Tuesday, 2013-11-19

*** mrodden has quit IRC00:00
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC00:01
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting00:01
*** dcramer_ has quit IRC00:02
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting00:02
*** rnirmal has quit IRC00:05
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting00:05
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC00:07
*** loq_mac has quit IRC00:07
*** markpeek1 has quit IRC00:08
*** loq_mac has joined #openstack-meeting00:08
*** herndon_ has quit IRC00:09
*** julim has quit IRC00:10
*** oubiwann has quit IRC00:12
*** jmontemayor has quit IRC00:13
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting00:15
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:17
*** s3wong has quit IRC00:18
*** markwash has quit IRC00:29
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC00:31
*** loq_mac has quit IRC00:34
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC00:35
*** adalbas has quit IRC00:35
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting00:38
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC00:40
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting00:40
*** loq_mac has joined #openstack-meeting00:42
*** loq_mac has quit IRC00:42
*** SvenDowideit has quit IRC00:42
*** SvenDowideit has joined #openstack-meeting00:42
*** emagana has quit IRC00:44
*** hemna has quit IRC00:45
*** gyee has quit IRC00:48
*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC00:48
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:48
*** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:49
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting00:54
*** fnaval_ has quit IRC00:55
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC00:56
*** stanlagun has joined #openstack-meeting00:58
*** rloo has left #openstack-meeting00:58
*** herndon has joined #openstack-meeting00:59
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting01:00
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC01:01
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC01:02
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting01:03
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting01:04
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC01:10
*** gongysh has quit IRC01:11
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC01:12
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting01:15
*** dcramer_ has quit IRC01:19
*** msmith_ has quit IRC01:21
*** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting01:21
*** SridarK has quit IRC01:23
*** jasondotstar has joined #openstack-meeting01:23
*** jsergent has quit IRC01:25
*** sjing has joined #openstack-meeting01:25
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting01:26
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC01:27
*** sjing has quit IRC01:29
*** armax has left #openstack-meeting01:29
*** sjing has joined #openstack-meeting01:30
*** rnirmal has quit IRC01:30
*** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:33
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom01:37
*** vipul has quit IRC01:38
*** michchap has quit IRC01:38
*** vipul has joined #openstack-meeting01:38
*** michchap has joined #openstack-meeting01:38
*** maxdml has quit IRC01:44
*** nermina has quit IRC01:44
*** rongze_ has quit IRC01:45
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting01:45
*** bdpayne has quit IRC01:50
*** suo has joined #openstack-meeting01:50
*** epim has quit IRC01:50
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:54
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC01:55
*** dcramer_ has quit IRC01:56
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:57
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting02:05
*** nermina has joined #openstack-meeting02:07
*** whenry has joined #openstack-meeting02:08
*** Mandell has quit IRC02:08
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting02:08
*** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:10
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting02:11
*** changbl has quit IRC02:12
*** Mandell has quit IRC02:12
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC02:16
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting02:18
*** b3nt_pin has quit IRC02:23
*** jasondotstar has quit IRC02:26
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting02:27
*** danwent has quit IRC02:27
*** sarob has quit IRC02:27
*** Rajeev has quit IRC02:30
*** shivh has quit IRC02:32
*** jasondotstar has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** ivasev has joined #openstack-meeting02:38
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC02:39
*** reed has quit IRC02:39
*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC02:43
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC02:44
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC02:47
*** changbl has joined #openstack-meeting02:51
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC02:52
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:52
*** tanisdl has quit IRC02:54
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC02:54
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:56
*** neelashah has joined #openstack-meeting02:57
Loquacity#startmeeting DocTeamMeeting02:59
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 02:59:55 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is Loquacity. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.02:59
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.02:59
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"02:59
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'docteammeeting'02:59
*** masayukig has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
LoquacityHere's our Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/DocTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting03:00
*** lbragstad has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
Loquacityso just in case anyone is confused, annegentle and i are alternating docs meetings to try and catch more timezones03:01
Loquacitythe new schedule looks like this: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/DocTeamMeeting#Monthly_doc.2Fweb_team_meeting03:01
Loquacity#topic Action items from last meeting03:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Action items from last meeting (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:01
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting03:01
Loquacityit doesn't look as though we have any action items to follow up on03:01
Loquacity#topic Report from the Summit03:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Report from the Summit (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:01
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz03:01
Loquacity#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2013-November/003252.html03:02
Loquacityannegentle wrote this doc from the summit, which i think she was waiting to hear back from people on03:02
Loquacityspecifically, i think you had comments fifieldt?03:02
*** yaguang has joined #openstack-meeting03:03
Loquacityhey :)03:03
fifieldtso, I wasn't quite sure of exactly what the config-reference was going to look like03:03
