how you have to insert two image refs for the PDF and HTML output? This will handle that more gracefully --- and tell you if you're missing images.13:27
fifieldt    Generate pdf file names in the format basename-20121110.pdf where basename is the base pdf name and 20121110 is the taken from /*/info/pubdate in the document.13:27
fifieldtHow does that work for the docs which are split using os= ?13:27
annegentle_Also in 1.6.0 we get the fix for the book titles for our install guides built conditioinally13:28
annegentle_fifieldt: ah good question.13:28
annegentle_fifieldt: we also don't want that style of naming for Google Analytics purposes for tracking over longer periods like releases13:28
annegentle_#action Anne to investigate PDF file naming13:28
annegentle_Another bit of news for Doc tools is that their repo is moving to openstack-ci/clouddocs-maven-plugin13:29
annegentle_This move enables more contributors to the plugin13:29
annegentle_any questions on the maven plugin?13:30
annegentle_David Cramer is the lead dev on it and couldn't be here this morning but says hello13:30
annegentle_#topic Gaps in Folsom doc - prioritizing13:30
*** openstack changes topic to "Gaps in Folsom doc - prioritizing"13:30
annegentle_Added that for you koolhead1713:30
fifieldtQuantum, Cinder13:30
annegentle_We did get a nice boost for Cinder from jgriffith which is why I went ahead and cut the folsom branch13:31
annegentle_but we need cleanup on the install guide particularly if we are going to use Cinder as default?13:31
fifieldtI think we still need to provide both nova-volume and cinder in Folsom doc13:31
fifieldtto facilitate "transition"13:31
fifieldtdespite it being such similar code13:32
koolhead17annegentle_, john did modified some cider doc which requers more clarification13:32
annegentle_fifieldt: I think that's true13:32
koolhead17i have assiged the bug to him13:32
*** davidha has quit IRC13:32
koolhead17i would say priority is to get the arch corrected13:32
annegentle_koolhead17: bug number please?13:32
koolhead17the bugs which are tagged with quantum needs special attention13:32
*** dwcramer has quit IRC13:32
annegentle_I'd also like to address the difference people are noting between the "ubuntu all in one" Appendix and the rest of the guide13:33
annegentle_see bug 107808413:33
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1078084 in openstack-manuals "Install guide bugs: paste ini doesnt need mods, confusion between appendix nova.conf and sample nova.conf" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/107808413:33
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1064643 in openstack-manuals "add example of basic "flat" scenario for quantum" [Medium,Triaged]13:33
annegentle_fifieldt: yep that's the one13:34
fifieldtDeploying quantum is not "simple" right now13:34
annegentle_Dan Wendlandt said he'd address last week13:34
koolhead17annegentle_, https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/107805713:34
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1078057 in openstack-manuals "OpenStack Install and Deploy Manual - Ubuntu: cinder flag setting is not clear" [Medium,Confirmed]13:34
annegentle_fifieldt: koolhead17 and razique say floating ups don't work13:34
fifieldtI think there needs to be a nice big warning about it not supporting multihost flatDHCP HA13:34
fifieldtI'm not surprised13:34
annegentle_fifieldt: oh good point13:34
koolhead17itarchitectkev, around?13:34
*** hghazal has quit IRC13:34
Raziqueitarchitectkev : I think I finally figured it out13:35
koolhead17annegentle_, we need Dan or someone from Quantum team to regularly look at those bugs13:35
annegentle_one thing I wondered is if the "Demo Setup" section is 1) chunked too much (as in, people don't click NEXT> and 2) placed so far down in the guide as to be invisible?13:35
Raziquefloating don't work, since the L3 package is broken in the official repost13:35
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
koolhead17i see most of the recent bugs coming for quantum13:35
annegentle_koolhead17: I was supposed to send him a list of bugs, I'll take an action to do that today13:35
koolhead17Daviey, ^^^13:35
annegentle_#action Anne to send Dan Wendlandt a list of highest priority Quantum doc bugs13:35
annegentle_Razique: Good detective work man!13:35
*** milner has joined #openstack-meeting13:36
koolhead17annegentle_, and see if we can poke kpepple for a new arch diagram to go ahead with folsom doc :)13:36
fifieldtI think he did one, didn't hi?13:36
annegentle_koolhead17: he did update it for folsom, but what's missing?13:36
fifieldt#link http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/logical-architecture.html13:37
*** hghazal has joined #openstack-meeting13:37
koolhead17annegentle_, http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/install/apt/content/externals.html#d6e47613:37
annegentle_koolhead17: ah those are from Lorin if my memory serves13:38
koolhead17Razique, are you talking about the bug related to iptables13:38
koolhead17annegentle_, assign it to him then :D13:38
annegentle_koolhead17: log a bug please13:38
Raziquekoolhead17 : yah the one preventing floating ips from working13:38
koolhead17annegentle_, i have logged that bug already13:39
annegentle_Any other concerns with Folsom docs?13:39
itarchitectkevCan I butt in with a "we need a getting started guide" - the docs are great, but you need to know where to look for the info, rather than the info being obvious.13:39
koolhead17Razique, it will b fixed in few days13:39
itarchitectkevI know there are some - but the documentation on quantum is immense13:39
annegentle_itarchitectkev: sure butt in!13:39
koolhead17itarchitectkev, http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/install/apt/content/ap_installingfolsomubuntuprecise.html13:39
koolhead17there u go :P13:39
annegentle_itarchitectkev: yeah that "Demo Setup" section was supposed to be the "get started" but it causes some frustration13:39
koolhead17me and Razique are working to get it in place :D13:39
annegentle_#link http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-network/admin/content/app_demo.html13:40
itarchitectkevI tend to gravitate to a blog post and I'd love to get a PDF on it from docs.openstack.org instead13:40
annegentle_itarchitectkev: which blog post is good for "getting started?"13:40
itarchitectkevEmilienM is the go to it seems13:40
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting13:41
annegentle_itarchitectkev: I agree we need a better Getting Started location - so you don't like http://www.openstack.org/software/start/ ?13:41
itarchitectkevBut needs some direction on writing for a user13:41
itarchitectkevrather than that very specific set up13:41
itarchitectkevI would love to go there for the guides :)13:41
annegentle_itarchitectkev: ah yes. I would prefer that people contribute to the docs rather than write one-offs but not sure how to handle13:41
itarchitectkevand I'll gladly help13:41
koolhead17annegentle_, +1 :D13:41
fifieldtyay, peeps13:42
annegentle_#link https://github.com/EmilienM/doc-openstack13:42
annegentle_itarchitectkev: that the one?13:42
koolhead17itarchitectkev, i liked skible doc`s quantum archs diagram though :)13:42
annegentle_itarchitectkev: how about linking to it from  http://www.openstack.org/software/start/ ?13:42
itarchitectkevdiagrams are good13:42
itarchitectkevannegentle_, can do for now13:42
annegentle_#action Anne to link to EmilienM's getting started doc from  http://www.openstack.org/software/start/13:43
fifieldtNB: that doc is for essex13:43
itarchitectkevYou know what I'd like? Even though the *cough* CloudStack Getting Started PDF is a gazillion pages long - we can do that, right?13:43
annegentle_itarchitectkev: link?13:43
fifieldtSo, I think we can help here if we write that book chapter we were thinking about in the 'planning the cluster' thing?13:43
fifieldtthe one that Joe sugggested13:44
annegentle_fifieldt: ah right13:44
koolhead17annegentle_, we have a getting started here too http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/install/apt/content/ap_installingfolsomubuntuprecise.html13:44
annegentle_#link https://github.com/EmilienM/openstack-folsom-guide13:44
koolhead17it works well without quantum though :P13:44
* itarchitectkev goes to look but they've moved their site since the new release13:44
annegentle_itarchitectkev: this? http://docs.cloudstack.org/CloudStack_Documentation13:45
fifieldtooh, they have Japanese13:46
annegentle_koolhead17: I think that the ap_installingfolsomubuntuprecise.html serves a single purpose, want to see what itarchitectkev is talking about with a "getting started"13:46
koolhead17well we just want to have a getting started somewhere13:46
itarchitectkev#link http://download.cloud.com/releases/3.0.0/CloudStack3.0.0-3.0.2QuickInstallGuide.pdf13:46
fifieldthttp://docs.cloudstack.org/Leap_Second_issues_on_CloudStack_Management_Servers_%28RHEL%29_and_KVM_hosts <-- I find this amusing :s13:46
annegentle_itarchitectkev: so I think our "Install and Deploy Guide" is meant to be that, but isn't for some reason.13:47
fifieldtJust needs some Tough Love, IMO13:47
annegentle_itarchitectkev: or for multiple reasons13:47
annegentle_fifieldt: yeah maybe it needs to be simplified?13:47
koolhead17annegentle_, yeah13:48
itarchitectkevannegentle_, +113:48
itarchitectkevI think that's right13:48
annegentle_Actually can we switch to open discussion so we can talk about the SLES OpenSuse addition to that guide?13:48
koolhead17one place click button13:48
koolhead17and bang ur done13:48
fifieldtfine with me13:48
annegentle_#topic SLES and OpenSuse addition to the Install guide13:48
*** openstack changes topic to "SLES and OpenSuse addition to the Install guide"13:48
annegentle_looking at the outline for the Cloud Stack Basic Install Guide, it's really what we have… just needs revisions13:48
fifieldt^ the SUSE patches13:48
uvirtbot`fifieldt: Error: "the" is not a valid command.13:48
annegentle_ah thanks Tom13:49
fifieldtSo, actually, B1 Systems are kinda experts on SUSE deployments13:49
annegentle_so I had another idea - what if we have two install guides, one for Object Storage + Identity, one for Identity + Compute + Image + Volumes?13:49
annegentle_which still doesn't give us a "Basic Install Guide" sadly.13:49
annegentle_fifieldt: yeah I really want to get the content in13:50
fifieldtbut glance stores images ... where? ;)13:50
*** gongysh has quit IRC13:50
annegentle_fifieldt: ah there's the rub13:50
fifieldtSo, a bit of reality for a second13:50
annegentle_what about putting the SUSE stuff in both manuals?13:50
annegentle_fifieldt: sure13:50
fifieldtThe smallest swift cluster that is reasonable to deploy13:50
fifieldtis 6 nodes13:51
fifieldt(5 storage + 1 proxy)13:51
fifieldtEven this is sometimes too large for an "OpenStack in the small" deployment13:51
fifieldtSo, perhaps it comes down to scale13:51
koolhead17fifieldt, 6 nodes is too much :P13:51
fifieldtIf you're at the stage where 6 nodes is too much, you don't deploy swift13:52
annegentle_fifieldt: yes13:52
fifieldtbut given our #1 design tenet is scalability13:52
annegentle_fifieldt: you speak truth :)13:52
fifieldtwe should provide some option for storing images that sucks less than normal13:52
*** luis_fdez has joined #openstack-meeting13:52
annegentle_fifieldt: as in document how to store images not-in-swift?13:52
fifieldtthere are a number of caching options here that we currently don't deploy13:53
fifieldtsuch as cache in glance, cache in nova13:53
fifieldtand these mitigate the need for large amounts of high performance storage for images in some cases13:53
fifieldt(the options are available, but there is not overview as such)13:53
annegentle_fifieldt: agreed13:53
*** dolphm has quit IRC13:53
fifieldtapologies for going away from the SUSE discussion :)13:53
fifieldtjust noting13:54
annegentle_no problem13:54
annegentle_my hope with the install/deploy guide was to have real deployments documented13:54
koolhead17fifieldt, so are we going to have a 6 node swift doc in place :)13:54
annegentle_fifieldt: because people shouldn't have to figure this out by word-of-mouth13:54
koolhead17fifieldt, sounds good to me.13:54
fifieldtso, this is why I really like the idea of a 'designing your OpenStack' thing13:54
annegentle_koolhead17: the install/deploy guide does say you'd need that many nodes for a real deploy (or does it?)13:54
fifieldtto guide people through the choices they can make13:54
fifieldtswift or no swift13:55
koolhead17annegentle_, i doubt it does13:55
fifieldtvolumes or no volumes13:55
fifieldtcinder or nova-network13:55
fifieldtbut to get to this stage is a serious amount of effort :)_13:55
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
fifieldthence I hope GSOC gets up!13:55
annegentle_fifieldt: maybe this is a page-long discussion (the decision making)13:55
koolhead17fifieldt, annegentle_ then lets have a one guide on as itarchitectkev said getting started bare minimum config13:55
annegentle_fifieldt: yes and I was also going to say, in the operators manual13:55
koolhead17once we have that lets extend our existing guide with multinode13:55
itarchitectkevkoolhead17 +1: this should be an agreed bare minimum that has choices dictated to the user13:55
annegentle_koolhead17: there are already those, we just need bug fixing on them right?13:56
itarchitectkevits not an OpenStack manual - its about getting lift-off without referring to google13:56
koolhead17annegentle_, kind of yes. But not as descriptive as fifieldt mentioned :)13:56
annegentle_(and you'll tell me if I'm deluded into thinking we can get there with what we have right?)13:56
koolhead17we can even add doc with multiple scheduler implementation13:56
fifieldtWith a "bare minimum" Openstack doc in place, we still need to provide enough docs to support the people who install eg Swift Only, Glance Only13:56
koolhead17and multiple compute node 4 same13:56
annegentle_itarchitectkev: so we have applied as a small group of deployers to write an operators manual with a Google Doc Summit.13:57
annegentle_but haven't heard if we're accepted13:57
itarchitectkevwho do I need to point the gun at?13:57
* fifieldt dodges13:57
annegentle_#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide13:57
annegentle_basically to write a book like that outline in a week :)13:57
itarchitectkevGet 1,000 monkeys, with typewriters and hope that they don't come up with some Shakespeare this time13:58
fifieldtI prefer Chaucer13:58
koolhead17itarchitectkev, :P13:58
koolhead17annegentle_, GSOC ^^13:59
annegentle_the group is fifieldt (U of Melbourne), Everett Towes (Cybera then Rackspace), Joe Topjian (Cyberra), and Jon Proulx (Mass. Institute of Tech.)13:59
itarchitectkevwhen do you know?14:00
annegentle_#link https://sites.google.com/site/docsprintsummitv2/14:00
annegentle_itarchitectkev: I've been bugging them for the last 2 weeks :)14:00
annegentle_I know the organizers14:00
annegentle_ok what else?14:00
fifieldtYou think we can work with them to make it a complete standalone suse version?14:01
fifieldtor not possible? or it will take too long and you want it out asap?14:01
annegentle_fifieldt: seems like that's the only "real" pattern we have14:01
annegentle_fifieldt: I'm not in a hurry -- and I still have a concern about it -- what about Keystone for Identity?14:02
annegentle_fifieldt: do we require that any standalone version use Keystone?14:02
fifieldtdo they have packages yet?14:02
* fifieldt notes 1 hour has passed, and apologies for stringing the conversation along14:02
*** samkottler is now known as samkottler|call14:03
koolhead17fifieldt, :)14:03
annegentle_you know I'm loathe to reject a doc addition14:03
annegentle_fifieldt: no worries14:03
*** arata has quit IRC14:04
annegentle_fifieldt: if they don't have Identity package, does it matter (esp. for swift?)14:04
fifieldtfor swift, not at all14:04
annegentle_it's kind of tied up in the "what is really openstack?" discussion I suppose14:04
fifieldthmm, I'm more pragmatic14:04
annegentle_fifieldt: we could let them have a standalone guide and not conditionalize it at all14:04
fifieldtthe doc contribution was in the install guide which is combined14:04
annegentle_fifieldt: yeah I'd rather get more info out in the docs ecosystem14:04
fifieldtwhereas we do have a swift-only guide14:04
fifieldtwhich it could be included in right now . . .14:04
annegentle_fifieldt: yeah that's another idea --- new install section in the swift-only guide14:05
annegentle_fifieldt: I like it14:05
fifieldtthough I have a feeling they have more to contribute14:05
fifieldtand would come on board if we asked :)14:05
annegentle_fifieldt: yeah14:05
fifieldtperhaps we could organise a meeting with the B1 guys? Or maybe it only needs an email?14:05
annegentle_fifieldt: I see one of their guys at Austin OpenStack meet ups and they really want to help14:05
annegentle_fifieldt: just to ensure I know the proposal --14:06
annegentle_let me repeat it14:06
annegentle_1. Note in the Install/deploy guide that packages for SLES OpenSuse are available14:06
annegentle_2. Move the info from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15721/ to the Object Storage admin manual14:06
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting14:07
annegentle_3. Ask about Identity14:07
annegentle_sound right?14:07
fifieldtdas is gut14:07
*** davidha has quit IRC14:07
annegentle_fifieldt: ok, I'll start with an email14:08
annegentle_#action Anne to send email to Christian Berendt with proposal for moving forward with SLES OpenSuse install info14:08
annegentle_I like the new meeting time14:08
annegentle_ok, thanks for sticking it out14:08
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"14:08
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 14:08:35 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)14:08
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/doc_web/2012/doc_web.2012-11-13-13.06.html14:08
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/doc_web/2012/doc_web.2012-11-13-13.06.txt14:08
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/doc_web/2012/doc_web.2012-11-13-13.06.log.html14:08
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting14:09
*** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting14:09
fifieldtDaisy was very quiet ;)14:09
fifieldthope her connection worked!14:10
annegentle_She's also working on the translation and CI work, hurrah.14:10
annegentle_fifieldt: I sure hope we hear SOON about Google Doc14:11
*** nijaba has quit IRC14:12
*** nijaba has joined #openstack-meeting14:13
*** nijaba has quit IRC14:13
*** nijaba has joined #openstack-meeting14:13
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
*** roadTripper has joined #openstack-meeting14:16
*** egallen has quit IRC14:17
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
*** annegentle_ has quit IRC14:21
*** Daisy has quit IRC14:23
*** fnaval has quit IRC14:30
*** mtreinish has joined #openstack-meeting14:36
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
*** samkottler|call is now known as samkottler14:44
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
*** oNeToWn has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting14:48
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC14:50
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting14:52
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC14:52
*** littleidea has quit IRC14:55
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting14:55
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting14:56
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC14:57
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting14:58
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC14:59
*** dkehn has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
*** NobodyCam_afk is now known as NobodyCam15:09
*** annegentle_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:10
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC15:13
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting15:16
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC15:16
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC15:21
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:21
*** andrewbogott_afk is now known as andrewbogott15:21
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC15:23
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting15:26
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting15:26
*** NobodyCam has quit IRC15:31
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting15:33
*** primeministerp has quit IRC15:33
*** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting15:34
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC15:36
*** notmyname has joined #openstack-meeting15:37
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting15:37
*** colinmcnamara has left #openstack-meeting15:39
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
*** gatuus has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
*** adjohn has quit IRC15:41
*** zul has quit IRC15:42
*** fifieldt has quit IRC15:45
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting15:46
*** davidha has quit IRC15:49
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting15:49
*** gatuus has quit IRC15:54
*** jfriedly has quit IRC15:54
*** gatuus has joined #openstack-meeting15:55
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting15:57
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
primeministerp#startmeeting hyper-v15:59
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 15:59:39 2012 UTC.  The chair is primeministerp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.15:59
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:59
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'hyper_v'15:59
primeministerpHi Everyone15:59
primeministerpgoing to wait a couple more minutes for some others to join16:00
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:02
primeministerpociuhandu: are you going to stand in for apilotti?16:02
ociuhanduprimeministerp: yes, he's joining also but i guess he got delayed in traffic16:03
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
*** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
primeministerpalexpilotti: alessandro!16:04
primeministerpgreat let's begin16:04
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting16:04
alexpilottihi everybody!16:04
alexpilottisorry for being late, just arrived!16:04
primeministerpso I sent out a brief agenda16:04
primeministerpalexpilotti: no worries16:04
primeministerpok so updates16:04
primeministerplet's start w/ the new bits that have been added16:05
primeministerp#topic cloudrive16:05
*** openstack changes topic to "cloudrive"16:05
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC16:05
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:05
primeministerpso has the clouddrive code made it through approvaL16:05
alexpilottidid anybody have the occasion to check out the configdrive / cloudinit bits?16:05
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:06
primeministerpalexpilotti:I know you were working on that yesterday16:06
alexpilottiprimeministerp: still waiting for reviewer's love :-)16:06
primeministerpsorry configdrive16:06
primeministerpnot clouddrive16:06
alexpilottiI had to split it further16:07
primeministerpwho do we need to poke to get it to happen16:07
primeministerpo into smaller commits?16:07
alexpilottiwe need to ping the nova core guys16:07
alexpilottiprimeministerp: yep. 2 of them got approved16:07
alexpilotti2 are waiting16:07
primeministerpvishy: ping16:07
alexpilottiand I also added documentation for the testing framework: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15930/16:08
alexpilottiociuhandu and me tested it quite well on ubuntu, finding a couple of bugs in cloudinit16:09
alexpilottiwe submitted them and those are going to be fixed16:10
alexpilottiin the meantime we are using a patched version of cloudinit16:10
*** primeministerp_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:10
primeministerp_sory about that16:10
primeministerp_er sorry16:10
*** sagar_nikam has joined #openstack-meeting16:10
alexpilotticloudinit, being outside of Openstack, is not benefitting of Jenkins / OpenStack16:10
alexpilottisorry, SmokeStack16:11
primeministerp_alexpilotti: what did i miss16:11
alexpilottiso regressions and generic errors are common16:11
alexpilottiprimeministerp_: nothing special, just a rough debugging weekend ;-)16:11
primeministerp_i guess moving on16:12
*** primeministerp has quit IRC16:12
alexpilottiabout cloudinit, I took a look at the Windows versions available16:12
primeministerp_is there anything else to discuss re: configdrive16:12
alexpilottiIMO none of them are up to the task16:12
primeministerp_or cloudinit?16:12
primeministerp_alexpilotti: did you already cover cloudinit?16:12
primeministerp_ahh thx16:12
alexpilotticloudinit / configdrive?16:12
primeministerp_that's what i missed16:12
alexpilottiso the idea is to write a new windows implementation or to port the Linux version16:13
primeministerp_alexpilotti: so, suggestions?16:13
primeministerp_alexpilotti: new windows implemenation?16:13
alexpilottiI'd like an implementation that can be easily injected in a VHD w/ dependencies16:13
alexpilottiso no .Net16:13
primeministerp_so you want something regardless of guest platform16:14
alexpilottiI'd either go w a port of the Python code or a C++ version16:14
*** reed_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:14
primeministerp_alexpilotti: ok16:14
alexpilotticloudinit is written in quite modular and decoupled way16:14
alexpilottiso it could be possible to port it w/o wasting time16:14
primeministerp_alexpilotti: ideally we don't waste any time16:15
alexpilottion the other side, it's probably faster to come up with a C++ version16:15
alexpilottithe objectives are:16:15
alexpilotti1) hostname config16:15
alexpilotti2) user creation / password / group memmbership16:15
alexpilotti3) static network injection16:15
alexpilotti4) userdata scripts (powershell in this case)16:16
primeministerp_which basically all means, just a harness to run powershell16:16
alexpilottinot really, I'd avoid powershell as a dependency as well16:16
primeministerp_and use wmi to calls to create users16:16
primeministerp_and such16:17
alexpilottior simple "net user xxx yyy /add" invocations16:17
primeministerp_at that point why not just use powershell16:17
primeministerp_if you're invoking those commands16:17
*** danwent has quit IRC16:17
alexpilottiwmi is a bit of a PITA when it's about usr management16:18
alexpilottino, just a plain shell16:18
alexpilottithink about Windows 2003 guests16:18
alexpilottiI want to be sure that every possible Windows workload is supported16:18
primeministerp_i forget about those16:18
primeministerp_fair enough16:18
alexpilottiw/o forcing the installation of any additional component16:19
primeministerp_native os only16:19
primeministerp_I agree16:19
alexpilottithat's the idea16:19
primeministerp_perfect then16:19
alexpilottiPython is a good compromise, as we can do a simple xcopy deployment16:19
alexpilottiso I'm looking at those two options.16:19
alexpilottiany ideas?16:19
primeministerp_python sounds good to me16:20
pnavarroJAVA ! no, I'm joking...16:20
primeministerp_pnavarro: any input?16:20
primeministerp_o man16:20
primeministerp_too funny16:20
alexpilottipnavarro: lol16:20
pnavarronothing to add..16:21
primeministerp_alexpilotti: pnavarro: so the two of you discussed quantum bits last week.16:21
primeministerp_#topic quantum16:21
primeministerp_any positive outcome?16:21
primeministerp_pnavarro: I know you are extremely busy16:21
alexpilottion our we got blocked by the cloudinit bugs / review16:21
primeministerp_alexpilotti: moving ahead as planned?16:21
primeministerp_alexpilotti: understood16:22
primeministerp_alexpilotti: more work than expected16:22
alexpilottiyeah, we wasted a few days but things are moving as fast as usual ;-)16:22
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:22
primeministerp_are we still on timeline for G1 or offically looking at G216:22
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:23
*** primeministerp_ is now known as primeministerp16:23
*** hghazal has quit IRC16:23
pnavarroI've started a basic implementation from the basis of the linux bridge one16:23
alexpilottiG2 at this point, there's no need IMO in spending night coding16:23
alexpilottipnavarro: cool!16:23
primeministerpalexpilotti: please don't16:23
pnavarrobut, as I have the volume bits to commit...16:23
primeministerpalexpilotti: save that for the week before "G"16:23
primeministerppnavarro: o please get those in asap16:23
alexpilottipnavarro: +116:23
primeministerppnavarro: I wasn't aware that they didn't get in yet16:24
pnavarrothey are ready for commit, just live migration testing are failing because I have no the environment ready16:24
*** hghazal has joined #openstack-meeting16:24
alexpilottipnavarro primeministerp: should we give the plugin a different name and kkep them both?16:24
alexpilottilike appending a "V2" at the end?16:24
primeministerpalexpilotti: that works for me for backward compat16:25
alexpilottiprimeministerp: yep, that was the idea16:25
pnavarrowhat to you mean by V2?16:25
alexpilottiplugin version 216:25
primeministerppnavarro: bascially have version 1 and version 216:25
alexpilottiso if the class name is16:26
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:26
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
alexpilottiI wanted to paste the real class name, but my VM is stuck :-D16:27
*** uncleofthestick has quit IRC16:27
pnavarrovolumeutils ?16:27
*** dprince has quit IRC16:27
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
primeministerppnavarro: in a nutshell having multiple versions of the driver16:28
*** gyee has quit IRC16:28
primeministerppnavarro: going forward ... i.e. win916:28
primeministerppnavarro: there is no wmiv1 namespace16:28
alexpilottipnavarro: whatever, I'll find it16:28
alexpilottipnavarro: the idea is to give the user a choice, or even better automatically choose the version based on the OS16:28
alexpilottiI'd go with the second16:29
alexpilottiyou just need to add a simple factory16:29
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
pnavarrommm ok, I thought the no-WMI version should be deprecated16:29
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
alexpilottipnavarro: in driver.py16:30
*** uncleofthestick has joined #openstack-meeting16:30
alexpilottiwhen you do:         self._volumeops = volumeops.VolumeOps()16:30
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting16:30
alexpilottiyou replace that with afactory method that goes like:16:30
alexpilottiif os < 2012:16:30
alexpilottipnavarro:   return volumeops.VolumeOps()16:30
alexpilotti  return volumeops.VolumeOpsV2()16:31
pnavarrook, I got it16:31
alexpilottipnavarro: what do u think?16:31
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:31
pnavarroit's ok for me16:32
alexpilottipnavarro: great tx! we are going to do the same also the vmops and the rest16:32
alexpilottifor example VHDX require the WMI api V216:33
primeministerpno pnavarro get that code in16:33
primeministerper so16:33
alexpilottiso we'll have to rewrite spawn and all the rest16:33
primeministerpesp if we're going to work on anything going fwd16:33
primeministerpanything on that?16:34
pnavarroI've realised that tests stubs are duplicated16:34
alexpilottipnavarro: which ones?16:34
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting16:35
pnavarroyou know, the stubs changed depending on they are launched from /nova/tests or /nova16:35
*** One-Man-Bucket has quit IRC16:35
pnavarroso they fully qualified name of the stub changes16:35
alexpilottiI got it16:36
primeministerp#topic ci update16:37
*** openstack changes topic to "ci update"16:37
*** reed_ is now known as reed16:37
pnavarroso, we should add this convention in some dev doc16:37
primeministerpalexpilotti: perfect timing i guess16:38
alexpilottipnavarro: we should fix that!16:38
*** dani4571 has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
pnavarroalexpilotti: +1000 !16:38
primeministerpalexpilotti: re: devdoc and the mocs16:38
primeministerpok ci stuff16:38
*** dani4571 has quit IRC16:38
primeministerpalexpilotti: and ociuhandu are coming to cambridge the week of dec 216:38
primeministerpwe'll be bringing up the smokestack/devstack tests and lighting up the ci infrastructure16:39
*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC16:39
alexpilottipnavarro: also, they are asking to change the format from pickle to json16:39
primeministerppnavarro: I'll work on giving you access to the infrasture at that time16:39
pnavarrothat'd be great !16:40
primeministerpmordred: did you want to come up?16:40
alexpilottias a general rule, let's execute them in nova\tests for the moment16:40
pnavarroalexpilotti: ok !16:40
*** Razique has quit IRC16:40
primeministerpalexpilotti: does that require much work? moving to json16:41
alexpilottiprimeministerp: just changing the serialization layer16:41
primeministerpalexpilotti: from the pickle files16:41
alexpilottiprimeministerp: 2 lines if the python code works well16:42
primeministerpalexpilotti: and it would align with the project better16:42
primeministerpalexpilotti: as they are already using a lot of json16:42
primeministerpalexpilotti: hence the request i'm sure16:42
alexpilottiprimeministerp: a lot of swearing if it happens like with Python 2.616:42
mordredprimeministerp: maybe - I've got to sort out a different work thing today before I can know16:42
*** vbannai has joined #openstack-meeting16:43
pnavarroalexpilotti: thierry carrez mentioned the other day in Paris that the TComittee started discusions to forget Python 2.616:43
alexpilottiprimeministerp: and alos if would be asy to read them and inject manually code16:43
primeministerpmordred: we'll if you're interested let me know16:43
*** itarchitectkev has quit IRC16:43
primeministerpalexpilotti: yes16:43
primeministerpalexpilotti: no gz16:43
alexpilottiI'd like to get rid of the gzs16:43
primeministerpalexpilotti: i'm sure every one else would too16:44
primeministerpit's the source of a lot of questions16:44
alexpilottiif the json files don't bloath as much as the picled ones! :-)16:44
*** jhenner1 has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
primeministerpalexpilotti: we need to have a discussion after this if possible16:45
*** jhenner has quit IRC16:45
primeministerpdoes anyone have anything else to add?16:45
alexpilottilet me say thanks to sagar_nikam!16:45
primeministerpo yes16:45
alexpilottihe's doing a great testing work!16:45
primeministerpsagar_nikam: thanks for your help w/ testing16:45
sagar_nikami have started the tests for live migration16:46
primeministerpsagar_nikam: you're doing a great job16:46
primeministerpsagar_nikam: feel free to file bugs16:46
sagar_nikamthanks all16:46
primeministerpsagar_nikam: also thanks for keeping me in the loop16:46
alexpilottiand talking about testing, we need to fix glance_client. Volunteers? ;-)16:46
primeministerpalexpilotti: it's broken?16:46
ttxpnavarro: actually the discussion should start at today's meeting.16:46
alexpilottiprimeministerp: we are going to open a page to file bugs for the installer16:46
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC16:47
primeministerpalexpilotti: good16:47
pnavarrottx: thanks for the note !16:47
alexpilottiprimeministerp: badly. It doesn't work on Hyper-V16:47
primeministerpttx: which one?16:47
alexpilottijaypipes: hi!16:47
*** jhenner1 has quit IRC16:47
ttxthe py2.6 one16:47
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:47
alexpilottijaypipes: we have some issues with glance_client :-)16:47
pnavarroguys, I have to go !16:48
pnavarrobye !16:49
primeministerpbye pedro16:49
primeministerpalexpilotti: email him?16:50
primeministerpok i"m going to call it16:50
primeministerpalexpilotti: let's chat now if that's ok16:50
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"16:50
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 16:50:23 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)16:50
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-13-15.59.html16:50
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-13-15.59.txt16:50
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-13-15.59.log.html16:50
primeministerpthanks again everyone16:50
alexpilottibye pnavarro!16:50
*** garyk has quit IRC16:50
*** metral has joined #openstack-meeting16:51
ociuhandubye pnavarro16:51
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting16:51
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:52
*** pnavarro has quit IRC16:53
*** sarob has quit IRC16:53
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** grapex has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC16:56
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:59
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC17:02
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
*** dwchadwick has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:07
*** Dorogs has quit IRC17:14
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:17
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:20
*** ndipanov has quit IRC17:21
*** ndipanov has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
*** NobodyCam has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC17:23
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:28
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:28
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** metral has quit IRC17:29
*** metral_ is now known as metral17:29
*** woodspa has joined #openstack-meeting17:31
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC17:33
*** jfriedly has quit IRC17:33
*** anniec has quit IRC17:34
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:35
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:38
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:39
*** samkottler is now known as samkottler|lunch17:40
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC17:44
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
*** NobodyCam has quit IRC17:44
*** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting17:45
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting17:46
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:46
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:48
*** NobodyCam has joined #openstack-meeting17:50
*** samkottler|lunch is now known as samkottler17:50
*** etoews1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:52
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:54
*** jfriedly has quit IRC17:54
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC17:54
*** Kristy has joined #openstack-meeting17:55
*** apevec has joined #openstack-meeting17:56
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** marek_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:58
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:59
heckj#startmeeting keystone18:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 18:00:21 2012 UTC.  The chair is heckj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.18:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.18:00
ayoung /O/18:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'keystone'18:00
heckjOla y'all18:00
heckjDid I catch it correctly that we have a David Chadwick lurking here today?18:00
heckj#link Agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting18:00
dwchadwickfor the first time, yes18:01
dolphmdwchadwick: welcome!18:01
heckjdwchadwick: glad you could make it18:01
heckjKristy: awesome! Welcome!18:01
dwchadwickthe full monty today18:01
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
heckj#topic Burning/Exploding/Supernova issues?18:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Burning/Exploding/Supernova issues?"18:02
heckjSo, let's get rolling - anything broken or severely on fire that needs immediate attention?18:02
*** nachi has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
*** zaneb has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
*** nachi_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
* dolphm readies a fire extenguisher18:02
* dolphm and a crowbar18:02
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC18:03
heckjI like the sound of that silence18:03
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting18:04
heckj#topic keystoneclient - version, releasin', etc18:04
*** openstack changes topic to "keystoneclient - version, releasin', etc"18:04
ayoungAll quiet on the Western front18:04
heckjSo we've *just* landed the auth_token bits into keystoneclient with henrynash' work18:04
heckjThe current released version of keystoneclient is 0.1.318:04
heckjWe also dropped in the AccessInfo base pieces, to start allowing authorization to be cached, etc.18:05
*** derekh has quit IRC18:05
heckjIt's time for a new release there, and a new number18:05
dolphm0.1.3 is ~3 months old!18:05
heckjAny qualms with 0.2.0? I'm open to suggestions here18:05
gyeekeyring after that?18:05
dolphmheckj: +118:06
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:06