fifieldtduring H it kinda became a bit of a 'dumping ground'03:04
fifieldtwhereas the initial plan was for something much lighter03:04
fifieldtthough, in the email I replied to03:04
fifieldtit seemed to be that the way forward was to Strip All The Things03:04
fifieldtand just have lists of options03:04
Loquacityis that bad?03:04
fifieldtwhich probably goes too far in that direction03:04
Loquacityah, ok03:05
*** sjing has quit IRC03:05
Loquacityit seems as though we might need a dedicated session to discuss that?03:05
fifieldtThe example I always use is the RPC section03:05
fifieldtintroduction, few notes, tables03:05
Loquacityoh, i looked at this in a review yesterday, i think03:05
Loquacityit *is* a reference guide, though03:06
fifieldtnot guide03:06
fifieldtit is a reference03:06
fifieldtnot a reference guide03:06
Loquacitymy bad03:06
*** sjing has joined #openstack-meeting03:06
Loquacityok, that changes things03:06
fifieldtit's the well-worn stapled-together thing that operators use as a look-up03:07
fifieldtthe guiding principle through it all is - it was supposed to be the damn-simple to maintain book03:07
fifieldtwith the hope that the paras around the tables wouldn't change much between releases, if at all03:08
fifieldtand the tables take care of themselves though auto-things03:08
Loquacityyeah, lots of tables, not much in the way of concepts03:08
Loquacitymakes sense03:08
Loquacityso what's the proposal?03:08
* fifieldt doublechecks the name of the 'other' book03:09
fifieldt"Cloud Administrator Guide "03:09
fifieldtthat's the guide, where the guid-y things should go, IMO03:09
Loquacitythat's the one i've got open now, actually03:10
*** epim has joined #openstack-meeting03:10
*** dcramer_ has quit IRC03:10
Loquacityok, so maybe we need something laying this out?03:10
fifieldtthe TOC for that one was thrown together very quickly03:10
fifieldtso likely, yes03:10
Loquacitywhere do overall plans like this usually reside?03:10
Loquacityon the wiki?03:10
Loquacityor do you think we need to discuss on list a little more first?03:11
fifieldthttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals with a link to a wiki page03:11
fifieldtit's better to write up a proposal03:11
fifieldtso people can just say "yes" ;)03:11
Loquacityok, makes sense03:11
Loquacitydo you want to kick that off?03:11
* fifieldt looks at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-restructure-documentation03:11
fifieldtI suspect there will be a lot of commonality between that page03:12
fifieldtand whatever we create03:12
fifieldtI was also never happy with the description of the "Cloud Administrator Guide"03:12
fifieldt" Provide guidance to day-to-day cloud administrators about how to perform administrative tasks."03:12
Loquacityyeah, agreed03:12
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom03:13
Loquacityok, so let's add an action for you to kick off that proposal03:13
Loquacityand i'll help you out wherever i can03:13
fifieldtI'm unlikely to be able to do anything in coming days03:13
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC03:13
fifieldtso it depends how soon you want it03:13
Loquacityin that case, maybe we should assign it to me?03:13
Loquacityno guarantee i'll get to it quickly either, i'm travelling to texas soon03:13
Loquacitybut i'm happy to take it03:13
fifieldtI'm just thinking03:13
fifieldtnaw, my thinking is bad03:14
Loquacitythinking is hard?03:14
fifieldtI was toying with the ideas of a 'first principles' look at things03:14
fifieldtsince you were shiny enough03:14
Loquacitythat's not insane, i think03:14
fifieldtbut it's probably not worth going that far up03:14
* fifieldt shrugs03:14
Loquacitybut we can explore that further03:14
Loquacity#action Loquacity to begin working on a proposal for config-reference and cloud admin guide IA03:14
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting03:15
Loquacity#topic Install Guide03:15
*** openstack changes topic to "Install Guide (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:15
Loquacityi'm not sure what to say on this03:15
fifieldtbased on the meeting log03:16
Loquacityi'm working on some high level IA-type stuff on the install guide now03:16
fifieldtthey seemed to make some conclusions in the previous meeting03:16
Loquacitybut that is still WIP03:16
fifieldtIA-type ?03:16
Loquacityinformation architecture03:16
fifieldtok, that's what I thought, cool03:16
fifieldttell me more :D03:16
Loquacityjust skimming the minutes03:16
Loquacitybasically the gist was that we need to do an overhaul for icehouse03:17
Loquacitybut there are needed improvements before then, we just don't want to do anything too major03:17
Loquacitysteve gordon is looking at it too03:17
Loquacityso unless anyone else has comments on that, we can probably move on03:18
fifieldtmy only comment03:18
fifieldtis testing :)03:18
fifieldtwe need to test :)03:18
fifieldtand I'm glad that we could do some this time03:18
Loquacityyep, agree 100%03:18
Loquacityi'm also having coffee with summer later this week, so we'll probably discuss this03:18
fifieldtyay :)03:19
Loquacityok, moving on03:19
Loquacity#topic Tom describe more about config ref and restructure for Icehouse03:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Tom describe more about config ref and restructure for Icehouse (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:19
Loquacityso i think we've covered that in the summit discussion03:19
fifieldtyes, indeed03:19
fifieldtunless there's more required?03:19
Loquacityi don't think so03:19
Loquacitywe have an action, so it's all good03:19
Loquacity#topic Meeting times, office hours03:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Meeting times, office hours (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:19
Loquacityi don't have much of an opinion on office hours03:20
Loquacitybut meetings have obviously been changed03:20
* fifieldt checks logs03:20
Loquacityi updated the wiki to reflect the new meeting schedule:03:20
Loquacity1st Tuesday, 03:00:00 UTC03:20
*** edmund has joined #openstack-meeting03:20
Loquacity2nd Tuesday, 14:00:00 UTC03:20
Loquacity3rd Tuesday, 03:00:00 UTC03:20
Loquacity4th Tuesday, 14:00:00 UTC03:20
Loquacityso i'll be looking after 1st and 3rd tuesdays03:20
fifieldtthank you :)03:20
Loquacityalso note that annegentle has changed the 2nd and 4th tuesdays to 140003:21
Loquacitythat messed a few people up last week03:21
* fifieldt is looking forward to when that's 10pm for me03:21
Loquacitydo you think it's worth considering something like this for the office hours too?03:21
Loquacityhehe, yeah, midnight is sucky03:22
Loquacityare the office hours used at all in the other TZ?03:22
fifieldtto be honest, I don't know03:22
Loquacityi like to think we're all fairly available around the clock, between the US contingent and the people in the southern hemisphere03:22
fifieldtif anything03:22
fifieldtI think it'd be cool to have office hours during time zone overlaps03:23
Loquacityso i'm not sure that having specific office hours is very beneficial03:23
fifieldtAU-EU, EU-US, US-AU03:23
Loquacityyeah, that would be wise03:23
fifieldtso that'd be my sole suggestion03:23
*** vito-ordaz has joined #openstack-meeting03:23
Loquacityok, maybe annegentle and i can discuss that further when i'm there later this month03:23