ayoungsounds good18:06
heckjgyee: sure - or if we can wrap it up in the next day or so, we can get it in with18:06
ayoungkeysring  in 2 would be a good feature18:06
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting18:06
heckjayoung: agreed, and it's close18:06
henrynashoops. sorry, was sitting openstack-dev18:07
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting18:07
heckjI'll plan on cutting a release of the keystoneclient end of this week (Thursday evening, Fri morning) with whatever we have in there now18:07
ayounghenrynash,  we were just suggesting upping the version number in client,  due to your recent work landing there.  we are going to get the keysringh stuff in as well and go 2.018:07
ayounghenrynash, do you have any changes outstanding to get into client before 2.0?18:07
heckj(also note that keystoneclient has initial V3 api support in there too)18:07
henrynashyes, sounds like a good idea18:07
dolphmheckj: keystoneclient vs openstack-manuals -- when can a new version be documented there?18:08
henrynashno, client, I think, is done…..18:08
* gyee is going to pull an all nighter on keyring after we agree on the interface18:08
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting18:08
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC18:08
ayounghenrynash, did you get all of the cms changes that , for example ,vishy posted late last week?18:08
henrynash(side question: just checking we don't need to move ec2, swift middleware to client?)18:08
henrynashayoung: yes18:08
annegentle_dolphm: we have a stable/folsom branch cut for openstack-manuals now18:08
heckjdolphm: good question - I believe after we release it, we should help get those docs updated18:08
dolphmheckj: already documented in openstack manuals master: --os-token / --os-endpoint; pending docs: keyring / auth_token / bootstrap18:09
heckjdolphm: then yeah - just after release18:09
heckjayoung: what's the state of the signing code? When are you planning on getting that into common or keystoneclient?18:09
heckj(or did all that we need  come in with henrynash's changes?)18:10
ayoungheckj, good question.  I haven't started on that yet.  the cms piece should be there, but nothing uses it18:10
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting18:11
*** henrynash_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:11
ayoungI've been in SQL land18:11
heckjayoung: Ok - so maybe a point release after 0.2.0 or something to add in that functionality, assuming it won't break any existing methods18:11
henrynash_(sorry, lost connection for sec)18:11
*** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:11
heckj#topic V3 Keystone API18:11
*** openstack changes topic to "V3 Keystone API"18:11
ayoungheckj, should not break anything.  It will just be additional functionality as far as I can see for now18:11
heckjayoung: cool18:12
heckjV3 API pieces are still landing policies is pending review18:12
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting18:12
heckjdolphm: saw a note about skipped tests in there that I think can be removed and those tests run on the last review18:12
dwchadwickwhat is the planned date for v3 api release18:12
ayoungheckj, BTW, we are going to start deprecating KVS, to start with not including it in the policy18:12
*** henrynash has quit IRC18:13
*** henrynash_ is now known as henrynash18:13
ayoungWe can always get KVS like behavior using the SQL backends and SQLite in-memory18:13
dolphmheckj: on your question regarding test_policy_crud in test_keystoneclient ... that was actually written against the client-side policy implementation when policies was implemented on v2... so i'm thinking create a whole new test_keystoneclient_v3 suite that runs against keystoneclient.v3?18:13
gyeewhen can I start on the stop-token-in-uris bp?18:13
heckjdwchadwick: initial "tech preview" as soon as we can get all the changes merged in18:13
heckjdolphm: setting up the new tests sounds good18:14
dolphmheckj: so remove for now, setup new test suite asap?18:14
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting18:14
*** imsplitbit has joined #openstack-meeting18:14
heckjdolphm: sounds good. Need help putting this into place? (can it be parallelized at all?)18:15
*** anniec has quit IRC18:15
*** anniec_ is now known as anniec18:15
dolphmgyee: are you happy with the identity api v3 spec for auth? (everything on /v3/tokens)18:15
dolphmheckj: gyee's help implementing /tokens stuff would be a pre-req for a true v3 test suite18:16
gyeedolphm, we would like to make more changes, like service/endpoint scoping18:16
dolphmgyee: propose asap?18:16
heckjdolphm: based on the emails recently, I think we might need to tweak up tokens to allow user-scoped (called "unscoped" previously) tokens as well as tenant-scoped18:16
gyeebut I am not sure about the timing18:16
dolphmheckj: #todo catch up on mailing list :)18:16
heckjgyee: your additional scope restriction to endpoints would be great to land in there at the same time18:16
gyeewe have a bp on service/endpoint scoping and service role delegation18:17
gyeenot sure if everyone have a chance to read up on it yet18:17
ayounggyee, yep. its on the agenda18:17
heckjheh - nice segway18:17
dolphmheckj: i might be able to get rolling on a test framework in the mean time, although i doubt it'll be able to test much without auth18:17
*** EmilienM has joined #openstack-meeting18:17
gyeeI am sure david have more stuff to add :)18:17
heckjgyee: any chance you can help dolph with some of the token implemenation bits?18:18
gyeeheckj, absolutely18:18
gyeelove to help18:18
dwchadwickI think we need to agree on the design as we are now doing via email before finalising the implementation18:18
dolphmgyee: thanks18:18
dolphmdwchadwick: +1, and agree on hard spec changes as well18:18
dwchadwickI would like to agree the concepts first18:19
gyeeyeah, lets create an etherpad on the bp18:19
dwchadwickthen proceed to the api and coding18:19
heckjgyee: +118:19
dwchadwickSorry but can you explain etherpad and bp to a newbie18:19
heckjgyee: set one up now? I'll link into meeting notes18:19
gyeegimme a min18:20
heckjdwchadwick: etherpad is a collaborative text editor - see "http://etherpad.openstack.org"18:20
dolphmdwchadwick: agree, although it's worth pointing out that if the implementation is do & easy to read, the openstack community will generally provide feedback much more readily18:20
dwchadwickok thanks18:20
heckjdwchadwick: great for writing together, sharing notes, highly, highly editable18:20
dolphmimplementation is easy to do & easy to read*18:20
heckjdwchadwick: bp is shorthand for a blueprint in launchpad18:20
heckjmuch less editable, kind of a pain in the butt, but what we have as a mechanism to talk about about prioritize feature work18:21
heckjdolphm: 100% agree - makes a HUGE difference18:21
heckj#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/service-endpoint-isolation-role-delegation18:21
dwchadwickso we work on a document in etherpad then publish the agreed one as bp18:21
*** andrewbogott is now known as andrewbogott_afk18:22
dwchadwickI have quite a lot of comments to make on the current delegation bp that was published today18:22
gyeedwchadwick, let have all your comments in the etherpad18:23
heckjdwchadwick: you can just leave the etherpad up as a blueprint link, it's handy - but the place we'll need to publish the final spec is in the github repo identity-api - the spec is documented there and effectively published18:23
heckjlet's definitely start out on the etherpad though18:23
dolphmgeneral etherpad advice to EVERYONE: mark your comments/feedback in etherpad with your name! e.g. (dolph): my comment18:24
dwchadwickI have just opened up the link but the current bp is not there. its more or less a blank page18:24
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:24
heckjdwchadwick: refresh or re-open https://etherpad.openstack.org/service-endpoint-isolation-role-delegation18:24
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting18:24
heckjI just put in some text, you should see it18:24
dwchadwickI expected to see the current bp in etherpad so that it could be edited or commented on18:24
heckjI see 7 collaborators connected right now there18:25
heckjNobody has added it yet :-) If you ahve the link handy, put it in there at the top18:25
heckjblueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/service-isolation-and-roles-delegation pasted in there - see it?18:25
heckjdwchadwick: ^^18:26
heckjguessing so - the whole content of the blueprint just appeared! :-)18:26
heckjOkay - let's head to that topic18:26
marek_Without pictures18:26
heckj#topic: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/service-isolation-and-roles-delegation18:26
*** openstack changes topic to ": https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/service-isolation-and-roles-delegation"18:26
heckjmarek_: ?18:26
heckjgyee - take it away!18:27
gyeehey everybody, marek_'s the author of the bp18:27
ayoungso, the problem with the name service isolation is that we really want endpoint isolation18:27
ayoungservice is the Kerberos name for endpoint18:27
*** colinmcnamara1 has joined #openstack-meeting18:27
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting18:27
ayoungso we have effectively chose the *best* name to rain confusion down upon our own users head18:27
gyeewe need to be able to scope it down to services and endpoints so that your token can not be reuse/abuse if the intended service happened to be compromised18:28
ayounggyee, does it really make sense to limit it to services?  Or is that required for when you don't know what service will be ultimately used?18:29
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:29
dwchadwickIf a token is targeted then it cannot be reused anywhere else (unless the accepting party does not care)18:29
ayounger..what endpoint will be ultimately used18:29
gyeeany endpoint18:29
dwchadwickOn Ethterpad one of my comments isIt is always a bad idea to give a capability token to anyone you do not trust.18:30
gyeeif your token is scoped to an endpoint, it cannot be used anywhere other than that endpoint18:30
ayounggyee, I am almost prone to say that tokens should be scoped to endpoints18:30
ayounggyee, yep18:30
gyeebut service should be an option as well18:30
dwchadwickand confidentiality is separate to targeting18:30
gyeeusing PKI, we can issue a cert for that endpoint18:31
dwchadwickSo encryption is not the solution to targeting18:31
ayounggyee, why service?  Are there cases where we know that it can be scoped to a service, but don'18:31
gyeeand encrypt the token for that endpoint only18:31
ayoungknow what endpoint it will ultimately be used on?18:31
dwchadwickNo because you can still have surreptitious forwarding18:31
heckjayoung: for service targeting - if your endpoints are all round-robin to a single service, it would be relevant18:32
ayoungIf an endpoint is compromised, we want to make sure no tokens from there can be reused18:32
ayoungheckj, OK18:32
gyeeheckj, exactly18:32
marek_A service might have a few endpoints in different zones  and you would like to have a single token that can be used for all its endpoints18:32
ayoungheckj, that seems to call for some abstraction between service and endpoint,  or, probably more correctly, a token scoped to a set of endpoints18:33
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting18:33
dwchadwickif the signed token is not targeted but only encrypted for the service, then the service can decrypt it and re-encrypt it for another service18:33
heckjwe've got a little blind spot in the service/endpoint setup - unclear relations between endpoints and how they're used by implementations, means the solution gets more complicated to cover the generalized cases18:33
marek_It can be scoped to a service or one with higher granularity to one or more endpoints of this service18:33
ayoungI think I would prefer to state "tokens can be scoped to one or more endpoints"  unless we are forced to go "service wide"18:34
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:34
dwchadwickthis is why we need a clear conceptual specification first :-)18:34
dwchadwickWhy not have the targeting at service level plus optional endpoints18:34
gyeea service is one or more endpoints right?18:34
dwchadwickif there are no endpoints specified it means all endpoints of this service18:35
ayounggyee, more correct to say a service is a powertype of an endpoint18:35
heckjgyee: I think more appropriately a service has one or more endpoints, but technically a servcice can have no endpoints according to the current spec18:35
gyeedwchadwick, yes, we need the flexibility for both services and endpoints18:35
*** jdurgin has quit IRC18:35
heckjayoung: WTF is a powertype?18:35
ayoungheckj, I'll find a link18:35
*** darraghb has quit IRC18:35
dolphm... powertype?18:35
dwchadwickblack and decker?18:35
dolphmdwchadwick: +118:35
heckjI see chainsaws coming next...18:35
marek_That is proposed in BP, service scoping with option to scope to endpoint18:35
ayoungheckj, its like a baseclass, but the term is better used in the cases of databases and things like this18:36
heckj#link this is a powertype: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powertype_%28UML%2918:36
dwchadwickSo its a superclass?18:36
gyeeWTF's UML? :)18:36
heckjgyee: +1 :-)18:37
ayoungIts an organization for Mixed Martial Arts, I think18:37
dwchadwickSo you can scope a token to a service type, and the type of service forms a class hierarchy18:37
*** sarob has quit IRC18:37
gyeenot service type, just service18:37
dolphmby service id?18:37
dwchadwickeg. I scope a token for banking service and it can be used at BoA, Citibank, Barclays etc18:37
heckjdwchadwick: except nothing is really inherited here, so that metaphor breaks down a bit18:38
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:38
marek_We need the ability to scope to a service instance not a type18:38
dwchadwickHow many endpoints does a service instance have?18:38
ayoungmarek_, the phrase "a service instance not a type" does not compute18:38
*** topol has joined #openstack-meeting18:38
*** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting18:39
dolphmmarek_: 0? not 1-3?18:39
dwchadwickThese are fine details that should be in the conceptual document18:39
gyeelet just call it service18:39
gyeeplain and simple18:39
ayoungagain, I'm not convince that  "all endpoints of a service" is a safe abstraction for tokens18:40
ayoungI would much rather say "this set of endpoints"18:40
marek_A service has a t least 1 endpoint. But there is no upper limit.18:40
dwchadwicka service (type) has many service instances18:40
dolphmmarek_: okay, yeah (i think the current client will choke on an additional set of endpoints, but that's not an API issue)18:40
dwchadwicka service instance has one or many endpoint18:40
dwchadwickSo we could agree to scope a token to a service type, service instance or set of endpoints18:41
heckjayoung: I'm good with asserting sets of endpoints - makes it very explicit18:41
dwchadwickThat is the full range of flexibility18:41
marek_I do not see a benefit of scoping to service type18:42
heckjayoung: trick will be asserting that and coordinating that with the endpoint itself, which currently doesn't know or much care about it's endpoint ID18:42
dwchadwickHowever, regardless of the scoping of the token, it has to be sent to an actual endpoint18:42
ayoungheckj, that will need to be solved anyway18:43
dwchadwickSo each endpoint can send the token to Keystone and it can validate whether the token is valid at that endpoint or not18:43
marek_The user may choose to scope to a service level or narrow down to a particular endpoint of this service18:43
heckjayoung: yep, just calling it out as an issue to be solved18:43
ayoungdwchadwick, that is my understanding as well18:43
*** vipul is now known as vipul|away18:43
dwchadwickHence each endpoint must know its lineage (service type, service instance)18:43
*** colinmcnamara1 has quit IRC18:43
ayoungdwchadwick, just service18:43
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting18:44
heckjdwchadwick: once the endpoint is correlated with it's relevant endpoint ID, lineage is explorable18:44
ayoungthere is no "service type" or , "service instance" abstraction in our dictionary18:44
gyeejust service18:44
*** jcooley has quit IRC18:44
dwchadwickthere must be the concept of service type and instance since you can have multiple copies of one service running in the cloud18:44
marek_There is no need for adding service type, unless you want to add common  roles per service  type18:45
dwchadwickAnd you have already said that a service instance can have one or many endpoints18:45
*** sarob has quit IRC18:46
dwchadwickPresumably there will be a service factory that can spawn instances of the service on demand18:46
*** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:46
heckjdwchadwick: I think the translation that's reasonable close: service_type ==> what we're calling 'service', service_instance => what we're calling 'endpoint'18:46
dwchadwickthe scope of roles is another issue to be discussed18:46
marek_We already  have service types like Nova, Swift. Do you mean  another type classification?18:47
ayoungdwchadwick, "instances of the service" are endpoints18:47
dwchadwickheckj -> I dont think so since a service can have multiple endpoints18:47
*** egallen has quit IRC18:47
heckjdwchadwick: you're assuming more and deeper structure in your definitions than we have in reality18:47
dwchadwickBut say a service has an admin endpoint and a user endpoint18:48
heckjthey aren't today classes and instances, they're a composition of REST objects with attributes on them that we can manipulate18:48
heckjthere's no factory, only API's to create services or create endpoints at the moment18:48
dwchadwickAre these different services in your world view? Because ultimately they should be the same object18:49
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC18:49
ayoungdwchadwick, they are the same endpoint.18:49
heckjdwchadwick: today, and with the current API, they're treated as 3 separate objects - a service and two endpoints with a relation between them from the endpoint pointing to the service to which they're related18:49
heckjayoung: more correct18:50
ayoungheckj, do we put admin and public as 2 endpoints in keystone?18:50
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting18:50
heckjayoung: no, we shimmed in some attributes on the endpoint so we could differentiate "public", "internal", and "admin"18:50
gyeeayoung, we have the 'facing' attr18:50
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting18:50
dolphman endpoint is a pointer to an instance of a service, two endpoints may point to the same instance, a service is useless without at least one endpoint because you can't use it :P18:51
dwchadwickagreed that zero endpoints makes no sense. But what about multiple endpoints18:51
marek_Well, you can still use the service with hidden/private/disabled endpoints to assigne roles and status of service18:52
dwchadwicklike an admin endpoint for the service18:52
dwchadwickSorry guys but I have to go now. I really enjoyed my first meeting with you via IRC18:53
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul18:53
dwchadwickI can continue on the Etherpad later tonight or tomorrow18:53
heckjdwchadwick: thanks for joining us18:53
*** dwchadwick has left #openstack-meeting18:53
heckjKristy: thanks for being here as well18:53
marek_You can define a Nova service in Keystone and use it as target for roles grants. Then later on you add /enable/ or just publish  or more endpoints  of this service18:53
heckjFYI: We've seven more minutes18:54
KristyThanks :)18:54
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting18:54
heckjgyee: what's your schedule today? I've got another meeting right after this that just smacked me18:54
henrynashare we ready for aob?18:54
henrynashany Other Business18:54
heckj#topic open discussion18:55
*** openstack changes topic to "open discussion"18:55
gyeeheckj, how about I ping you later in the afternoon?18:55
heckjgyee: sounds good - I'll be offline for a while, but back in within a few hours18:55
dolphmmarek_: when you say enable the endpoint -- are you referring to the v3 definition of enable/disabling endpoints?18:55
gyeeI just need to know what are we going to do with the authenticate() interface for keyrig stuff18:55
henrynashso wanted to let you know that I will complete the bp for groups of suers tonight18:55
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:55
heckjhenrynash: sounds good - looking forward to readin git18:55
gyeehenrynash, I plan on commenting on your bp later today as well18:56
henrynashwill hook up the api design doc for it later tonight18:56
ayounggyee, continue the "authenticate()" discussion in #openstack-dev after the meeting.18:56
marek_dolphm: yes18:56
gyeeayoung, sure18:56
heckjayoung: wo'nt work for me- I need to run to other meetings, but will be back in a few hours18:56
henrynashI also plan to complete the bp for private name spaces this week: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/domain-name-spaces18:56
*** afazekas has quit IRC18:56
ayoungheckj, that is OK,  we'll have a solution for you by the time you are done18:57
heckjayoung: yeah, good luck with that18:57
*** oNeToWn has quit IRC18:57
heckjWrapping up for now18:59
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"18:59
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 18:59:56 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:59
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-13-18.00.html18:59
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-13-18.00.txt19:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-13-18.00.log.html19:00
heckjayoung: gyee: will ping you when I'm back online19:00
jeblairci ppl?19:00
gyeesounds good19:00
*** dkehn is now known as dkehn_lunch19:00
*** heckj has quit IRC19:00
*** jfriedly has quit IRC19:01
jeblairmordred: ping19:01
jeblair#startmeeting ci19:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 19:01:36 2012 UTC.  The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.19:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.19:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'ci'19:01
jeblair#topic actions from last meeting19:02
*** openstack changes topic to "actions from last meeting"19:02
jeblairfungi: any movement on foundation server stuff?19:02
fungitalked to reed again today19:02
fungihe's sitting across a conference table from toddmorey for the next two days, and will try to get some info/movement on it19:03
*** henrynash has quit IRC19:03
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting19:03
fungimy patches are probably a bit stale, so i'll rebase them again19:03
jeblair#action toddmorey provide a test foundation server19:03
fungiother than that, nothing19:03
jeblairi do not think that mordred updated the bug list19:04
clarkbI am pretty sure he hasnt19:04
jeblair#action mordred bugify summit actions19:04
jeblair#action everyone collect action items from other summit session etherpads and register as bugs19:05
jeblairand i confess, i have not done that second thing yet myself.19:05
jeblairI _have_ deconfigured nova-volume testing on master...19:05
jeblairso the current devstack-gate only runs cinder on master19:06
clarkbI did put a thing or two on the state-of-ci list so that mordred would do it :)19:06
jeblairand runs cinder+n-vol for folsom, and n-vol for <folsom19:06
jeblairi think the mechanics for that will work out well for similar projects, like quantum19:06
jeblair#topic grenade / quantum19:07
*** openstack changes topic to "grenade / quantum"19:07
jeblairThese haven't been progressing much; and I need to spend some time tracking people down and trying to get them moving again.19:07
*** gyee has quit IRC19:07
clarkbwhat is left for quantum?19:08
jeblairdtroyer suggested that grenade may be making some assumptions about where upgrade data are stored that is not compatible with running it in the devstack gate.19:08
jeblairas for quantum19:08
jeblairthere is this change:19:08
jeblair#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/14990/19:08
jeblairwhich I'd like to get some nova-core people looking at...19:09
jeblairparticularly since it seems to do a lot of wrapping devstack exercises with "if using quantum...; else..."19:09
clarkbmordred just walked into a different meeting. fyi...19:10
*** Kristy has quit IRC19:10
*** pabelanger has joined #openstack-meeting19:11
jeblair#topic testr and friends19:11
*** openstack changes topic to "testr and friends"19:11
jeblairclarkb: what's up with testr?19:11
mordredjeblair: hey man - some of us have to walk in to meetings sometimes19:11
*** etoews1 has left #openstack-meeting19:11
*** dolphm has quit IRC19:12
mordredI have patches that get nova all the way to using testr19:12
clarkbso I haven'y been able to do much with testr while you guys were conferencing, but we haven't had a meeting over that time period either...19:12
jeblairmordred: glad you're here.  you're up next.  :)19:12
mordredexcept - the last few patches make things SLOW19:12
jeblairthat's sad19:12
mordredI have no yet been able to diagnose19:12
clarkbI have a patch that basically got testr mostly working so that nova devs could look at it and play with it19:12
clarkbI think jog0 was one of the few to really take a look at it.19:13
jeblairclarkb, mordred: are these the same or different patches?19:13
*** jog0_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:13
clarkbjeblair: different, mine was more just get it to go and mordreds is more make it work properly19:13
*** martine has joined #openstack-meeting19:13
*** jog0_ has quit IRC19:13
*** jog0__ has joined #openstack-meeting19:13
*** egallen has quit IRC19:14
clarkbone comment from jog0 was wondering if we could have nose and testr as options...19:14
clarkbI kind of figured we didn'y want to support both. However, getting coverage with testr may be tricky19:14
fungirun_tests.sh and tox options are already causing enough confusion on what will pass ci testing19:14
jeblairthe attempt to move from run_tests to tox left us with two ways of running tests.  i really don't want four.19:14
jeblairfungi: exactly.19:14
mordredI imagine it has something to do with making database init proper fixtures19:14
clarkbthe problem with testr and coverage is testr runs everything in different processes and relies upon a line protocol so you can't just run it under coverage to get that info19:15
clarkbeach individual process would need to be told to run under coverage then you will need to merge the results. certainly possible, just something I haven't sorted out yet19:16
mordredclarkb: I think we should not care about testr for coverage tests19:16
jeblairmordred: how will we run coverage tests then?19:16
mordredany of the normal test runners19:16
mordredcoverage has a wrapper19:17
jeblairi thought testr was more "normal" than nose19:17
mordredtestr requires that the unittests _themselves_ operate in the usual unittest protocol19:17
*** jog0 has quit IRC19:17
*** jog0__ is now known as jog019:17
mordredbut it's quite a complex pipeline approach suitable for running tests - but not for doing other things19:17
jeblairmordred: then what does it yield us if we still have to run nose?19:17
*** uncleofthestick has quit IRC19:18
mordredrunning nose for the coverage tests should be fine - because if that fails weirdly, whatever19:18
mordredthe tests will have been correctly run via the unittests19:18
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting19:18
jeblairmordred: that sounds nice, but i just heard "there are now twice as many ways running tests can break".19:19
mordredthere's still only one way to run tests - coverage is a post-analysis things19:19
mordredbut I hear you19:19
mordredit's just a thought19:19
mordredthe other option is going to be patching subunit/testtools to grok the coverage library19:19
jeblairmordred: actually, we've been talking about making it pre-merge, so you can factor coverage changes into merge decisions.19:20
clarkbI think we can just run subunit/testtools under coverage19:20
mordredok. nevermind then19:20
mordredwe need to patch subunit19:20
clarkbmordred: why?19:20
* mordred poked at this on the plane19:20
mordredI could be wrong - I'm just pretty sure19:20
mordredplease prove me wrong :)19:21
jeblair(and running it pre-merge means that coverage run-time affects overall check test run time, btw)19:21
clarkbI want to say that you can run subunit under coverage and as long as it doesn't fork you get all thedetails19:21
mordredyeah. k. let's make coverage work with testr then19:21
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting19:21
mordredwe need to be able to work with it in parallel mode - which is why we need patching I think19:21
clarkbor have some external way to merge multiple coverage reports19:22
jeblairclarkb: you want to continue hacking on that?19:22
clarkbbut yes, patching subunit/testtools is a possibility.19:22
clarkbjeblair: yes19:22
jeblair#action clarkb look into subunit/testtools with coverage19:22
clarkbmordred: can you #link your nova change for testr?19:23
*** apevec has quit IRC19:24
mordred#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/14949/19:24
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting19:24
jeblairshall we move onto project creation?19:24
clarkbyes, I think we have covered testr for now19:25
jeblair#topic automagic project creation19:25
*** openstack changes topic to "automagic project creation"19:25
jeblair#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15352/19:25
*** jfriedly has quit IRC19:25
jeblairthis seems nearly ready to go!19:25
mordredyes. just needs docs19:25
jeblairdidn't clarkb write some?19:25
clarkbno, I fixed the technical issues19:25
clarkbthat said mordred if you are in meetings all day I can crank out docs19:26
mordredclarkb: please. my day got bitchslapped19:26
clarkbok, I will do that today19:26
clarkbthen, once those are written we should probably do another round of testing on review-dev to catch and potential fails in our recent updates19:27
clarkbmordred: or have you been testing as you went?19:27
mordredclarkb: I have not tested the group-add change19:27
*** jog0 has quit IRC19:27
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting19:28
jeblair#action clarkb document and test project creation change19:28
jeblairi'm very excited about merging that and being ready for the expected onslaught of new projects.19:28
clarkbfor those following along at home this change puts gerrit project management in puppet19:28
clarkbso that any one can propose new gerrit projects and have them automagically created when the puppet change is approved through gerrit19:28
jeblair#topic gerrit user sync script19:29
*** openstack changes topic to "gerrit user sync script"19:29
jeblairnow that there is an api call in launchpad to look up a user given an openid,19:30
jeblairwe can have the gerrit sync script automatically correct the situation where a user logs into gerrit with an unexpected openid19:30
jeblairit's not a perfect solution to the problem, but it should eliminate the need to ask the lp admins to manually correct the situation.19:30
jeblairi've started working on that, and since i have to fully comprehend the sync script in order to implement it...19:31
jeblairi'm trying to leave it in a better state than i found it19:31
mordredyou're ripping it down to the new group sync semantics, yeah?19:31
jeblairwhich means hopefully more modular and maintainable, along with a few technical changes:19:31
jeblairyes, one is that it will only sync groups that exist in gerrit19:32
jeblairwhich should cut down on syncing tons of unecessary groups and perhaps thousands of users.19:32
fungipotential major runtime improvement there19:32
jeblairanother is to cache all the LP data at the start of the script, and move the actual database writes to the end, so that the time spent holding write locks in mysql is much smaller19:33
jeblairso we should be able to actually use gerrit group admin functions again, which we pretty much can't because the script is always holding a write lock on the groups tables.19:33
fungiin which case we might not have to worry so much about turning off the sync script during maintenance involving gerrit db changes too19:34
mordredexcellent - once that's in - I want to delete the useless groups too19:34
jeblairmordred: +119:34
jeblairi should have something for review soon, but i'm also going to try to make one more improvement:19:34
jeblaira debug mode that caches the LP data in a pickle for re-use across runs so that we can actually test and debug the script in human rather than geological time.19:35
*** Gordonz has quit IRC19:35
mordred:) funny story - I had something similar to that in the VERY FIRST versoin of the script19:35
jeblair#action jeblair finish updates to sync script.19:36
jeblairmordred: yeah, it's pretty important.  this poor script has seen a lot of action.  :(19:36
jeblair#topic ci-issues-log19:37
*** openstack changes topic to "ci-issues-log"19:37
jeblairclarkb: want to talk about your idea?19:37
clarkb#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/ci-issues-log19:37
clarkbat the summit there was a lot of mention about when the infrastructure failed and when things couldn't merge and so on19:38
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting19:38
clarkband we weren't tracking these issues very well19:38
fungiassertions about perceived gate "instability"19:38
*** andrewbogott_afk is now known as andrewbogott19:38
clarkbnow, these things don't always end up being bugs in hte infrastructure or even things related to what we do, but the perception is there19:38
jeblairperceived is a good word, because at this point the infrastructure very rarely fails.19:39
clarkbso filing bugs against openstack-ci for things we can never fix or don't have a hand in doesn't make sense19:39
clarkbbut we still want to track this so I started the above etherpad19:39
jeblairit's useful for that, but i think it's actually more useful as a communication tool for ourselves...19:39
clarkbbasically when something fails jot it down in there19:40
clarkbjeblair: yes, it has been useful for that19:40
clarkbbeing able to keep up to date with the latest status of a particular issue is helpful19:40
jeblairi find it's valuable to see what has been happening and what other people have been doing, for exactly the reason a ships log is useful to crews going on and off shift.19:40
jeblairbut it can also be a tool for exposing what's going on (and what's going wrong) to the wider community...19:41
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting19:42
jeblairbut whether etherpad is the best tool for that is an open question19:42
clarkbya, I am still not sold on it19:42
jeblairit's great that we can all edit it and keep things up to date19:42
fungiat my last job, we used a private wordpress instance for that, but it wasn't really ideal either19:43
fungii like the etherpad better in that the content is more granularly collaborative and wikilike19:43
clarkbwe could potentially use a git repository19:43
clarkbto have stronger versioning and history19:43
fungior a wiki page...19:44
jeblairwe could try publicising it and see what happens; i guess my only concern is that misinformation or less-useful information, or "problem dumps" start showing up there.19:44
clarkbor a wiki page19:44
clarkbjeblair: ya, I don't really see it as a user reporting tool19:44
clarkbthe info there should be pre filtered19:44
fungietherpad and wiki are both not natively great for keeping long and continuously update logs of things though, i think19:44
clarkbso that it isn't ambiguous to the next shift if things have been filtered19:45
fungii think i want something bloglike over the long term but wikilike over the short term19:45
funginot really sure such a thing exists19:45
clarkbwe could use a static content blog system backed by git19:45
jeblairclarkb: i think quick updates are key19:46
jeblairi really hate heavyweight reporting tools.19:46
fungii agree. and at that, etherpad is great. normal wikis somewhat but not quite as much. blogs and git far less so19:46
*** Gordonz has quit IRC19:46
jeblairclarkb: that doesn't exclude your idea, but i think it suggests that maybe it should be wrapped with quick scripts or something.19:47
fungimaybe something that scraped a daily etherpad into a git-backed blog entry?19:47
*** woodspa has quit IRC19:47
jeblairwe could also write a web app that's half wiki and half blog.  click to edit the most recent entries, automatic archiving of old ones...19:48
jeblairokay, so more brainstorming about this, but it seems several of us really like the idea.  :)19:48
jeblairon a related note, flakey tests...19:48
jeblair#topic flakey tests19:48
*** openstack changes topic to "flakey tests"19:48
jeblairthere have been a lot of flakey tests lately, obviously, and the issues log is at least partly a response to that19:49
jeblairwe've been sort of a de-facto clearinghouse for information about the tests19:49
fungior front desk for complaints about anyway19:49
jeblairwhich is a useful thing to do, but i think it's distracting us from doing the things we're rather better at than being a help desk.19:49
mordredjaypipes: you around? this might be a convo you should be in on...19:50
clarkbmy initial instinct is to take away reverify19:50
*** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting19:50
mordredsame here19:50
clarkbyou can recheck to see if your patch is actually bad19:50
mordredalthough it will cause an immediate revolt19:50
clarkbbut to merge your code you must take some ownership of the failrues19:51
clarkband the core members can re authorize if need be19:51
jeblairyes, removing recheck/reverify doesn't stop you from merging code, but it escalates problems.19:52
jeblairand given how solid the infrastructure is, i feel comfortable doing it from that point of view... however...19:52
jeblairit seems like either the code or tests or both are kind of crap right now.19:52
clarkbthat said I think the flakeyness is pretty visible and that hasn't helped the troubleshooting much19:52
jeblairand it will really annoy people that their changes are harder to get merged (even if it's the fault of their co-devs)19:53
jeblairso, how about this for a compromise:19:53
torgomaticbut if the flaky code is in another project, then that makes developers' lives harder19:53
jeblairtorgomatic: indeed, exacerbating that point.19:53
fungithere is only one project, and that project is openstack19:53
torgomaticfor example, if the devstack gate fails due to some Cinder thing when run on a commit in Swift, there's about a 0.0% chance that I (as a Swift dev) can go fix it19:54
jeblairfungi: that's right too.  :)19:54
jeblairanyway, idea: recheck/reverify require a bug link.19:54
clarkbtorgomatic: correct, which is why the core members being able to re authorize is important.19:54
*** vipul is now known as vipul|away19:54
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul19:54
fungimaybe you don't fix it, but you involve devs for the component which is suspect19:54
clarkbtorgomatic: but, in doing so those core members should be working with the other projects to sort out the problems19:54
*** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting19:54
jeblairso you have to at least diagnose/triage the problem enough to identify an existing bug in the correct project, or report a new one.19:54
clarkb(this is my thought of how things would work in an ideal world)19:54
jeblairand we whip up a report of the most active/recent bug links attached to reverify/rechecks19:55
*** nachi_ has quit IRC19:55
fungiit's also an incentive to step up scrutiny of stability for new openstack components during incubation, since everyone becomes responsible for it being smooth once we gate on it19:56
jeblairso that they can be quantified, tracked in the project meeting, and hopefully more dev attention focused on them.19:56
clarkbI really like that19:56
clarkbmay be less useful for rechecks as it could be the patch itself that is broken19:57
clarkbbut being able to track and quantify is a giant step above where we are now19:57
fungiyeah, tying every failure to a documented bug report (even a vague one), would be great19:57
torgomaticit can be difficult to know which codebase something else is in, though19:57
*** dkehn_lunch is now known as dkehn19:57
clarkbtorgomatic: we can move bugs around projects19:58
jeblairyeah, but if the volumes test fails, you can at least start with a bug against cinder, and if that's not right, it can be moved to the right project on later inspection19:58
torgomaticclarkb: fair enough19:58
clarkbI think if a bug is submitted with general failure details then as part of the troubleshooting that info can become more solid19:58
*** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting19:59
mordred(lurking - but can we suggest that the bug gets a flaky-ci tag or something so that they can be raised in the weekly meetings?)19:59
jeblair#action jeblair propose a system for linking reverifies to bugs19:59