Loquacityit's a low prio, i think03:23
Loquacityalright, that brings us to ...03:23
Loquacity#topic Open discussion03:24
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: DocTeamMeeting)"03:24
fifieldtSuggestion: a doc bug day03:24
Loquacityooh, i saw that03:24
Loquacityyes, i love the idea :)03:24
fifieldt24  hours of fun03:24
Loquacityi actually wanted to do a docs bootcamp here in brisbane too03:24
fifieldtooh nice03:24
fifieldtI think for focus the two events should be separated by a bit03:24
Loquacityi agree03:24
fifieldtdo you know when you were thinking about BNE?03:24
fifieldtnew year?03:25
Loquacitywell, anne is proposing one for february03:25
Loquacityi'd want to go to that, and then do one here afterwards03:25
Loquacitypossibly linked to pycon03:25
fifieldtoh yes, that is a good idea03:25
fifieldtso July then03:25
* fifieldt has to be careful in Feb - OpenStack Tokyo day 03:25
Loquacityaugust, i think03:25
Loquacitywhen is that?03:26
fifieldt13th and 14th of feb03:26
Loquacityyeah, haven't heard further on anne's plans for feb yet03:26
Loquacitybut will keep my ear to the ground03:26
Loquacitycan i add an action for you for the doc bug day?03:26
fifieldtany suggested day/month from you03:26
Loquacity#action fifieldt to organise a doc bug day03:26
fifieldtI'm thinking this side of the year03:27
Loquacitywell, i'm travelling through to mid-dec03:27
Loquacityso after that would be ideal, although we're running out of year03:27
Loquacityi think i fly back in on the 13th03:27
*** schwicht has quit IRC03:27
*** herndon has quit IRC03:27
fifieldtnick is traveling through the 2nd03:27
Loquacityhow much time do you need to organise it?03:27
fifieldtnot much time at all03:28
Loquacityis next week too soon?03:28
fifieldtthe hardest thing is getting some proposed dates03:28
fifieldtnext week is fine03:28
fifieldtif people are free03:28
Loquacityok, so i'll propose, say 27/28 nov03:28
Loquacityor the week of 16-20 dec03:28
fifieldtok - I'll make a doodle poll for people to respond03:28
Loquacityooh, i don't know what that is03:29
fifieldtone moment and you will see03:29
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC03:29
Loquacityok :)03:29
fifieldtanything else on the agenda ? :)03:29
Loquacitynope, that's it03:29
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"03:30
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 03:30:08 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)03:30
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docteammeeting/2013/docteammeeting.2013-11-19-02.59.html03:30
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docteammeeting/2013/docteammeeting.2013-11-19-02.59.txt03:30
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docteammeeting/2013/docteammeeting.2013-11-19-02.59.log.html03:30
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting03:30
Loquacityhopefully that worked :)03:30
* Loquacity wanders back to #openstack-doc03:30
*** changbl has quit IRC03:31
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting03:33
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC03:35
*** ayoung has quit IRC03:36
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz03:38
*** ivasev has quit IRC03:38
*** fnaval_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:38
*** krast has joined #openstack-meeting03:40
*** krast has quit IRC03:41
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting03:41
*** lblanchard has quit IRC03:47
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom03:49
*** rnirmal has quit IRC03:50
*** sushils has quit IRC03:50
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC03:52
*** sushils has joined #openstack-meeting03:55
*** sushils has quit IRC04:02
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting04:02
*** fnaval_ has quit IRC04:03
*** fnaval_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:04
*** sushils has joined #openstack-meeting04:05
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC04:06
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting04:06
*** sushils has quit IRC04:12
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz04:18
*** jasondotstar has quit IRC04:20
*** ArxCruz has quit IRC04:22
*** ArxCruz has joined #openstack-meeting04:23
*** DennyZhang has joined #openstack-meeting04:24
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC04:29
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting04:30
*** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting04:33
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting04:35
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom04:35
*** jasondotstar has joined #openstack-meeting04:37
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting04:38
*** lbragstad has quit IRC04:39
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** Linz has quit IRC04:50
*** fnaval__ has joined #openstack-meeting04:52
*** IlyaE has quit IRC04:54
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting04:55
*** fnaval_ has quit IRC04:56
*** IlyaE has quit IRC05:00
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting05:00
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:00
*** tmorin has joined #openstack-meeting05:01
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC05:03
*** nati_uen_ is now known as nati_ueno05:04
nati_uenoWho's around?05:04
tmorinhi nati05:04
nati_uenohi tmorin05:04
tmorini am05:04
*** tmorin is now known as thomas_morin05:04
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting05:05
nati_uenoonly two guys joining this meeting ?05:05
nati_uenohm let's wait some min05:06
thomas_morinyes, at least pedro should join05:06
nati_uenoI sent mail05:07
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting05:09
*** jasondotstar has quit IRC05:10
*** vvechkanov has quit IRC05:12
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:13
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting05:15
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz05:15
*** jecarey has quit IRC05:18
*** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting05:18
*** neelashah has quit IRC05:18
thomas_morinnachi: I just checked, the meeting is scheduled for tomorrow, we are not 19/11 on the US west coast yet05:21
*** nosnos has quit IRC05:23
*** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting05:23
thomas_morinnati: talk to you tomorrow, same place, we can expect to see more people05:23
thomas_morinnait: I'll try to get back to sleep now... ;)05:24
*** thomas_morin has quit IRC05:24
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting05:25
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC05:27
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:28
*** ArthurBerezin has joined #openstack-meeting05:29
nati_uenoI got i05:30
*** IlyaE has quit IRC05:31
*** berlin88 has quit IRC05:31
*** ArthurBerezin has left #openstack-meeting05:31
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC05:32
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:36
*** lpeer has quit IRC05:38
*** changbl has joined #openstack-meeting05:38
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC05:42
*** DennyZhang has quit IRC05:43
*** sdake_ has quit IRC05:43
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:43
*** Linz has quit IRC05:49
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting05:49
*** loq_mac has joined #openstack-meeting05:51
*** loq_mac has quit IRC05:51
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:54
*** comay has quit IRC05:55
*** masayukig has quit IRC05:55
*** pablosan has quit IRC06:02
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC06:02
*** michchap has quit IRC06:02
*** oubiwann has quit IRC06:02
*** markpeek has quit IRC06:03
*** michchap has joined #openstack-meeting06:04
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting06:05
*** sarob has quit IRC06:07
*** lpeer has joined #openstack-meeting06:10
*** markpeek has quit IRC06:11
*** Linz has quit IRC06:17
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting06:18
*** bdpayne has quit IRC06:18
*** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting06:20
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting06:23
*** Shaan7 has joined #openstack-meeting06:28
*** nermina has quit IRC06:32
*** nermina has joined #openstack-meeting06:32
*** vito-ordaz has joined #openstack-meeting06:33
*** Linz has quit IRC06:34
*** nermina has quit IRC06:35
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting06:36
*** gongysh has quit IRC06:37
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC06:38
*** DennyZhang has joined #openstack-meeting06:39
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC06:41
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting06:42
*** DennyZhang has quit IRC06:44
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC06:46
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting06:48
*** fifieldt has quit IRC06:50
*** epim has quit IRC06:56
*** epim has joined #openstack-meeting06:57
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting07:01
*** denis_makogon has joined #openstack-meeting07:02
*** boris-42 has quit IRC07:02
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting07:03
*** michchap has quit IRC07:03
*** michchap has joined #openstack-meeting07:04
*** nosnos_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:05
*** nosnos has quit IRC07:05
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting07:08
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC07:09
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting07:10
*** matsuhas_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:13
*** sarob has quit IRC07:13
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC07:14
*** stevemar has quit IRC07:16
*** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** davidhadas has quit IRC07:23
*** bdpayne has quit IRC07:24
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting07:24
*** romcheg has joined #openstack-meeting07:28
*** epim has quit IRC07:28
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC07:30
*** sjing has quit IRC07:36
*** lsmola_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:36
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC07:37
*** DinaBelova has joined #openstack-meeting07:37
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting07:38
*** sjing has joined #openstack-meeting07:38
*** lsmola_ has quit IRC07:39
*** lsmola has joined #openstack-meeting07:40
*** DennyZhang has joined #openstack-meeting07:40
*** DennyZhang has quit IRC07:44
*** avishayb has joined #openstack-meeting07:53
*** sacharya has quit IRC07:57
*** fbo is now known as fbo_away07:57
*** ndipanov_gone is now known as ndipanov08:02
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting08:04
*** marun has quit IRC08:06
*** ArthurBerezin has joined #openstack-meeting08:07
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting08:08
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting08:08
*** mrunge has quit IRC08:08
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting08:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting08:09
*** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting08:11
*** sarob has quit IRC08:13
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting08:15
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting08:15
*** mestery_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:15
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC08:18
*** mestery has quit IRC08:19
*** romcheg has quit IRC08:19
*** sarob has quit IRC08:19
*** katyafervent has quit IRC08:20
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting08:24
*** marun has quit IRC08:25
*** masayukig has joined #openstack-meeting08:25
*** denis_makogon has quit IRC08:28
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC08:28
*** ArthurBerezin has left #openstack-meeting08:29
*** coolsvap has quit IRC08:30
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:30
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting08:30
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting08:32
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting08:32
*** afazekas_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:34
*** flaper87|afk is now known as flaper8708:37
*** romcheg has joined #openstack-meeting08:40
*** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting08:41
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC08:42
*** boris-42_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:45
*** boris-42 has quit IRC08:45
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC08:47
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC08:49
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** ilyashakhat has quit IRC08:53
*** DinaBelova has quit IRC08:54
*** ilyashakhat has joined #openstack-meeting08:54
*** DinaBelova has joined #openstack-meeting08:54
*** nprivalova has joined #openstack-meeting08:55
*** yassine has joined #openstack-meeting08:56
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC08:59
*** davidhadas_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:00
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:01
*** davidhadas has quit IRC09:03
*** ndipanov has quit IRC09:03
*** ndipanov has joined #openstack-meeting09:04
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting09:05
*** asalkeld has quit IRC09:07
*** rossella_s has joined #openstack-meeting09:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting09:08
*** ygbo has joined #openstack-meeting09:09
*** danwent has quit IRC09:10
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting09:11
*** ndipanov_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:12
*** sarob has quit IRC09:12
*** ndipanov has quit IRC09:13
*** ndipanov_ is now known as ndipanov09:19
*** ndipanov has joined #openstack-meeting09:19
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:20
*** belmoreira has quit IRC09:23
*** fbo_away is now known as fbo09:23
*** michchap has quit IRC09:24
*** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting09:25
*** matsuhas_ has quit IRC09:25
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting09:25
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC09:25
*** belmoreira has quit IRC09:26
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC09:26
*** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
*** michchap has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting09:29
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC09:30
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC09:30