jeblairmordred: +119:59
jeblairand we're out of time19:59
jeblairthanks everyone!19:59
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"19:59
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 19:59:49 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)19:59
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ci/2012/ci.2012-11-13-19.01.html19:59
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ci/2012/ci.2012-11-13-19.01.txt19:59
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ci/2012/ci.2012-11-13-19.01.log.html19:59
*** topol_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:01
*** nachi has quit IRC20:01
ttxTC members: who's around ?20:01
*** mikal has quit IRC20:01
ttx#startmeeting tc20:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 20:02:04 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.20:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.20:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'20:02
*** topol has quit IRC20:02
ttxOn our plate today:20:02
ttx#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/TechnicalCommittee20:02
*** topol_ is now known as topol20:02
ttxjaypipes, heckj, notmyname, bcwaldon, jgriffith, vishy: join us if you can20:03
ttx#topic Motion: 3rd-party APIs20:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Motion: 3rd-party APIs"20:03
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2012-November/000088.html20:03
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
ttxThis was debated at length on the ML, but not so much after the actual motion text was posted20:03
ttxAny more questions/discussion needed on that before we vote ?20:03
annegentle_"does yet have" should be "does not yet have"?20:03
* markmc has the habit of saying the exact opposite of what he meant :)20:04
notmynamemarkmc: then we must be in agreement ;-)20:04
markmcyeah, "does not yet"20:04
annegentle_markmc: ok20:04
ttx"The previous aspirational statement that the PPB made in May 2012 about 3rd party APIs being implemented external to core stands. However, where a given project does not yet have expose a "stable, complete, performant interface" for 3rd party APIs to build on, that  project may choose to accept proposed new APIs in the interim if it sees fit."20:05
ttxany other question before vote ?20:05
danwent"does not yet have expose a" ?20:05
*** maurosr has quit IRC20:05
markmc "The previous aspirational statement that the PPB made in May 2012 about 3rd party APIs being implemented external to core stands. However, where a given project does not yet expose a "stable, complete, performant interface" for 3rd party APIs to build on, that  project may choose to accept proposed new APIs in the interim if it sees fit."20:06
ttxdanwent: those crazy Irishmen can't spell20:06
markmcI can spell just fine20:06
markmcjust add/miss random words here or there20:06
russellbit's that complicated forming of words into sentences thing...20:06
danwentwell, i figured errors in the statement would make people think we didn't even read it :P20:06
annegentle_Sorry, I'm trying to get it. Any scenarios this enables or disables? Does it enable Google's APIs? Does it preclude AWS?20:06
*** pabelanger has left #openstack-meeting20:06
annegentle_is it sufficiently vague to let PTLs do what they want? (Is that the idea?)20:07
ttxannegentle_: I don't think that statement enables or diables. It brings back full control on the matter to each PTL20:07
annegentle_ttx: ok, then I do get it :)20:07
markmcannegentle_, the specific ask is "should the Nova PTL be allowed add GCE support to Nova while we don't have a stale API for having GCE support external"20:07
ttxbut still give a general "good" direction20:07
ttxany other question?20:08
ttxReady to vote ?20:08
ttx#startvote Approve 3rd-party APIs motion? yes, no, abstain20:09
openstackBegin voting on: Approve 3rd-party APIs motion? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain.20:09
openstackVote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.20:09
markmc#vote yes20:09
*** vipul is now known as vipul|away20:09
notmyname#vote no20:09
russellb#vote yes20:09
vishy#vote yes20:09
danwent#vote yes20:09
mordred#vote yes20:09
ttx#vote yes20:09
jgriffith#vote yes20:09
ttx"30" more seconds20:10
gabrielhurley#vote abstain20:10
annegentle_#vote yes20:10
bcwaldon#vote yes20:10
openstackVoted on "Approve 3rd-party APIs motion?" Results are20:11
openstackyes (9): markmc, bcwaldon, ttx, vishy, russellb, jgriffith, mordred, annegentle_, danwent20:11
openstackabstain (1): gabrielhurley20:11
openstackno (1): notmyname20:11
ttx#info Motion approved20:11
ttx#topic Ongoing discussion: Incubator process update20:11
*** openstack changes topic to "Ongoing discussion: Incubator process update"20:11
ttxWe have a thread going on openstack-dev... the idea being to come up with a view that has majority support from the TC to be defended in a joint committee with the BoD20:11
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2012-November/thread.html#238720:11
ttxLooks like positions are crystallizing around two views so far, which is quite good20:11
ttxView 1 is about separating the "core" and "common release" concepts...20:12
* mordred is in favor of crystalization20:12
*** vbannai has quit IRC20:12
ttx...considering incubation as the path towards common release, leaving the labels like 'core' to be applied for trademarks choice by the BoD20:12
ttxThis was best expressed by markmc in:20:12
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2012-November/002470.html20:12
ttxHere, one aspect to consider is that the Foundation bylaws actually define what an openstack project is (in section 4.1b): core + library + gating + supporting20:12
ttxSame article also defines "core" as "the software modules which are part of an integrated release and for which an OpenStack trademark may be used"20:12
ttxNote that the "and" in this definition leaves some room for us to have projects part of an integrated release which would not be "core".20:13
ttxSection 4.13b says the TC can decide for anything which is not a core project, but that the BoD approves TC recommendations for anything core.20:13
ttxThe trick being that sections 4.1 and 4.13 is quite difficult (though not impossible) to change, as it's protected by section 9.2d20:13
markmcttx, bylaws can be changed, sounds like the kind of thing that we should be open to changing20:13
gabrielhurleyI have a question about the proposal that includes the "common release" projects (or any proposal that decreases the number of core projects significantly): how does that affect TC membership?20:14
ttxmarkmc: sure, it's just one of the sections that require a lot of approvals to be changed20:14
markmcttx, oh, is it? darn - I'd lost track20:14
markmcgabrielhurley, I think we'd eventually have to get back to the idea of all TC seats being elected20:15
ttxgabrielhurley: the "common release" projects could be considered like other "official projects": contributions to them would allow you to vote for directly-elected TC members20:15
ttxthen we can decide to stop special-casing "core" projects since we wuldn't care that much about them20:16
ttxwhich then goes to what markmc just said20:16
ttxView 2 is to still define Core, as pure IaaS. Best expressed by notmyname @20:16
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2012-November/002455.html20:16
ttxI had a few questions about it, maybe others have too20:17
*** gabrielhurley1 has joined #openstack-meeting20:17
ttxnotmyname: is it, in your mind, completely incompatible with view 1 ?20:17
zanebso, it seems like modulo some libraries and stuff, "Core" == "in OpenStack" under the current definition20:17
mordredit seems liek notmyname's definition would/could include dnsaas and lbaas but not horizon or dbaas20:18
mordreddamn spelling20:18
zanebwould we be having the same debate if the categories were "services +  library + gating + supporting"20:18
ttxzaneb: there are official projects, which we control... and a number of them were marked "core"20:18
*** gabrielhurley has quit IRC20:18
ttxthe only trick is that the bylaws mention the project categories, which makes it a bit difficult to change20:18
* markmc thinks the project should be inclusive, that projects are attracted to joining us under our project umbrella is a good thing20:19
mordredmarkmc: ++20:19
ttxwe could cheat by adding whatever we want as "supporting" projects though :)20:19
russellbmarkmc: +120:19
zanebmy point is that we're more hung up on the definition of the word than the definition of the category20:19
markmczaneb, View 1 is basically to stop fussing about the definition of Core20:19
ttxI think the disscussion about core and incubation will make a bylaws change necessary anyway20:19
markmczaneb, and leave it purely be a trademark policy thing, which we leave up to the Foundation20:20
mordredso - there's a definition from the OIN about Linux which I really like:20:20
ttxnotmyname: around?20:20
notmynamemarkmc: I think that we should be restrictive because more projects will end up diluting what openstack is and distract from a focus on them20:20
mordred#link http://paste.openstack.org/show/25820/20:20
notmynamettx: ya20:20
ttx<ttx> notmyname: is it, in your mind, completely incompatible with view 1 ?20:20
ttx(view 2)20:20
notmynamettx: ya, I'm trying to grok that into a short statement20:20
ttxok, take your time :)20:21
markmcnotmyname, new projects and contributors IMHO don't dilute, they enhance20:21
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting20:21
zanebmarkmc: +120:21
mordredspecifically, I like the (reworded): "has been or is likely to be leveraged across multiple OpenStack platforms"20:21
annegentle_markmc: generally I agree more projects are great, but the shared resources then become more taxed.20:21
notmynamettx: I think that both view one and view two share similar goals, but the specifics (especially around scope) make the two views incompatible20:21
*** jcooley has quit IRC20:22
russellbhopefully we can grow the contributions to shared resources just as the set of projects grows20:22
mordredannegentle_: well, the shared resources physically are fine - the shared resources in terms of Docs and CI - people need to understand that they need to start participating and sharing the load there20:22
mordredbut that goes for our core projects as it is now20:22
ttxnotmyname: so your definition of "core" is only valid if core == common release ?20:22
*** heckj has quit IRC20:22
* markmc stops typing what russellb just typed20:22
mordredas almost none of the big-time people contribute squat to the CI infrastructure as it is20:22
mordredso I don't really think that adding new projects is going to be any worse from that perspective than it is now20:22
annegentle_mordred: russellb: yes I share that hope but then that expectation must be built into the bylaws20:22
notmynamettx: that's a tautology since it's what's in the bylaws. core should be a limited set of projects that enhance the focus of openstack. I think that means we should focus on IaaS20:23
mordredannegentle_: I think it could be in the TC guidelines for new projects inclusion - hey, you guys particupating in supporting systems at all?20:23
markmcannegentle_, bylaws can't really be used to force people to contribute to specific areas, I think20:23
jgriffithnotmyname: +120:23
russellbyeah, rules around that worry me a bit20:23
russellbshould be a cultural thing, part of what makes a project be "playing nice" in openstack20:23
annegentle_markmc: that's true. Just stating my position about expansion vs. conservation.20:24
mordredand I think it's something we need to get out there now anyway20:24
mordredeven for our current projects20:24
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn20:24
markmcmordred, yep20:24
russellbdefinitely legitimate growing pains, but i don't think we should let that hinder growth20:24
mordredrussellb: ++20:24
ttxHmm, what's the way forward ? Continue discussion on the ML ? Formalize both views as motions and vote for or gainst them at next meeting ?20:24
notmynameexcept that it seems what you're proposing (new projects and more people help us all) is counter to your other goals of "all the projects should work together". all the core devs helping out on all the projects means that the core devs become more "shared resources" and that means more projects dilutes the community20:24
mordredI disagree20:25
mordredI think we're talking about different thigns20:25
annegentle_I wonder if we're really addressing what the board needs addressed? http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2012-November/000072.html20:25
jgriffithrussellb: "playing nice" seems to be a bit subjective and open up quite a bit of interpretation, result is ANY project is core if they "play nice"20:25
mordredI'm not talking about core devs working on all the projects20:25
mordredI was talking about dilution of shared resources - specifically doc and CI teams20:25
russellbjgriffith: sure ... but we're charged with making that judgement call when evaluating projects20:25
mordredand I mainly htink that the project as a whole has not valued adding resources to doc and CI as it grows20:25
mordredin favor of adding more devs to hack on features20:25
notmynamemordred: your team was just talking about core devs needing to research and file bugs on different projects when those bugs prevent gating on a patch20:25
markmcjgriffith, playing nice is a requirement, but not sufficient on its own20:25
jgriffithmarkmc: that's kinda my point20:26
ttxannegentle_: view 1 is addressing the board needs imho. View 2 is a bit stepping on their toes20:26
mordrednotmyname: yes. that's a specific issue20:26
mordredI'm talking about rackspace and nebula and at&t and NTT and HP ponying up people to work on docs and CI20:26
mordredinstead of having those people working on internal versions of the same20:26
markmcttx, I'd love us to have consensus, but it seems like we need some sort of vote20:26
notmynamemordred: which doesn't have anything to do with "core", right? (although it is a critical need)20:26
russellbthat's a good point, mordred, we do need to do a better job of that.20:26
mordrednotmyname: it does not20:27
jgriffithttx: Perhaps we vote on if we should even define core or not?20:27
mordrednotmyname: it only is a response to "more projects dilute shared resources"20:27
markmcttx, problem with voting on something is that it needs to be a broad direction, not specifics - plenty to discuss with the board that could change the details20:27
jgriffithttx: Seems we're all over the map here right now20:27
mordredthe shared resources should be scalable20:27
gabrielhurley1or in a different view, making contributions to docs and CI a part of the bar for incubation/core...20:27
mordredif we're doing it right20:27
mordredand if we're not doing it right, we're screwed anyway20:27
markmcttx, maybe vote on direction, but need to come back and vote on final specifics after the discussion?20:27
annegentle_gabrielhurley1: yes that was what I had hoped would be part of the Core definition20:27
jgriffithmarkmc: +120:27
ttxmarkmc: that sounds good. Are we going to be ready to vote on direction anytime soon, though ?20:27
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting20:28
vishyare we clear on whether core == included in openstack?20:28
mordrednotmyname: so in short, I think "diluting shared resources" shouldn't be a criteria for expansive or restrictive core view20:28
markmcttx, come up with a "direction motion" over the next week on the list, vote next week?20:28
vishydo we need a vote on that point?20:28
mordredmarkmc: ++20:28
markmcvishy, more like we don't care about the definition of core, what we really care about is "included in openstack"20:29
ttxvishy: "core" means "the software modules which are part of an integrated release and for which an OpenStack trademark may be used"20:29
notmynamemordred: that seems impractical. of course it matters. the shared resources are what define openstack. otherwise we're just some cool tech projects20:29
jaypipeshey, sorry y'all.. just now back from a dentist appt.20:29
* mordred punches jaypipes20:29
ttxvishy: theer are multiple ways to interpret that "and"20:29
* jaypipes grabs tendon20:29
mordrednotmyname: sure they are - but they're also scalable20:29
mordredI think we can add some more projects without the shared resources falling over20:30
mordredunless there is a bottleneck on, say, only having one annegentle_20:30
ttxmay I suggest that we voice our opposition to the two predominant views on the ML thread asap20:30
annegentle_mordred: I'd never prevent expansion -- I just want scope. I'd like a non-incubated, non-core project to win with a better process.20:30
mordredttx: ++20:30
ttxso that they can be formalized in time for next meeting20:30
ttxand we can start the discussion on the long overdue other topics20:30
mordredannegentle_: I think I agree with you - but I'm not sure what you mean20:31
markmcttx, shall I take a stab at drafting another typo-ridden motion?20:31
mordredmarkmc: YES!20:31
annegentle_ttx: based on Alan Clark's email, why isn't the motion just to nominate a few people to participate in the revisiting of Incubation?20:31
markmcwe can bounce back and forth variations on the motion20:31
ttxmarkmc: I hereby name you "Main dyslexic motion writer"20:31
markmcthat'll get us closer to something to vote on20:31
*** gabrielhurley1 has quit IRC20:31
russellbannegentle_: well i think we need a unified opinion that those people will represent to the board20:32
ttxannegentle_: we discussed that last week. Nobody can represent the TC since the TC has no official opinion on that yet20:32
annegentle_ah okay.20:32
* mordred will just pretend to be the voice of the TC at the next board meeting20:32
* annegentle_ thinks back to how easy it was to ask Ryan Lane to be a user advocate20:32
ttxit's a bit hard to pick people if everyone has a different opinion20:32
markmcannegentle_, it doesn't help the strength of the TC if we go into a discussion with the board with multiple disjoint positions20:32
mordredmarkmc: ++20:32
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting20:32
ttx#action everyone to voice their opposition to the two predominant views on the ML thread asap20:33
mordredttx: will you kill me if I mail out a door-number-3 proposal?20:33
ttxmordred: no, it's perfectly alright20:33
mordredttx: k. just making sure.20:33
* mordred doesn't like angering ttx20:33
russellbis door #3 the mystery box?20:34
ttxI was wondering if those two views were capturing all views20:34
russellbwho can resist the mystery box?20:34
ttxsince it looked like most people were satisfied abandoning their own view for view 1.20:34
ttxok, let's move on. Nothing like an IRC meeting to reignite a dead thread20:34
mordredttx: view 1 is pretty good ... but I just spent a lot of time on a plane, which gave me time to go crazys20:34
* mordred sets ttx on fire20:34
ttx#topic Preliminary discussion: Distro support policy20:34
*** openstack changes topic to "Preliminary discussion: Distro support policy"20:34
ttxmtaylor: ok go20:35
mordredgreat. SO20:35
mordredin direct oppostion to what I just said to notmyname ...20:35
ttx(we'll be back to incubator process upadte at the end of meetign if there is time left)20:35
mordredI don't think we, as a project, can support all versions of all pythons on all distros20:35
russellbwhat does "support" mean20:35
russellbactive CI testing?20:35
mordredand or policy20:36
mordredsuch as -20:36
*** samkottler is now known as samkottler|lunch20:36
markmcso, this is mostly a discussion of where to focus CI resources?20:36
russellband *not* that not supporting it means we rip out all compat code ...20:36
mordredalthough that enters in to it20:36
mordredbut, specifically, there are two things:20:36
mordreda) 2.6 vs. 2.720:36
mordredwe can't really start supporting python3 until we drop support for 2.620:36
mordredI'm not saying we _should_ start supporting 320:36
mordredjust saying, it's a choice20:36
markmcright, so moving forward makes supporting an older version impossible?20:37
markmcwe're sure that 2.6 support precludes starting to support 3.x?20:37
mordredit is possible at this point to write code that is compat with 2.7 and 3.3 at the same time20:37
mordred(string handling is the thing that kills you with 2.6 and/or 3.x<3.320:37
mordredit's just not possible to write code which will satisty both at the same time20:38
russellbso, what dependencies are blocking us from python3?  that might make this a big no-op anyway?20:38