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting09:30
*** nosnos_ has quit IRC09:33
*** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting09:34
*** bgorski has joined #openstack-meeting09:35
*** ArthurBerezin has joined #openstack-meeting09:42
*** ArthurBerezin has left #openstack-meeting09:42
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting09:51
*** terriyu has joined #openstack-meeting09:51
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting09:55
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting10:03
*** sjing has quit IRC10:04
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting10:05
*** ilyashakhat has quit IRC10:06
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC10:07
*** ilyashakhat has joined #openstack-meeting10:07
*** davidhadas_ has quit IRC10:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting10:08
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting10:09
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC10:11
*** sarob has quit IRC10:13
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting10:13
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting10:14
*** sushils has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC10:15
*** lsmola has quit IRC10:16
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting10:16
*** avishayb has quit IRC10:19
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** adalbas has joined #openstack-meeting10:23
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC10:28
*** lsmola has joined #openstack-meeting10:29
*** lpeer_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:33
*** lpeer has quit IRC10:35
*** lpeer_ has quit IRC10:38
*** lpeer__ has joined #openstack-meeting10:38
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:38
*** lpeer__ has quit IRC10:42
*** lpeer__ has joined #openstack-meeting10:42
*** lsmola has quit IRC10:44
*** lsmola has joined #openstack-meeting10:45
*** terriyu has quit IRC10:47
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting10:49
*** marun has quit IRC10:49
*** nprivalova has quit IRC10:51
*** davidhadas has quit IRC10:52
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting10:53
*** sushils has quit IRC10:56
*** boris-42_ is now known as boris-4210:56
*** jlibosva is now known as jlibosva|1unch10:57
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC10:58
*** matsuhashi has joined #openstack-meeting10:59
*** asalkeld has quit IRC10:59
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting10:59
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC11:00
*** lpeer has joined #openstack-meeting11:02
*** lpeer__ has quit IRC11:02
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting11:03
*** jlibosva|1unch is now known as jlibosva11:03
*** matsuhashi has quit IRC11:04
*** avishayb has joined #openstack-meeting11:05
*** nprivalova has joined #openstack-meeting11:05
*** coolsvap has quit IRC11:07
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting11:08
*** doron has joined #openstack-meeting11:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting11:08
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting11:11
*** sarob has quit IRC11:12
*** rongze has quit IRC11:18
*** plomakin has quit IRC11:19
*** jtomasek has quit IRC11:19
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting11:19
*** yaguang has quit IRC11:20
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC11:23
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:25
*** schwicht has joined #openstack-meeting11:27
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting11:28
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC11:29
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC11:30
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting11:31
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting11:31
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting11:32
*** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:34
*** pcm_ has quit IRC11:34
*** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:35
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC11:35
*** nprivalova has quit IRC11:37
*** tnurlygayanov has quit IRC11:40
*** tnurlygayanov has joined #openstack-meeting11:40
*** DuncanT- has quit IRC11:45
*** plomakin has joined #openstack-meeting11:46
*** DuncanT- has joined #openstack-meeting11:46
*** DuncanT- is now known as DuncanT11:46
*** ilyashakhat has quit IRC11:47
*** ilyashakhat has joined #openstack-meeting11:48
*** ben_duyujie has joined #openstack-meeting11:48
*** IlyaE has quit IRC11:50
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC11:51
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting11:51
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting11:51
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting11:53
*** nprivalova has joined #openstack-meeting11:55
*** doron is now known as doron_afk11:58
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC11:59
*** belmoreira has quit IRC11:59
*** davidhadas_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:02
*** amotoki has quit IRC12:03
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom12:04
*** davidhadas has quit IRC12:05
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz12:05
*** sushils has joined #openstack-meeting12:06
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** kashyap has quit IRC12:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting12:09
*** davidhadas_ has quit IRC12:12
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting12:13
*** kashyap has joined #openstack-meeting12:13
*** sarob has quit IRC12:14
*** avladu has quit IRC12:16
*** shakayumi has joined #openstack-meeting12:17
*** mrunge has quit IRC12:18
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting12:24
*** tnurlygayanov has quit IRC12:25
*** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting12:26
*** tnurlygayanov has joined #openstack-meeting12:27
*** ruhe has quit IRC12:32
*** jtomasek has quit IRC12:33
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC12:34
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC12:34
*** davidhadas_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:35
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting12:35
*** davidhadas has quit IRC12:38
*** jtomasek has quit IRC12:41
*** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting12:42
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** masayukig has quit IRC12:48
*** _ozstacker_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:50
*** shakayumi has quit IRC12:51
*** ozstacker has quit IRC12:54
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:55
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting12:57
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting12:58
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting12:59
*** jlibosva has quit IRC13:00
*** davidhadas_ has quit IRC13:00
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting13:00
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC13:00
*** jhenner1 has joined #openstack-meeting13:01
*** whenry has quit IRC13:02
*** suo has quit IRC13:02
*** afazekas_ has quit IRC13:02
*** jhenner has quit IRC13:02
*** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting13:05
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
*** jvarlamova_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
*** pdmars has quit IRC13:11
*** sarob has quit IRC13:13
*** afazekas_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:14
*** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting13:16
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC13:17
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC13:17
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting13:18
*** marun has quit IRC13:20
*** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting13:24
*** avishayb has quit IRC13:26
*** martines has quit IRC13:32
*** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting13:34
*** nosnos has quit IRC13:35
*** lbragstad has joined #openstack-meeting13:40
*** IlyaE has quit IRC13:44
*** weshay has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC13:48
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:49
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting13:49
*** kevinconway has quit IRC13:50
*** bpokorny has joined #openstack-meeting13:53
*** DrBacchus has joined #openstack-meeting13:54
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** SergeyLukjanov is now known as _SergeyLukjanov13:55
*** _SergeyLukjanov is now known as SergeyLukjanov13:56
*** SergeyLukjanov is now known as _SergeyLukjanov13:56
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
*** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
*** sandywalsh__ has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
*** davidhadas_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
*** herndon_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
*** dguitarbite has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
*** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC14:00
*** _SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC14:00
*** sandywalsh__ has quit IRC14:01
*** davidhadas has quit IRC14:01
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
*** johnthetubaguy has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
*** dkranz has quit IRC14:02
*** afazekas_ has quit IRC14:02
*** kevinconway has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
*** inkerra has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
*** jhenner1 has quit IRC14:03
*** yaguang has joined #openstack-meeting14:04
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting14:04
*** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:07
*** jasondotstar has joined #openstack-meeting14:08
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting14:08
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC14:10
*** fnaval__ has quit IRC14:11
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
*** fnaval_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
*** sarob has quit IRC14:13
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting14:14
*** ben_duyujie has quit IRC14:14
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting14:16
*** DinaBelova has quit IRC14:17
*** stevemar has quit IRC14:18
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC14:18
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting14:19
*** nprivalova has quit IRC14:22
*** dolphm has quit IRC14:23
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:23
*** doron_afk is now known as doron14:24
*** RajeshMohan has quit IRC14:24
*** doron is now known as doron_afk14:24
*** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting14:24
*** nermina has joined #openstack-meeting14:24
*** mestery_ is now known as mestery14:24
*** maxdml has joined #openstack-meeting14:25
*** doron_afk is now known as doron14:25
*** changbl has quit IRC14:25
*** DinaBelova has joined #openstack-meeting14:25
*** neelashah has joined #openstack-meeting14:27
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting14:28
*** nprivalova has joined #openstack-meeting14:28
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC14:30
*** DrBacchus has quit IRC14:31
*** avishayb has joined #openstack-meeting14:33
*** mrodden has joined #openstack-meeting14:34
*** vijendar has joined #openstack-meeting14:35
*** jecarey has joined #openstack-meeting14:35
*** afazekas_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:35
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting14:36
*** ArthurBerezin has joined #openstack-meeting14:39
*** burt has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
*** doron is now known as doron_afk14:46
*** thedodd has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
*** zul has quit IRC14:47
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting14:47
*** davidhadas_ has quit IRC14:48
*** lexx has joined #openstack-meeting14:48
*** litong has joined #openstack-meeting14:53
*** dolphm has quit IRC14:54
*** doron_afk is now known as doron14:54
*** tianst has joined #openstack-meeting14:54
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting14:55
*** jgallard has joined #openstack-meeting14:55
*** toan-tran has joined #openstack-meeting14:57
*** ArthurBerezin has left #openstack-meeting14:58
*** tianst has quit IRC14:58
garykdoron: ping14:59
garykhope i have the correct time this week :)14:59
dorongaryk: hi14:59
doronindeed so ;)14:59
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting14:59
dorongaryk: are you aware of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffEv0PRcrqI ?15:00
n0anogaryk, right time by my calendar15:00
*** ArthurBerezin1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
garykdoron: thank. no, i was not15:00
dorongaryk: good one.15:00
*** tianst has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
garykn0ano: welcome back from your holiday15:00
*** scottda has quit IRC15:00
*** Guest34448 has quit IRC15:01
garykn0ano: you want to run the meeting or should I?15:01
n0anoWhy don't you do today, I can pick up starting next week.15:01
garykn0ano: ok, sure np.15:01
*** BillArnold has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting15:02
*** PaulMurray has joined #openstack-meeting15:02
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting15:02
garykeveryone ready to start15:02
PaulMurrayhi all15:02
garykPaulMurray: hi15:02
garyk#startmeeting scheduler15:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 15:02:47 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is garyk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.15:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: scheduler)"15:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'scheduler'15:02
jgallardhi all15:02
garykhi, sorry about missing the meeting last week. combination of the jetlag and clock changes.15:03
toan-transorry last week I got the wrong time15:03
toan-tranit's changed into winter time15:03
garykyeah, i guess that we all got it mixed up a lillte15:03
*** sarob has quit IRC15:03
*** rongze has quit IRC15:04
garyki was thinking that we can go over action items from the summit.15:04
*** markvan has joined #openstack-meeting15:04
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting15:04
garykin addition to this are there other topics that people would like to bring up?15:04
n0anoI guess the question is what are the ARs to go over, do you have a list?15:05