mordredwell - fun story - python3 is going to be the default python in the next ubuntu LTS20:38
soreneventlet, for one.20:38
*** sudorandom has joined #openstack-meeting20:38
lifelessmarkmc: python 2.6 is syntax incompatible with 3 (or vice verca:) - you can use 2to3 though20:38
russellbwe are *very* tied to eventlet right now, and if that doesn't support python3 and isn't going to in the near future ...20:38
mordredso it's possible that our decision is to continue supporting 2.6 for now20:38
lifelessmordred: ^ 2to320:38
bcwaldonmordred: how would we justify the requirement for python 2.4 in xenserver plugin code?20:39
mordredlifeless: right. without using 2to320:39
mordredbcwaldon: I believe the xenserver plugin is a special case at the moment20:39
lifelessusing 2to3 is a bit time consuming20:39
*** spligak has joined #openstack-meeting20:39
bcwaldonkk, just wanted to make sure everyone knew about that20:39
mordredwe don't even come CLOSE to doing 2.4 for the other projects :)20:39
mordredbcwaldon: good point20:39
mordredbefore we get too tied in this part, lemme bring up part b20:39
mordredwhich is distro target support20:40
mordredin the past, we have targeted "latest ubuntu" as our dev platform target20:40
russellband again, is this about CI focus?  or?20:40
mordredit's partially about dependent library versions that we as a project assert to support20:40
mordredCI can and will support whatever the project states that it supports20:40
markmcmordred, what I understood roughly our distro support matrix to be20:40
lifelesspip install everywhere, problem solved.20:40
* lifeless runs20:41
mordredlifeless: it's not20:41
markmcmost recent Ubuntu LTS and RHEL20:41
mordredmarkmc: RHEL is not part of the projects matrix20:41
markmclatest and previous version of Ubuntu and Fedora20:41
mordredalthough it could be if we decided to make it20:41
mordredand fedora is also not part of that matrix20:41
markmcmordred, well, it'd be a reason to continue supporting python 2.620:41
russellbso where's the matrix, heh20:41
markmcmordred, or not moving to e.g. a newer version of libvirt20:41
mordredthat's the main question here - what is the matrix20:41
mordredlike, what is it actually, rather than what does CI happen to run20:42
ttxCan you see the matrix ?20:42
markmchow can you say what the matrix is and say there isn't a defined matrix?20:42
markmcin the same few sentences? :)20:42
mordredmarkmc: what I'm saying is, WAY BACK WHEN, it was "latest ubuntu"[20:42
annegentle_mordred: The answer is out there, Neo, and it's looking for you, and it will find you if you want it to.20:42
mordredto my knowledge, it has never changed from that20:42
mordredalthough we've talked about wanting it to20:42
notmynamemordred: what I see in production deploys is "supported LTS releases" and CentOS20:42
markmcmordred, ok, I understood that the "loosely defined matrix" had evolved into what I said before20:42
mordrednotmyname: totally. there are MANY ways to skin this cat20:43
*** sagar_nikam has quit IRC20:43
mordredbasically, I do not want to be defining this ad-hoc by the set of things I run in CI20:43
markmcmordred, if it wasn't written down, it was a "rough consensus" - I had assumed the consensus had moved on20:43
*** redbo has joined #openstack-meeting20:43
mordredbecause notmyname brings up a great point - there are people running lucid in production still with openstack20:44
mordreddo we care, as a body?20:44
markmcwhat's lucid? most recent LTS?20:44
*** ayoung has quit IRC20:44
russellbso what value do we gain in "officially" supporting a distro, and not just leaving it as having distros officially support openstack?20:44
mordredit's the previous one20:44
ttxmarkmc: 10.0420:44
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting20:44
mordrednone of the projects other than swift can even come close to running on it20:44
markmcmordred, ok, but the most recent one was very recently released ?20:44
ttxmarkmc: best ever. i did it.20:44
mordredmarkmc: yes20:44
mordredthat's why I'm bringing this up, actually20:44
*** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting20:44
markmcmordred, there's probably a transition point where you support two LTSs, but not for long I guess20:44
mordredwe have now hit the point where CI would normally upgrade the build slaves to quantal20:45
torgomatichowever, there are big swift clusters running on Lucid, so that should be considered20:45
mordredbut this is the first time we've had a supportable ubuntu LTS during openstack dev20:45
notmynamemarkmc: actually, LTSs have 5 years of support, so the window is quite large20:45
mordrednotmyname: ++20:45
* russellb is curious about the answer to his question20:45
notmynamemarkmc: in fact, it will be possible for a lucid deployment to entirely skip precise and move to the next one and not be out of support20:45
markmcnotmyname, RHEL has 10+ years, but I don't think it makes sense to support latest OpenStack on 10 year old RHEL20:45
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting20:45
mordredrussellb: I think it's a question of what devs can be expected to care about in their patches20:46
mordredrussellb: that's what I mean by "support"20:46
*** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC20:46
notmynamerussellb: not to raise another issue, but that is a great question because openstack doesn't actually provide packages for a distro20:46
mordredif someone submits code, and notmyname says "that breaks on lucid" ... should people care20:46
mordred(I mean, I care about everything notmyname says, but you know)20:46
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting20:47
mordredthere is a point where supporting old releases is in conflict with using new libraries20:47
russellbi just don't want to start a distro flame war with people asking why XYZ isn't on our matrix20:47
markmcwell, as an comparable example - I think it makes sense to stop caring about RHEL6 maybe 6 months after RHEL7 comes out20:47
markmceven if that screws RH a bit20:47
mordredwhich is one of the reasons that 'latest ubuntu' has been the de facto answer so far20:47
mordredI'd be 'happy' to support latest LTS, latest RHEL, latest fedora and latest ubuntu in the CI systems - although I would need some help from redhat to get working redhat slaves up and going20:48
ttxmordred: that sounds like a good set20:48
mordredbut I'm not about to start adding complexity if we don't actually want it or just ad hoc20:48
mordredbecause even if I added that I still wouldn't be supporting lucid for swift20:49
bcwaldonmordred: what value do we get from running on all those platforms?20:49
mordred(although we've discussed adding lucid slaves just for swift because notmyname is cool)20:49
markmcI'm not sure thinking about CI is really getting to the root here20:49
russellbwe know much sooner if we break something on platform X20:49
markmcmaybe it's really about dependency management20:49
mordredmarkmc: I agree20:49
bcwaldonbut why do we care about that?20:49
bcwaldonwe care about having a platform that works for our testing20:49
markmce.g. a patch to require a newer version of libvirt might kill support for some distros20:49
mordredbcwaldon: that's the question - _DO_ we care?20:49
bcwaldonnot that everybody has done their homework before something lands20:49
markmcwe should have policy on which distros we support so we can make such a decision sanely20:50
mordredbcwaldon: or do we want to have a dev target and let the distros sort out distro support20:50
mordred(sorry, I might have been phrasing this poorly)20:50
bcwaldonmordred: I think thats much more sane20:50
*** Vek has joined #openstack-meeting20:50
bcwaldonmordred: there are a ton of windows people that we would be cutting out if we dont run on their platform20:50
*** martine has quit IRC20:51
ttxbcwaldon: I'd say running on multiple platforms (> 1) helps us determine if a given issue is in our code or in the platform code20:51
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:51
*** vipul|away is now known as vipul20:52
markmcthere are some decisions we might make about dependencies that would totally eliminate the ability of people to run OpenStack on a set of distros20:52
ttxbut maybe we want mulyiple platform only to not be called partial in the choice of the "reference platform"20:52
markmcpython version, libvirt version, etc.20:52
bcwaldonttx: but it also introduces the need to pre-package things before being able to build out deployments and it introduces a bigger set of distro-specific bugs20:52
notmynameI know of swift clusters running on bsd and illumos. I'd hesitate to drop "official" support for lucid, but I'm more opposed to simply saying "latest X". I think mordred's list is a good starting point for compromise20:52
russellband i think it's to the benefit of openstack, for greater proliferation to have as broad of distro support as possible, so finding issues that hurt that as soon as possible is a good thing.20:52
bcwaldonI don't see enough value in more than two distros20:52
notmynamebcwaldon: more than X distros? (why 2)20:52
bcwaldonnotmyname: to thierry's point20:53
lifelessso, the big deployers, AFAIK, are all keen on running tip20:53
notmynamebcwaldon: ah, sorry20:53
mordredwell, the multi-distro thing ties back to the 2.6 vs. 2.7 thing ... for instance, precise (latest LTS) and quantal (latest ubuntu) do not have python 2.620:53
lifelessperhaps that should be factor in assessing what the project has interest in supporting20:53
russellbRHEL 6 does (and thus CentOS 6)20:53
mordredlifeless: but rackspace are running tip of swift on lucid20:53
lifelessmordred: what are they running tip of nova on ?20:53
bcwaldonI think I'm missing one key piece of info here - are we looking to gate on all of these platforms, or just run post-merge testing?20:54
mordredlifeless: dunno.20:54
lifelessbcwaldon: 'accept bugs on' I think is the statement20:54
markmcit's a tradeoff thing too - I'd probably welcome dropping 2.6 support, if we were actually getting 3.x support in the short term20:54
mordredlifeless: ++20:54
lifelessbcwaldon: at what point do you say 'that is not a bug'20:54
markmcbut dropping 2.6 support and crossing our fingers that it will help 3.x support happen sometime, not so much value20:54
bcwaldonlifeless: I'm not following you20:54
russellbmarkmc: right but that doesn't seem to be anywhere on the horizon, we're blocked on dependencies20:54
lifelessbcwaldon: e.g. syntax incompatible with python 3.3? Thats a bug. Incompatible with 2.4? Thats not a bug.20:54
ttxmordred: to summarize: I think adding a lot more platforms doesn't really help. it's not more fair because there will always be distros out20:54
*** metral has quit IRC20:54
*** metral_ is now known as metral20:54
ttxmordred: so better choose a reasonable/manageable set. Could be one or 2 or 4.20:55
bcwaldonlifeless: I'm talking about distros not providing packages or something, not python issues20:55
*** dfg has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
russellbwell there's CI, and there's what do we care about.  can we reject a patch because it breaks platform X.20:55
bcwaldonrussellb: yes, thats what I'm interested in getting answered20:55
notmynamerussellb: absolutely. production is what matters20:55
mordredthat's the thing - we can make automatoin decisions with CI _after_ we know what it is that we have chosen to care about20:55
bcwaldonnotmyname: 'production' is subjective, though20:55
lifelessbcwaldon: same basic thing though is my point. Distro has a too-old python-eventlet -> not a bug, if the version is lower than some N20:55
mordredbcwaldon: I don't think it's just about distro packages20:55
*** eglynn_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:56
mordredwe run mostly from pip anyway (other than libvirt)20:56
redboSwift will keep working on 2.6, but that doesn't mean it has to be CIed.  IMO.20:56
bcwaldonmordred: true, that was just an example20:56
lifelessmissing entirely is equivalent to too-old :)20:56
notmynameredbo: +120:56
mordredI think it's mainly libvirt + libxml + python-version20:56
ttxredbo: +120:56
mordredredbo: +120:56
ttxmordred: running out of time.20:56
notmynamebcwaldon: if someone from RAX proposes a patch to swift that breaks softlayers bsd deploy or X's CentOS deploy, it probably shouldn't be merged20:56
redboif it's a pain, I mean20:56
mordredok - if we leave 2.6 support for swift out of it20:56
ttxmordred: way forward ?20:56
mordreddoes anyone ELSE care about 2.6?20:56
bcwaldonnotmyname: how can we know that during the gate, though?20:56
bcwaldonmordred: no20:57
markmclifeless, too old eventlet isn't as big a deal as too old python, though - but hard to define the line there20:57
bcwaldonmordred: bburn it20:57
russellbmordred: well, yes, if we want it to run on RHEL 6 / CentOS 620:57
mordredrussellb: does EPEL have 2.7?20:57
russellbdon't know20:57
mordredbecause something tells me pure RHEL isn't going to work with openstack anyway, right?20:57
russellbsure it does20:57
mordredit does? I stand corrected20:57
mordredok. then the RHEL/2.6 is still on the table20:58
notmynamebcwaldon: heh, so maybe we should have a list of stuff we'll support and test against ;-)20:58
lifelessmordred: sure, and I agree. My point was that you can talk about this not as a CI problem, but as 'when would you close a reported bug Invalid'20:58
mordredif we want to support RHEL, then we need ot support 2.620:58
russellbyeah, there is an official red hat openstack repo for RHEL now ...20:58
mordredlifeless: I agree20:58
ttxmordred: I'd suggest you start a thread on openstack-dev with a made-up set of supported platforms and let the backslash naturally fall on you.20:58
mordredttx: ok. I will do that20:58
mordredand we'll come back to it next week20:58
mordredwith perhaps more clarity20:58
ttx#action mordred to start ML thread on distro/python support20:58
lifelessmordred: bah, s/mordred/markmc in my last comment20:59
mordredbut I think folks here grok the issue at hand a bit, yeah?20:59
*** itarchitectkev has joined #openstack-meeting20:59
ttxmordred: I still think kicking off the discussion in thos chaotic way helps seeing where the battle lines actually are20:59
mordredttx: ++20:59
bcwaldonBURN PYTHON 2.6!20:59
markmclifeless, yep, that's another way - I prefer thinking of it in terms of dependency management, though20:59
ttxso it's useful to have that "preliminaru discussion"20:59
* mordred agrees with bcwaldon, just for the record20:59
bcwaldonprepare for battle!20:59
ttxbefore we even start the thread.20:59
*** jpeeler has joined #openstack-meeting20:59
lifelessmarkmc: sure; though to me dependency management is an end product, not a driving force.21:00
mordredmarkmc: any chance RH have an idea of when a RHEL with 2.7 is coming out?21:00
comstudbcwaldon: phasers on stun21:00
ttxOk, time is up, thanks everyone! Sharpen your ML flamers, looks like they will serve all week.21:00
russellbmordred: that would be RHEL 721:00
russellbwhich could be late 2013 ...21:00
koolhead17ttx, :P21:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"21:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 21:00:34 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)21:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-13-20.02.html21:00
markmcmordred, honestly don't know - RHEL7 isn't too far away21:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-13-20.02.txt21:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-13-20.02.log.html21:00
mordredrussellb, markmc: let people know I'll be happier when that is released21:00
russellbk :)21:00
ttxmarkmc, heckj, notmyname, bcwaldon, jgriffith, vishy, gabrielhurley, danwent: still around ?21:01
*** dprince has quit IRC21:01
bcwaldonttx: grabbing coffee, brb21:01
*** dfg has left #openstack-meeting21:01
gabrielhurleyttx: I'm here, but my connection is terrible. mind if I go early in the meeting today while I'm still online?21:01
ttxgabrielhurley: granted21:01
ttx#startmeeting project21:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 21:01:59 2012 UTC.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.21:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.21:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'project'21:02
ttxAgenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting21:02
ttx#topic Actions from previous meeting21:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting"21:02
ttxAll done, will detail in each section21:02
*** samkottler|lunch is now known as samkottler21:02
ttx#topic Horizon status21:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status"21:02
ttxgabrielhurley: still there ?21:02
gabrielhurleyfor now21:02
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/grizzly-121:02
ttxLooks a bit late to me... still feeling good about all those ?21:03
gabrielhurleynot a lot of change since last week. I need to do some hacking on my two BPs over the weekend but they'll be fine.21:03
ttxEspecially wondering about the 2 "not started" ones :)21:03
gabrielhurleyI reached out to "Ray" for a status on that last BP but no response yet21:03
gabrielhurleyI'll reassign and retarget if i don't get anything in a day or two21:03
gabrielhurleyand actually the "needs code review" one is merged21:03
gabrielhurleyI'll close that21:03
ttxyes, sounds good. Everything else on track ?21:03
ttxlike "Unify Horizon Config" ?21:03
gabrielhurleyyeah. that one's fine21:04
gabrielhurleyjust need to wrap it up21:04
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/grizzly21:04
ttxShould we tentatively assign file-upload-redux & inline-table-editing to team "Nebula", so that I know you will cover it ?21:04
ttxI kinda like to have at least a vague idea of an assignee on High priority stuff.21:04
gabrielhurleyI could do that, sure21:04
gabrielhurleyI'll make sure anything high priority is assigned21:04
ttxgabrielhurley: anything else ?21:04
gabrielhurleydon't believe so21:05
ttxQuestions for Horizon ?21:05
ttx#topic Oslo status21:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Oslo status"21:05
ttxmarkmc: hey21:05
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/grizzly-121:05
ttxAbout https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/oslo-release-versioning21:05
ttxI started the discussion on the ML, so it could be marked as "started", I guess21:06
*** NobodyCam is now known as NobodyCam_lunch21:06
markmcttx, yeah, thanks for that - will ponder and reply21:06
ttxIs there more to it than just completing that discussion ?21:06
ttxDid you plan to release any library before g1 ?21:06
markmcnope, just the discussion21:06
markmcI'm hoping to do oslo-config, but it's tight21:06
markmcthe argparse re-write is pretty close, but involves some API changes21:06
*** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:06
ttxShould the library initial releases appear as blueprints so that we track their completion ?21:06
heckjmarkmc: I'll follow on ML, but wanted to sort out how we were going to do documentation for these various libraries and how that matched to releases/repos.21:06
markmcso on the fence about rushing a release out with it21:06
markmcttx, good point21:07
ttxmarkmc: no point in rushing them if no core project makes use of them in the milestone anyway21:07
markmc#action markmc file blueprint for oslo-config release21:07
bcwaldonmarkmc: you should use glance as your guinea pig21:07
markmcbcwaldon, sounds good21:07
ttxi.e. they can be release early in g2 and then get all projects to use them instead of codecopy21:07
markmcgood idea21:07
ttxno real point in having it out "at g1"21:08
markmcit's only going to be oslo-config, nothing else ready I think21:08
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/grizzly21:08
ttxLooks good now21:08
ttxmarkmc: Anything else ?21:09
markmcnope, that's it21:09
markmcappreciate everyone's input on oslo plans21:09
ttxOh, had a question about common-binaries. You're doing it ?21:09
markmcand renaming the repo, etc.21:09
markmcttx, yep, I'll do that21:09
heckjmarkmc: question for you21:09
annegentle_markmc: more details on doc plans would be useful21:09
ttxCool, was planning to do it but you can certainly achieve it faster than I would21:09
heckjmarkmc: what's the general plan around providing docs for these libraries? ANy high level outline?21:10
heckj(just submitted a review that expands and builds docstrings -> sphinx)21:10
markmcannegentle_, yeah - oslo-config is actually a good test case, because cfg actually has fairly good docs inline21:10
markmcannegentle_, just need to figure out how to publish them21:10