*** bpokorny has left #openstack-meeting15:05
garykat the moment we do not have a lite, but a list would be a good idea15:05
*** Fdot has joined #openstack-meeting15:05
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting15:05
garyki can update regarding the instance groups and the resource tracking15:05
n0anoI'm curious about Boris' memcache changes15:06
doron+1 on memcached15:06
garykboris-42: you around?15:06
*** haomaiwang has quit IRC15:06
garykregarding the instance groups15:06
garyk1. it was decided that the new api's that we proposed were too complicated15:07
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting15:07
*** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-meeting15:07
garyk2. it was decided that we should complete the proposed api's for havana (for v2 and v3)15:07
garykthis gives us a good basis to start working on15:07
n0anodo we have time to complete the API for Havana?  I though new development was closed15:08
*** sgordon has joined #openstack-meeting15:08
garykfor havana we missed the cut due to the fact that we did not have v3 support15:08
garykwe plane to get this done in the coming weeks. there were also some loose ends regarding the v2 api15:08
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting15:09
n0anoso is the plan to do that work for Icehouse instead?\15:09
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting15:09
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting15:09
garykin short, yes, we have the time to complete the api. i certainly hope that we get it in by I115:09
garykyes. plan is to do it in I15:09
n0anomakes sense, is there any other design needed or are you just at the implementation phase15:09
garykAt the moment we have anti-affinity scheduling in review and are in the process of thinking about host capabilities15:09
*** MikeSpreitzer1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:10
garykthe ball is in our court to get down and do the implementations15:10
garykMikeSpreitzer1: hi15:10
MikeSpreitzer1Do we have an agenda?15:10
garykso i hope that in the near future we will have something up for review regarding the api (the cli and scheduler part are ready for review)15:10
*** thouveng has quit IRC15:11
garykMikeSpreitzer1: basically to go over summit action items etc. no formal agenda15:11
n0anosounds like it would be good to do the review for all at the same time - api, cli and scheduler - rather than doing it piecemeal15:11
*** lpeer has quit IRC15:11
*** MikeSpreitzer2 has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
garykIn parallel Yathi will be working on his scheduling changes15:12
*** haomaiwang has quit IRC15:12
MikeSpreitzer2I just had a connectivity glitch, may have missed a remark before the one about Yathi15:12
*** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
garykn0ano: we have all of the building blocks and hope just to get them in review soon15:12
n0anoOK, sounds good15:12
garykMikeSpreitzer1: basically Yathi will be working on his 'smart resource placement' pluggable driver15:13
MikeSpreitzer2n0ano: I would like to follow up on your question at the summit about scalability15:13
garykMikeSpreitzer2: i guess that this is a good time to talk about that.15:14
n0anoMikeSpreitzer1, in what way, I'm hoping that Bors' memcache changes will address a large part of the current scalability, I'd like to see where that goes15:14
garykit would be nice if boris-42 could chime in regarding their performance developments.15:14
MikeSpreitzer2Yes, I very much agree, Boris' suggestion is getting way too little love15:14
MikeSpreitzer2I also wanted to talk about the goal posts (hoping to nail them down so they do not move)15:14
n0anolove should be coming, as I understand it the patch is working, they just have to create some peformance numbers15:15
n0anoMikeSpreitzer1, which goal posts?15:15
*** Fdot has quit IRC15:15
*** fnaval_ has quit IRC15:15
MikeSpreitzer2for scalability15:15
*** MikeSpreitzer1 has quit IRC15:15
toan-tranwell, i'm curious so see the number as well15:15
n0anoaah, interesting question, typically that has always been - a good as possible15:15
toan-tranas I understand, LP solving is rather a costly15:15
n0anos/a good/as good15:15
garyki think that we are all curious about the numbers. i am not sure how many schedulers thay are using in thier test case. but i understand that they simulate 100's of nodes15:16
MikeSpreitzer2"as good as possible" begs the question of "possible" — which begs the question of other requirements15:16
garyktoan-tran: what is LP?15:16
n0anoMikeSpreitzer2, exactly15:16
toan-transorry, i'm talking about solver scheduler15:16
toan-tranmiss up a little15:17
toan-tranmess up15:17
garyktoan-tran: no problem.15:17
garyki think that is work in progress and hopefully when Yathi is back from his vacation there will be more information on that.15:17
MikeSpreitzer2OK, so this is what I was afraid of, no extrinsic "good enough" mark15:17
n0anoMikeSpreitzer2, sort of, currently we're good for about ~200 nodes, the goal at least is to do ~1000 nodes, would like to do ~1000015:18
n0anoI don't know if those are acceptable goals or not but they make sense to me15:18
*** MikeSpreitzer has joined #openstack-meeting15:19
toan-tran200 nodes on simulation or real test? and if simulation which simulator?15:19
MikeSpreitzerJust had another connectivity glitch, missed everything after the first numbers from n0ano15:19
MikeSpreitzerGlad to have a number15:19
n0anoMikeSpreitzer2, sort of, currently we're good for about ~200 nodes, the goal at least is to do ~1000 nodes, would like to do ~1000015:19
garyki think that rally (and may be wrong here) is a testing environment when one can simulate load15:19
n0anoI don't know if those are acceptable goals or not but they make sense to me15:19
* n0ano loves cut/paste15:20
*** Fdot has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
*** doron is now known as doron_afk15:20
*** Guest34448 has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
n0anotoan-tran, the ~200 nodes comes from real world usage, not simulation15:20
*** doron_afk is now known as doron15:20
*** scottda has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
MikeSpreitzerSo my group currently thinks our solver can do about 1K hosts, is unlikely to do 10K hosts well enough.15:20
garykMikeSpreitzer: i think that there are a number of different issues at hand15:21
garyk1. is the interactions with the database15:21
MikeSpreitzerI have started reading the Omega paper, which seems to be recommending multiple solvers with optimistic concurrency control as a way to scale beyond the ability of a single solver15:21
MikeSpreitzerYes, DB interaction is crucial15:21
n0anoI belive that Boris is claiming his memcache should be able to handle ~10000 which is why I `really` want to see his real perf numbers15:21
garyk2. each scheduler being able to have a real time picture of the current situation15:21
MikeSpreitzerIn our current code the DB is more of a bottleneck than the solver15:21
garyk3. placement complexity15:22
*** MikeSpreitzer2 has quit IRC15:22
garykyes, i agree. the db is the major bottleneck15:22
garyki think that is where boris-42's solution comes into place.15:22
MikeSpreitzerThat is why I raised the question of whether we could use NOSQL instead of SQL, it could be a major advance in DB efficiency.15:22