*** metral has quit IRC21:10
*** metral_ is now known as metral21:10
markmcheckj, then you've done more on this than anyone else :)21:10
annegentle_go heckj go21:10
markmcheckj, it's important, should figure it out as part of the oslo-config release21:10
heckjhence the question - didn't know if they were going to fragment, or be consolidated… would prefer consolidated if at all possible.21:11
heckj(from a writing it point of view anyway)21:11
heckjI can follow up in email/ML21:11
ttxother questions on Oslo ?21:11
annegentle_markmc: doc builds being published during dev are useful then release them as well - but would also probably need some overall doc arch21:11
markmceach package will have its own docs21:11
annegentle_probably what heckj is getting at21:11
ttxok, I guess we are done with oslo, moving on21:12
annegentle_markmc: we can talk more on ML21:12
ttx#topic Keystone status21:12
*** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status"21:12
ttxheckj: o/21:12
markmcannegentle_, yep, thanks21:12
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-121:13
ttxLooks good to me. Confident all those are going to hit before next week ?21:13
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting21:13
heckjV3 api is going slow getting it in, but we're looking good to have a full tech preview21:14
heckjauth_token middleware is in keystoneclient as of this morning, the BP remains open to finish the transition21:14
ttxheckj: so there will be a "refine V3 API" targeted at grizzly-2 ?21:14
*** hub_cap has joined #openstack-meeting21:14
heckjand keystoneclient just had some major updates - we'll be releasing a 0.2 keystoneclient near the end of this week21:15
bcwaldonheckj: what does the general path look like for projects to use the middleware from the new location?21:15
Vekheckj: hope my patch gets in to that...21:15
heckjttx: I expect so, but a lot of that work is covered under more specific blueprints21:15
bcwaldonheckj: and will you import the middleware from keystoneclient into a location in keystone to keep backwards compat?21:15
ttxheckj: I think from a features communication standpoint it would be good to complete the blueprint that covers the full tech preview21:15
ttxheckj: so that it's clear that it hit at g121:16
heckjbcwaldon: can do - don't think that was explicitly in our plans.21:16
*** topol_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:16
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/grizzly21:16
ttxLooks all good to me.21:16
ttxheckj: Anything else you wanted to mention ?21:17
heckjlots of early motion, good progress. That's it!21:17
ttxQuestions about Keystone ?21:17
ttx#topic Swift status21:18
*** openstack changes topic to "Swift status"21:18
ttxnotmyname: hi!21:18
ttxJust released today: https://launchpad.net/swift/grizzly/1.7.521:18
notmynameit's a great release. I'm working on an announcement email/post today21:19
ttxnotmyname: did you announce it yet ?21:19
ttxnotmyname: you can post to openstack-announce too, I'll make sure it passes the ML filter21:19
*** topol has quit IRC21:19
*** topol_ is now known as topol21:19
*** markmc has quit IRC21:19
ttxnotmyname: A bit early I guess to talk about next grizzly version... 1.7.6 ?21:20
notmynameya, a bit early, but there has been some cleanup of the bugs and blueprints21:20
ttxnotmyname: I can setup a 1.7.6 milestone, without date, so that people can target at the "next" milestone.. we can change name and date later ?21:21
notmynameyes. sounds good21:21
ttx#action ttx to set up swift 1.7.6 milestone, no eta yet21:21
ttxnotmyname: anything else ?21:21
*** gabrielhurley has quit IRC21:21
notmynamejust the release. that's all21:21
ttxQuestions on Swift ?21:22
ttx#topic Glance status21:22
*** openstack changes topic to "Glance status"21:22
ttxbcwaldon: hey21:22
bcwaldonttx: oh hey21:22
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/grizzly-121:22
ttxnow that's what I call done21:22
bcwaldonttx: why thank you21:23
bcwaldonttx: we'll probably pull some more on over the next week21:23
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/grizzly21:23
bcwaldonttx: probably just 'whatever happens to get fixed'21:23
ttxadmittedly 2 blueprints over a total of 12 is not that great of a % on the overall grizzly plan :)21:24
bcwaldonttx: come on now21:24
bcwaldonttx: be nice21:24
ttxI play good cop AND bad cop at the same time.21:24
ttxSo.. on the grizzly plan21:24
Vekboy, talk about split personalities...21:25
ttxWould be good to  set a priority to streaming-server21:25
ttxand set tentative target milestones, especially on essential/high stuff21:25
bcwaldonttx: yes, that might not line up with our priorities for grizzly21:25
bcwaldonttx: I'm thinking through the rest right meow21:25
ttxbcwaldon: great. Anything else ?21:26
bcwaldonttx: No, officer21:26
ttxQuestions on Glance ?21:26
ttx#topic Quantum status21:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status"21:27
ttxdanwent: o/21:27
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/grizzly-121:27
ttxgood progress overall... but only one week left21:27
ttxAnything you would drop of this (long) list to ensure focus on the rest ?21:27
danwentyup, everything will be posted for a review by wed, or moved out21:27
ttxsounds good.21:27
*** jd__ has left #openstack-meeting21:28
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/grizzly21:28
danwenti priortized everything21:28
danwentprioritized :)21:28
ttxlet me refresh21:29
ttxlooks like everything was covered recently :)21:29
ttxWould be good to set a milestone for ipv6-feature-parity & make-string-localizable21:30
ttxsince theyare "high" prio21:30
ttxotherwise looks good!21:31
danwentok, will ping the dev on the v6 one.  I think we may still need to find someone for localization21:31
*** jcooley has quit IRC21:31
danwentah, looks like someone signed up21:31
danwentwill do21:31
ttxdanwent: Anything else ?21:31
ttxQuestions on Quantum ?21:31
ttx#topic Cinder status21:32
*** openstack changes topic to "Cinder status"21:32
ttxjgriffith: o/21:32
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-121:32
jgriffithttx: hey there21:32
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting21:32
ttxOK, this this looks in slow progress... with only one week left ?21:32
jgriffithThe ones that aren't started should be quick and I plan to pick them up this week-end if they don't get done21:33
jgriffithThe first two items just need to make it through reviews21:33
ttxhmm, ok. Should I add xenapi-storage-manager-nfs to the grizzly series goal ?21:34
ttxi.e. do you bless it ?21:34
jgriffithI did21:34
ttxjgriffith: so you're still confident everything can hit g121:35
jgriffithttx: absolutely21:35
ttxLooking at the general plan now...21:35
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/grizzly21:35
ttxWho is going to work on cinder-api-2.0 ?21:36
jgriffithttx: It's already in progress by thingee...21:36
jgriffithttx: I'll update21:36
jgriffithttx: Oh... you found a dup21:36
ttxoh, that explains it21:37
ttxjust mark one obsolete21:37
jgriffithttx: I'll need to merge Chucks and Mike's21:37
jgriffithttx: doing it now21:37
ttxAlso retain-glance-metadata-for-billing is "proposed" for grizzly, should I confirm it ?21:37
jgriffithttx: yes please, I just targetted that this morning21:38
ttxjgriffith: Anything else ?21:38
ttxQuestions on Cinder ?21:38
ttx#topic Nova status21:39
*** openstack changes topic to "Nova status"21:39
ttxvishy: o/21:39
ttx#link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-121:39
ttxGenerally good progress, but only one week left...21:39
ttxAnything that won't make it that we should already defer to g2 ?21:40
ttxCould help in prioritizing reviews21:40
vishyi went through in defering a couple of things already21:40
vishycompute cells seems unliekely to land21:40
vishyand entrypoints as well21:41
vishymostly due to review delays21:41
vishycomstud / mordred: does that seem accurate?21:41
ttxhow is "Delete all traces of volume code from nova" going ?21:41
vishythat one is close21:41
ttxok, good21:41
ttxit's good to have the cleanup full by the time the milestone hits21:41
comstudvishy: When is cut-off for g-1 ?  Seems unlikely21:41
ttxcomstud: EOB next tuesday21:42
comstudyeah, we'll need slightly longer I suspect21:42
ttxvishy: defer as appropriate21:42
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/grizzly21:42
ttxStill a few issues there...21:43
ttxWould be good to have assignees for the "High" priority stuff21:43
ttxif nobody goes for it and they are targets of opportunity, maybe we can downprioritize those21:43
ttxvishy: how is the hunt for volunteer assignees going so far ?21:44
vishyttx: haven't heard a peep!21:44
ttxvishy: call was a bit lost in your last email, iirc21:45
vishyttx: think i should send out another one for specific ones?21:45
*** spiffxp has joined #openstack-meeting21:45
vishyttx: a few of those I think we can assign to their drafters21:45
vishyttx: i will go through and do that and send out an email for volunteers for the rest21:45
ttxvishy: for the ones that are really "High" prio, a specific email asking for volunteers can't hurt21:46
ttxAlso we need more tentative milestone targets set21:46
ttxbut one is linked to the other21:46
ttxno assignee, no milestone21:46
ttxA few prio mismatches, detected by ttx.py:21:46
ttxdb-cleanup (High) depends on blueprint with lower priority (db-api-cleanup, Medium)21:46
ttxSame for nova-v3-api (High), depending on apis-for-nova-manage (Medium)21:47
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC21:47
*** steveleon has joined #openstack-meeting21:47
*** hghazal has quit IRC21:47
ttx#action vishy to adjust priorities for db-cleanup db-api-cleanup nova-v3-api apis-for-nova-manage to avoid depending on lower prio bps21:47
ttxvishy: Anything else ?21:47
vishyhmm, tha second one doesn't really seem like a dependency exactly21:47
vishyok i will clean21:47
ttxvishy: removing the dependency link will ALSO fix it :)21:48
ttxQuestions on Nova ?21:48
*** esp2 has joined #openstack-meeting21:48
*** grapex1 has joined #openstack-meeting21:48
ttx#topic Incubated projects21:48
*** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects"21:48
ttxAnyone to talk Ceilometer ?21:48
*** SlickNik has joined #openstack-meeting21:48
*** markvoelker has quit IRC21:48
ttxAnyone from Heat ?21:49
eglynn_(from ceilo)21:49
ttxok, ceilometer first21:49
ttxLooking at https://launchpad.net/ceilometer/grizzly21:49
ttxWant me to create milestones at the common dates ?21:49
*** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting21:49
eglynn_nothing much to report other than reaching out to the Synaps folks with a view to closer collaboration21:49
eglynn_ttx re. milestones I'd say G-2 will be our first21:50
ttx#action ttx to create milestones for ceilometer grizzly starting at g221:50
ttxeglynn_: Also I looked into jobs necessary for integrated release... Now that you have common-bump-milestone support, I think you only need a proper ceilometer-tarball job21:50
eglynn_(a fair bit of churn ongoing on WRT to removing nova DB access)21:50
ttxeglynn_: so you can add that to your list of requests to CI :)21:50
eglynn_ttx: cool21:50
ttxFinally it would be good to work on your Grizzly plans a bit21:51
ttx#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/grizzly21:51
ttxLooks a bit bare atm21:51
eglynn_yep, understood, we'll get ours hand around that this week21:51
ttx#action ceilometer crew to ask for a ceilometer-tarball job and pimp up their grizzly roadmap21:51
eglynn_s/ours hand/our hands/21:51
ttxstevebake: hello, and welcome to the crazy fast meeting21:51
ttxThe first step towards total assimilation would be to align Launchpad teams21:52
ttxYou seem to have a single ~heat team (Heat Drivers), and no ~heat-core21:52
ttxThose teams represent different things. heat-core are the code reviewers, while heat-drivers are in charge of the roadmap.21:52
stevebakeWe're still migrating content from the github wiki, so light on blueprints21:52
ttxThey can be the same people, but generally the drivers group is much smaller21:52
ttxSo my suggestion would be to create a heat-core group, set review permissions to those21:52
ttxthen rename ~heat to ~heat-drivers and clean it up (should be PTL + a limited few helpers)21:52
ttx#action heat crew to align Launchpad teams with openstack model21:53
zanebI thought there was a heat-core, but I could be wrong21:53
ttxstevebake: when do you think you want me to start doing your milestone releases ? g2 ? g3 ?21:53
stevebakewe're still discussing whether to do a g-1 release, since we're only just incubated21:53
stevebakebut I think we can commit to g-2 onwards21:54
ttxstevebake: that would be next week. Maybe skip it if it doesn't make sense feature-wise21:54
stevebakewe might do a slightly delayed g-121:54
ttxstevebake: OK, I'll investigate how far you are from a Jenkins job standpoint and keep you posted21:54
*** marek_ has quit IRC21:54
ttxstevebake: sure, delayed g1 is an option21:54
stevebakethat is all. Progress is being made21:55
ttxstevebake: did you already switch to openstack common versioning ? Or still using the original heat versions ?21:55
ttxi.e. v8 or 2013.1?21:55
zanebwe haven't switched that over yet21:55
zanebbut I think next release it would make sense to do that21:56
ttxmight not be worth calling something g-1 until you do that21:56
zanebyes, that makes sense21:56
stevebakeAlso need to choose a versioning for first release of python-heatclient21:56
ttxso two options, doing a v..8? or switch versioning and do a 2013.1~g121:56
ttxstevebake: that's a lot more open. Client libraries just can pick whatever they want ;)21:57
ttxok, need to move on21:57
ttxstevebake: thanks!21:57
*** jdorothy has joined #openstack-meeting21:57
ttx#topic Other Team reports21:57
*** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports"21:57
ttxQA, Docs, CI: anyone ?21:57
*** almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan21:58
*** saurabhs has joined #openstack-meeting21:58
ttx#topic Open discussion21:58
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion"21:58
ttxI'm looking into changing the format of the meeting, covering the stuff that matters to everyone first21:58
ttxsince most people just drop from the meeting when they are done21:58
ttxand nobody listens to me at this point21:58
ttxThat means we would drop the "Other Team reports" and "Open discussion" topics at the end and replace them with a "General announcements" topic at the start21:59
*** juice has joined #openstack-meeting21:59
ttxAdditionally we'll remove the "Actions from last week" topic and talk about those in each corresponding topic.21:59
ttxUnless someone complains I'll switch to that format for next meeting.21:59
ttx#action ttx to revamp meeting format for next time21:59
ttxannegentle_: that affects you ^21:59
*** yidclare has joined #openstack-meeting21:59
ttxannegentle_: should make it easier to announce stuff while everyone is still listening22:00
annegentle_ttx: nice22:00
*** EmilienM has left #openstack-meeting22:00
annegentle_cuz I wanted to announce our participation in the GNOME Outreach Program for Women!22:00
annegentle_#link http://wiki.openstack.org/GnomeOutreachWomen22:00
*** tasdomas has quit IRC22:00
ttxannegentle_: cool!22:01
ttxAnything else, anyone ?22:01
annegentle_very exciting.22:01
ttxannegentle_: unfortunately nobody listens anymore. I'd suggest a post on the ML :)22:02
annegentle_ttx: yup, will do :)22:02
ttxand that closes our meeting. Thanks everyone22:02
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"22:02
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 22:02:21 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)22:02
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-13-21.01.html22:02
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-13-21.01.txt22:02
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-13-21.01.log.html22:02
*** Vek has left #openstack-meeting22:02
*** jcooley has joined #openstack-meeting22:02
annegentle_thanks ttx22:02
vipul#topic Reddwarf Meeting22:02
ttxwe now have a following meeting so I have to be on time :)22:02
hub_cap#startmeeting reddwarf22:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 13 22:02:56 2012 UTC.  The chair is hub_cap. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.22:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.22:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'reddwarf'22:02
ttxhub_cap: sorry was 2 min late22:03
hub_capttx: your on my list22:03
vipulso that's how it's done22:03
*** sudorandom has left #openstack-meeting22:03
hub_capyup then we do things like22:03
jcooleyjcooley here as well.22:04
hub_caplets wait a few minutes for everyone to join up22:04
hub_capagenda is here http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/RedDwarfMeeting22:04
hub_cap#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/RedDwarfMeeting22:04
SlickNikNikhil here as well.22:05
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting22:05
hub_capok seems like we have a quorom lets get started based on the link above22:05
*** kmansel has joined #openstack-meeting22:05
hub_cap#topic Meet and greet22:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Meet and greet"22:05
*** ThiagoCMC has joined #openstack-meeting22:05
hub_caplets spend a few seconds each saying hi and what we do, where we are, who w work for etc..22:06
hub_capim michael basnight, lead of the opensource portion of the project from rackspace22:06
hub_capfeel free to start typing everyone :)22:06
vipulHey! Vipul from HP - lead for Reddwarf @ HP22:06
hub_caplets add tags to them22:06
juicejustin hopper, working with the dbaas team at HP.  Pretty new to all of this :)22:07
hub_cap#info michael basnight, lead of the opensource portion of the project from rackspace22:07
kmanselHi.  Kevin from HP22:07
jdorothyJosh Dorothy w/ HP22:07
hub_capif we add tags itll show in the notes22:07
juiceI sit next to Kevin (rather unpleasant :)22:07
ThiagoCMCHi! I'm Thiago and I'm doing a POC of OpenStack for my own start up company (public cloud computing provider). I'm using today the OpenStack Alamo, from Rackspace for my tests...22:07
jdorothy#info Josh Dorothy w/ HP22:07
yidclare#info Clare Springer w/ HP22:07
juice#info Justin Hopper w/ HP22:07
vipul#info Vipul Sabhya @ hp22:07
hub_capThiagoCMC: welcome! a 3rd party so to speak (figured we would all be from hp or rax)22:07
SlickNik#info Nikhil Manchanda, with HP.22:08
esp2Hello. #info Dan Nguyen @HP22:08
jcooley#info jim cooley, director of database/reddwarf @ HP22:08
ThiagoCMChub_cap, awesome! tks!22:08
saurabhs#info Saurabh, w/ HP22:08
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC22:08
SlickNikStill wrapping my head around the way OpenStack does things, so thanks for being helpful everyone.22:08
hub_capnice to see you all HP'ers, i believe the rax peoplez are in sprint planning, soooo...... they likley wont be on today, but im holding down the fort w/ a crying baby in the background :)22:08
vipulwhere's all the rackers22:08
*** grapex2 has joined #openstack-meeting22:08
hub_capgrapex2: when grapex and grapex1 dont work22:09
kmansel#info Kevin Mansel @ HP22:09
*** grapex2 has left #openstack-meeting22:09
*** grapex1 has quit IRC22:09
rnirmal#info Nirmal Ranganathan @ Rackspace.. just eavesdropping22:10
hub_cap#info grapex is tim simpson, sr dev on the project at rax, cp16net is craig vyvial sr dev at rax, rnirmal is nirmal ranganathan former reddwarfer22:10
hub_capok cool lets keep a-goin22:10
*** boden has quit IRC22:10
hub_cap#topic Discuss launchpad participation22:10
*** openstack changes topic to "Discuss launchpad participation"22:10
hub_capjust to let everyone know, ive been mucking w/ the launchpad page today22:10
hub_cap#link https://launchpad.net/reddwarf22:10
spiffxp#info Aaron Crickenberger w/ HP22:11
hub_capthats gonna show up under the launchpad participation lol22:11
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting22:11
hub_cap#info added the grizzly series to the page22:11
hub_capi figured we should follow the same release schedule as the rest of the openstackers, any objections?22:11
*** datsun180b has joined #openstack-meeting22:12
vipulSounds good to me22:12
*** redthrux has joined #openstack-meeting22:12
*** Toanster is now known as toanster-away22:12
SlickNikSounds reasonable.22:12
rnirmaleasier to track22:12
vipulthanks for fixing the links22:12
hub_capvipul: no problemo, if u see anythign else, and 1) dont have access to fix, tell me, or 2) ask me to fix22:13
hub_capid lke ot make it so im not the only person who can do this, i dont want it to be a Autocracy22:13
hub_capid prefer the #1 from above over teh #2 ;)22:13
*** joeCruz has joined #openstack-meeting22:14
vipulcool, I may have the correct permissions, since i do see 'Change details'22:14
hub_caplooks like rackers are coming in slowly22:14
hub_capvipul: good22:14
hub_capok so does anyone have any info/links/etc for that topic? or we move on?22:15
spiffxpre: release schedule, are we talking about something more general than http://wiki.openstack.org/GrizzlyReleaseSchedule?22:15
SlickNikI had a quick clarification.22:15
hub_capSlickNik: go for it22:15
hub_cap#link https://launchpad.net/reddwarf/grizzly22:15
hub_capspiffxp: ^ ^22:15
SlickNikIf I had a bug/issue that I wanted to open against redstack, can I use the reddwarf lauchpad site to do it?22:15
hub_capspiffxp: ive added the grizzly milestones to the series as well22:16
*** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting22:16
spiffxpgot it22:16
hub_capSlickNik: thats a good question, we might need to add a separate page for that, lets model it after devstack22:16
hub_caplooks like devstack has thier own22:16
hub_cap#action grapex to make a launchpad site for redstack22:16
SlickNikAwesome, that would be ideal. Thanks!22:17
grapexhub_cap: Sounds cool.22:17
hub_capcool any more Qs or moving on?22:17
vipulLong term though, are we thinking of migrating Redstack into Devstack?22:17
vipulso this may be the interim solution, until we get there22:17
*** srn has joined #openstack-meeting22:18
hub_capvipul: as much as possible i think so22:18
hub_capi talked w/ anotherjesse a long while ago about booting special services in devstack22:18
vipulhub_cap: yea there seems to be precendence with non-incubated projects already being part of devstack22:19
hub_capthey were on board w/ making a configurable system to allow us (and others) to use our own configure logic within devstack, so i think that in some form of fashion we will have our own particulars22:19
hub_caplol ya vipul22:19
rnirmalhub_cap: devstack now is updated to have loadable libs22:19
rnirmalso could potentially add reddwarf22:19
rnirmallibs as in bunch of bash scripts22:19
hub_capya #topic devstack integration22:20
hub_cap#info we need a way to configure reddwarf easier within devstack22:20
hub_capwho wants the action item to talk w/ devstack about it?22:21
hub_cap#topic devstack integration22:21
*** openstack changes topic to "devstack integration"22:21
hub_caplol if the hashtag isint at the begin it does nothing22:21
SlickNikjust noticed that.22:21
hub_cap#info we need a way to configure reddwarf easier within devstack22:21
vipulthese meeting notes are going to be a work in progress :)22:21
hub_capvipul: fo sure22:22
hub_capso as for ownership any volunteers? if not ill take it22:22
hub_cap#action hub_cap to discuss devstack integration22:22
jcooleywe can talk with the devstack/ci folks, some of them are right here :)22:22
hub_cap#info consider using the libs in devstack22:22
hub_capjcooley: u want the action?22:23
hub_cap#action jcooley (not hub_cap) to discuss devstack integration22:23
vipul#info non-incubated precendence already in devstack, see 'ryu' integration22:23
*** al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away22:23
hub_capcool, time to move on?22:23
hub_cap#topic Discuss initial core team22:24
*** openstack changes topic to "Discuss initial core team"22:24
hub_capso id like ot keep core very small at first, like 2 from each of our teams22:25
*** sarob has quit IRC22:25
vipul#info current reddwarf-core team: hub_cap, grapex, vipul22:25
hub_capand add more as we have code reviews / contributions22:25
vipulhub_cap, we'd like to propose one more from our side to get things stated22:25
hub_capspiffxp: ?22:25
*** CrackerJackMack has joined #openstack-meeting22:25
hub_capvipul: did u have someone in mind?22:26
* spiffxp nominates SlickNik22:26
vipulspiffxp or SlickNik22:26
hub_capok ill let you decide vipul22:26
*** jodah has joined #openstack-meeting22:26
hub_capand ill add to the team22:26
hub_capso the _only_ thing we need to be cognisant of is that we make sure the "other" company has a stake in each review22:27
hub_cap#action hub_cap to add spiffxp to core team22:27
SlickNikSounds good. I recommend spiffxp.22:27
ThiagoCMCGuys, will be a "beta testers team"? If yes, I'm on it!22:28
grapexSo it seems like we need +4 total on a commit to merge it. Does anyone want it to be higher?22:28
hub_capThiagoCMC: you are the beta tester team!22:28
spiffxphub_cap: I wasn't sure if we wanted to try encoding that w/ some crazy ci rules at some point, I think it's out of openstack-ci's scope right now22:28
hub_capgrapex: id say we need a +3 and that should suffice right spiffxp grapex?22:28
hub_cap+2 from one team and then +1 from the other22:29
vipulgrapex: I think you need a minimum of 2 +2's22:29
spiffxp2 +222:29
hub_capcan that be done? can we change that "rule" for our project?22:29
*** ThiagoCMC has quit IRC22:29
jcooleyit turns out they are in layers, we can have at least one +2 or do we want 2 x +2?22:29
vipulI propose 2 x +2's22:29
hub_capvipul: i think thats not enough tho22:29
vipuland mordred did mention that this is configurable22:30
hub_capcuz grapex and i could easily shuffle code past you :)22:30
jcooleyi think that makes sense. 2 x +222:30
hub_capif we have 3*+2 it woudl require someone from both companies reviewing22:30
grapexhub_cap: Yeah, that's what I was thinking. We could inadvertently both look at something and merge it.22:30
rnirmalhub_cap: I don't think it requires 2 +222:30
hub_capyes grapex. i think until we have a larger team and better rules around blueprints/bugs/ci etc...22:30
rnirmalone +2 and +1 approve22:30
hub_caprnirmal: you are correct thats how it works now22:31
rnirmalyou could always have more as a rule22:31
hub_capid prefer 3 core members need to review it22:31
vipulhmm, good point, just don't want things to be stacked up pending reviews..22:31
hub_capvipul: lets cross that bridge when we come to it22:31
spiffxpditto, I am concerned emphasis on +2 downplays +1 participation22:31
jcooleyrnirmal, yep those are the default rules.22:31
yidclareyeah, requiring 3 +2 essentially means the entire core team needs to be reviewing every single commit22:32
hub_capyidclare: there are 4 of us now :)22:32
*** robertmyers has quit IRC22:32
hub_capso its 3/4 of the core team22:32
*** dkehn has quit IRC22:32
vipulno 2 must go on vacay at the same time :)22:32
hub_capvipul: ;) im on vaca right now dude22:32
jcooleyall i worry about is that 3 x +2 means 3/4s of the core team needs to approve.22:33
grapexWhat about if instead of three mandatory +2's, we just have a total of 6. That could be one core and four other members.22:33
*** dkehn has joined #openstack-meeting22:33
spiffxpI think 2 +2 would be better for now while we work on getting folks onboarded through the gerrit process22:33
jcooleysince we're moving pretty fast, that might slow down changes.  if folks are cool with that...22:33
hub_capwell i dont think speed should be our only motivation22:33
vipulwe could do a hybrid approach like grapex suggests22:33
hub_capi think our motiviation should be participation from both teams22:34
SlickNikI'd prefer a quicker number.22:34
SlickNikI like grapex's ideas as well.22:34
hub_capif you guys just push stuff all day long then we will feel like we dont have any skin in the game22:34
hub_capand verse visa22:34
jcooleystandard core rules are 2 x +2 and no concern for how many +1s.22:34
juicebased on what we were told yesterday these numbers are not additive22:34
yidclareI second spiffxp - 2 +2's and try to informally makes sure someone from each group sees it22:34
jcooley2 x +1 doesn't equal +2 by the way.22:34
jcooley4 x +1 doesn't equal 2 x +2 either.22:35
hub_capso lets do this, add a reviewer from the other company in your gerrit review22:35
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting22:35
juicethat was what I was trying say - thanks for the examples jcooley22:35
vipulhub_cap, that works22:35
SlickNikThat works as well.22:36
hub_capok so now the question22:36
hub_capdo we know for sure that the group has been changed in gerrit?22:36
vipulhub_cap, it has not yet22:36
spiffxpwhich group?22:36
hub_capthe one i just added u to spiffxp22:36
hub_cap#link https://launchpad.net/~reddwarf-core22:36
hub_capok who is gonna pester mordred then?22:37
*** topol has quit IRC22:37
hub_capto change from -drivers to -core for the +2s22:37
vipul#action Vipul to follow up on reddwarf-core with mordred22:37
jcooleyi'll do it.22:37
jcooleyhe's sitting next to me :)22:37
hub_capfeedback loop is very small22:37
vipul#action jcooley to follow up for Vipul on reddwarf-core with mordred :)22:38
SlickNiklol,n00b question alert. who's mordred?22:38
vipulmordred is Monty22:38
SlickNikohhh, gotcha22:38
*** mtreinish has quit IRC22:38
hub_cap#info make sure one of the other company (rax/hp) looks at each review (add a particular reviewer from core)22:38
spiffxphub_cap: any chance vipuls could also be made an admin of reddwarf-core?22:38
spiffxperr… vipul that is22:38
hub_capsure spiffxp22:39
hub_capnow dont go adding people willy nilly ;)22:39
hub_capok moving on22:40
vipuljust as an FYI, getting more people added to core team:22:40
hub_cap#topic Proper blueprinting/bug practices22:40
*** openstack changes topic to "Proper blueprinting/bug practices"22:40
jcooleyi think we'll have to do the "make sure one of the other company (rax/hp) ..." by unformal convention.  not sure they can inforce this in gerrit.22:40
hub_capcrap sry vipul go head22:40
hub_capjcooley: its not enforcable22:40
vipuljust goinig to say, it needs to be pushed through the mailing list22:40
vipuland needs some +122:40
hub_capbut its a convention now, we can fix it by having a ptl and doing proper launchpad bug/blueprinting22:40
hub_caponce we get to that ^ ^ we dont need any rules for who has to review22:41
*** annashen has joined #openstack-meeting22:41
hub_capwhick gets to the next topic, does everyone know how to add bugs/blueprints and link them in commits?22:41
jcooleyagreed.  also we should be trying to do that -- but we missed the last openstack blueprint review period.22:41
hub_cap#action everyone to make sure that reviews are linked with bugs or blueprints22:41
juiceit was discussed yesterday briefly22:42
SlickNikmordred said yesterday that we could just mention it in the commit message.22:42
vipuli thought it was just having the word 'blueprint xxx'22:42
juicesomething about putting bug anywhere in the comment22:42
SlickNikYeah, I was under the same impression.22:42
jcooleyyes, they have regex scanning22:42
hub_capyup SlickNik you mention it in the commit22:42
hub_capfixes lp#bugID22:42
vipulblueprint BLUEPRINT22:42
vipulbug #######22:42
SlickNik"Bug #1234" or "Blueprint blah"22:42
uvirtbot`Launchpad bug 1234 in launchpad "Gina is an unmaintainable mess of command line options, environment variables and shell scripts" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/123422:42
vipul#link http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritWorkflow22:43
hub_capor Blueprint: blah, Blueprint-implemented: blah22:43
*** itarchitectkev has quit IRC22:43
rnirmalcreate your branch as bp/<blueprint short name>22:43
hub_capthx vipul22:43
rnirmalcan do the same for bugs bug/<bug id>22:43
*** ayoung has quit IRC22:43
vipulrnirmal: good to know22:43
rnirmalalso fixes <bug id> in the commit msg22:43
rnirmaland implements bp/<bp short name>22:43
SlickNikwow, there a bot in IRC that apparently brings it up as well.22:43
rnirmalfor blueprints22:43
hub_capya SlickNik cool eh?22:44
hub_capgood to know gina is an unmaintainable mess22:44
rnirmal#info http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritWorkflow22:44
hub_caplol double info22:44
hub_capok any other question on that topic?22:44
rnirmaltoo bad was not paying attention :)22:45
SlickNikyou snooze, ya lose.22:45
spiffxphub_cap: yeah, one more Q22:45
hub_capok i had roadmap on the chopping block next but im not sure that a meeting would be best for that, lets skip to the heated topic22:46
hub_cap#topic PTL?22:46
*** openstack changes topic to "PTL?"22:46
hub_capso, 1) do we need one now?22:46
hub_capif yes, 2) who?22:46
hub_capproject technical lead juice22:47
vipulI was under the impression PTLs are chosen after Incubation?22:47
hub_capare they? cool then we can skip it for now22:47
hub_cap#info not now, wait for more participation and incubation22:47
hub_capgood by everyone?22:48
SlickNikSounds good to me.22:48
vipulat least we don't need an official one... is my understanding22:48
hub_capcool we know vipul and i are the technical leads for the projects so we will do our best to discuss things between the teams22:48
hub_capsound good vipul?22:48
vipulyep, works22:48
hub_cap#info vipul and hub_cap to keep communication open between hp/rax22:49
jcooleyagain: good :)22:49
hub_capok now the end of the meeting, ...22:49
hub_cap#topic Open discussion22:49
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion"22:49
hub_capdoes anyone have anything that was not discussed on the meeting we shoudl bring up or make sure we bring up nxt wk?22:49
vipulany update on getting reddwarf-integration to stackforge?22:49
hub_capvipul: i think soneone mentioned that earlier? but they called it redstack22:50
hub_capand there is a action item for grapex to do that22:50
grapexvipul: I talked to clarkb about it yesterday. Apparently its almost in, but mordred is using it as a guinea pig for a new way of putting projects into StackForge.22:50
grapexThat's probably fine, for now.22:50
vipulgrapex: thanks22:50
grapexTo me, a bigger issue is that 1. the public version of RedStack and the RDLI tests have some bugs that have crept in, and 2. we're not running anything in CI atm.22:51
hub_cap#info there is likely a decent bit of work to make rdli (reddwarf-integration) work for the public project22:51
grapexI have a few ideas on that.22:51
hub_cap#info we _need_ _need_ _need_ some CI soon22:51
hub_cap#action grapex to own CI and make sure it gets accomplished22:51
vipulhub_cap, grapex: are you may have been following, we're having some issues with redstack -- anything (like disable boot from volume) we shoudl be aware of22:51
grapexI think it would be possible to get at least all the fake mode stuff working on a publicly accessible Jenkins node soon. That way we could at least plug into the Gerrit stream and gate on it.22:51
hub_capvipul: lets talk them out in irc, im sure there are cobwebs in the public code that we dont know about22:52
hub_capmy focus (mainly after i get back to work) is to work on the public openstack codebase22:52
hub_capas opposed to anything internal / feature driven by rax :)22:52
spiffxpwe have a bunch of folks looking to do their first commit for reddwarf, should we just use dummy bugs to add TODO's, or is there low hanging fruit we could go after?22:53
hub_capso ill be able to help a lot and devote a decent ammt of time to helping yall out22:53
hub_capspiffxp: sure just add/remove the TODO that was pushed earlier22:53
hub_cap#info we need to integrate the client in to stackforge as well22:54
*** tasdomas has joined #openstack-meeting22:54
hub_capwho wants to own that?22:54
vipulhub_cap, it's already in stackforge22:54
hub_capoh it is!?!22:54
hub_cap#info hub_cap is a moron, its already there22:54
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:55
hub_capthat was easy :)22:55
*** alexpilotti_ has quit IRC22:55
rnirmalhub_cap: nice to know :P22:55
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:55
hub_cap#action hub_cap make sure the client launchpad page is up to date w/ the series like the reddwarf one22:55
jcooleywe've also been talking with mordred about the road to getting this in openstack CI22:55
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:55
vipulI believe a couple of patches went through as well22:55
mordredyes - had a great chat with vipul and jcooley yesterday22:56
*** alexpilotti_ has quit IRC22:56
mordredI think I understand redstack and reddwarf_integration better now, and am thrilled22:56
jcooleyhub_cap: folks here @ hp are now working on tip/reference implementation instead of some internal HP-y thing22:56
hub_capmordred: sweet!!22:56
hub_capjcooley: VERY SWEET!!22:56
hub_capid like to get our team there soon too jcooley22:56
mordredhub_cap: I want you to talk to lifeless or devananda at some point about getting your image creation to use the stuff they're working on22:57
jcooleyvery cool, i think we're aligned22:57
mordredin redstack22:57
hub_capmordred: fine by me sir.22:57
lifelesshub_cap: hi22:57
hub_cap#action hub_cap talk to  lifeless or devananda about the image creation22:57
hub_caplifeless: howdy22:57
lifelessI need to run up the street for ~ 15m, after that I'll be around again22:57
hub_caplifeless: i wont be ;)22:57
hub_cap#info hub_cap is on paternity leave for 2 more weeks and will be sparse22:58
hub_capim on paternity leave lifeless ill hit u up via email22:58
clarkbgrapex: I really really want to merge the change today. That will allow you to propose a dependent change that creates your new project22:58
clarkbgrapex: I am actively working on that change now.22:58
grapexclarkb: Sounds interesting. Let's talk in #reddwarf soon.22:58
*** dolphm has quit IRC22:59
lifelesshub_cap: cool - rbtcollins <at> hp dot com22:59
hub_capok so we are at 1 hr not sure if there is another group after but lets try to wrap up22:59
hub_caplifeless: aye22:59
*** joeCruz is now known as jcru22:59
jcooleyindeed.  think we got a lot accomplished.22:59
yidclarethanks for moderating, hub_cap23:00
hub_capyup very good meeting indeed23:00
vipulgood start :)23:00
hub_capyidclare: np!23:00
spiffxpya thx hub_cap23:00
hub_capvipul: thx for getting the ball rolling on the ML too!!23:00
SlickNikSweet, thanks all.23:00
jcooleythx folks! look forward to working with you guys closer.23:00
vipulhub_cap: np23:00
hub_capdef. we are a team now for real!23:01
*** stevebake has quit IRC23:01
vipulfo sho23:01
hub_capok if no one has anythign else to chat about im gonna end meeting23:01
juicethumbs up23:01
grapexAwesome work guys. :)23:01
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting23:01
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack"23:01
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 13 23:01:54 2012 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)23:01
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2012/reddwarf.2012-11-13-22.02.html23:01
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2012/reddwarf.2012-11-13-22.02.txt23:01
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/reddwarf/2012/reddwarf.2012-11-13-22.02.log.html23:01
hub_capok now we get to see how ugly the meeting notes are!!!!23:02
*** stevebake has quit IRC23:02
*** jdorothy has left #openstack-meeting23:02
*** yidclare has left #openstack-meeting23:02
*** stevebake has joined #openstack-meeting23:02
juicethat's some neat stuff23:03
rnirmaldoesn't look all that bad23:03
rnirmaland great job for a first meeting23:03
juicebest meeting secretary I have met23:03
hub_caplol :)23:03
hub_capya we did aight. go team venture23:04
*** rnirmal has quit IRC23:04
*** vipul has left #openstack-meeting23:04
*** datsun180b has left #openstack-meeting23:04
*** kmansel has left #openstack-meeting23:04
*** esp2 has left #openstack-meeting23:04
*** anniec has quit IRC23:05
*** metral has quit IRC23:06
*** koolhead17 has quit IRC23:09
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:09
*** imsplitbit has quit IRC23:10
*** NobodyCam_lunch is now known as NobodyCam23:11
*** afazekas has quit IRC23:13
*** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting23:15
*** annegentle_ has quit IRC23:18
*** jhenner has quit IRC23:18
*** alexpilotti_ has quit IRC23:18
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:20
*** ThiagoCMC has joined #openstack-meeting23:24
*** henrynash has quit IRC23:24
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting23:25
*** redthrux has quit IRC23:25
*** srn has quit IRC23:25
*** reed has quit IRC23:26
*** jcru has quit IRC23:27
*** NobodyCam has quit IRC23:29
*** mikal has quit IRC23:29
*** fnaval has quit IRC23:29
*** samkottler is now known as samkottler|out23:30
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting23:31
*** alexpilotti_ has quit IRC23:33
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC23:35
*** Mr_T has left #openstack-meeting23:42
*** henrynash has quit IRC23:46
*** redthrux has joined #openstack-meeting23:54
*** saurabhs has left #openstack-meeting23:55
*** redthrux has joined #openstack-meeting23:55
*** jaypipes has quit IRC23:55

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