toan-tranMike: sorry, which paper are you taling about?15:22
garyki am not sure if it just touches on the problem or if it actually provides a real solution15:22
*** Mandell has quit IRC15:23
MikeSpreitzerThis year's EuroSys, a paper from Google folks on their Borg replacement called Omega15:23
garykMikeSpreitzer: can you please post alink if you have one15:23
MikeSpreitzerSomeone recommended it at the summit15:23
n0anoalso, what about the session where we talked about decisions that were `good enough`, not perfect, another way to scale up15:23
MikeSpreitzerThat's inherent in all our solver based approaches15:23
*** markpeek has quit IRC15:23
doronMikeSpreitzer: boris-42's suggestion was to replace db with memcache which can be sync'ed bwith several instances15:23
*** markpeek1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:23
doronthis should resolve the db issue.15:23
MikeSpreitzerBut only part of DB usage is that15:24
doronwell IIRC resource tracker should report to the scheduler15:24
MikeSpreitzerFor the Omega paper, just Google "Google Omega", it's the first hit15:24
doronand basically this should remove the need for a db15:24
toan-tranI have a remark on the implemented solver scheduler15:25
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:25
MikeSpreitzerWe do have a system with multiple moving parts regardless, so there has to be a DB for some level of coordination.15:25
n0anoMikeSpreitzer, this link15:25
n0ano#link http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feurosys2013.tudos.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2Fpaper%2FSchwarzkopf.pdf&ei=zIKLUqXUHIi2yAG4noDIAQ&usg=AFQjCNGy7xy2leYjXnSPgAJckQKX0qxung&sig2=i3S8xPB05-_bbzI8FxHDsQ&bvm=bv.56643336,d.aWc15:25
toan-tranit calls DB (RAMwiegher) once for getting the cost15:25
doronMikeSpreitzer: I agree, but stats are voletile15:25
toan-tranhowever, it does not reflex the Load Balacing policy as RAMWeigher doe15:26
*** dolphm has quit IRC15:26
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:27
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC15:27
*** lpeer has joined #openstack-meeting15:27
toan-tranbasically the objectif functions cannot be linear15:27
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting15:27
toan-tranbasically the objective function cannot be linear15:28
doronguys, this is boris-42's BP: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/no-db-scheduler15:28
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC15:28
*** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:28
*** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:29
garyki hope that next week boris-42 could join us to elaborate on thier developments15:29
boris-42garyk I am in vacation=)15:29
boris-42garyk yes I will joing15:30
boris-42garyk we are going to finish implementation15:30
garykok, enjoy the vacation. chat to you next week15:30
garykin addition to this yathi will hopefully be here next week to also discuss the constraints scheduling (i think that is what it is being called).15:31
garykPaulMurray: was there any intersting you want to add from your sessions?15:31
toan-trangaryk: +115:31
PaulMurraygaryk sorry got distracted15:31
PaulMurraydo you want me to update?15:32
*** jp_at_hp has joined #openstack-meeting15:32
garykPaulMurray: np. just wanted to know if you wanted to add anything from the session that you did on the scheduling at the summit15:32
PaulMurraythe main point was sorting out the order of work between me, Lianhau and boris15:32
PaulMurrayLianhau was doing scheduler metrics15:33
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC15:33
PaulMurrayand was ready to go, so I think several of his patches are merged now15:33
MikeSpreitzer(I'd like to queue up a little discussion of the ML thread "Introducing the new OpenStack service forContainers")15:33
*** ivasev has joined #openstack-meeting15:33
PaulMurrayI will add extensibility to the resource tracking15:33
*** fnaval_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:33
PaulMurrayFYI - there was a discussion about boris' work there too.15:34
*** jp_at_hp has left #openstack-meeting15:34
PaulMurrayIn case the wrong idea came across - I am all for it - just didn't15:34
garyksounds good.15:34
n0anofunny how all roads come back to Boris :-)15:35
PaulMurrayall roads come back to the db!15:35
PaulMurraythat's the problem15:35
n0anoPaulMurray, +115:35
*** Kharec has quit IRC15:35
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting15:35
PaulMurrayunless there are questions there is little more to add right now15:36
PaulMurrayjust getting code done.15:36
*** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting15:36
toan-tranI have a question on the scheduler & API if you don't mind15:36
alaskibtw, I'm around and catching up on the meeting.  Got mixed up with the time change15:36
*** doron is now known as doron_afk15:36
*** doron_afk is now known as doron15:36
garykok, thanks for the update15:36
garykalaski: hi. also wanted to ask if you have updates regarding your scheduling sessions15:37
PaulMurraytoan-tran - go ahead15:37
toan-tranI'm just curious where we're targetting with solver scheduler & instance group API15:37
toan-tranNova, Heat , or something else?15:37
*** Kharec has joined #openstack-meeting15:37
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC15:37
garyktoan-tran: good question.15:38
toan-tranBoris also proposed separating scheduler from nova & cinder15:38
toan-trancan we corporate?15:38
garykideally we would have liked the scheduler API to be able to define the who application. This was deemed to complicated at this time15:38
MikeSpreitzerContainers may also lead to separating scheduler15:38
*** avishayb has quit IRC15:38
alaskiI didn't have any scheduling sessions, but was at each of them and have opinions which I think are captured in etherpads overall15:38
doronbtw, neutron also need a scheduler...15:39
toan-tranok neutron ...15:39
garykThe solver scheduler will make use of the metadata key value pairs.15:39
MikeSpreitzerWill containers and VMs compete for the same hosts?  If so, they need a common scheduler15:39
n0anoneutron needs a scheduler??  that seems odd15:39
doronn0ano: yep15:39
doronthey use 'service' vms for routing15:39
doronand need to provide hints to control the placment15:40
MikeSpreitzerSome networks also have some degrees of freedom in choosing routes15:40
n0anoyet another push for Scheduler as a Service15:40
garykn0ano: the scheduler for neutron is pretty simple - just needs to select which dhcp or l3 node to use for the specific support15:40
*** dolphm_ is now known as dolphm15:40
garykat the moment it is round robin15:40
doronI was in a session they discussed it.15:40
alaskiMikeSpreitzer: re: containers, it can be done many different ways, but most likely it wil be done based on capabilities since they're different 'hypervisors'15:40
garykwhat we would like to do is add the ability to provide network proximity.15:40
n0anoI missed that, sounds like they're trying to get overly complex15:40
doronregardless of complexity the need for SaaS is gaining momentum15:40
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
doronSaaS- Scheduling as a service..15:41
doronso some of the summit ideas where very true15:41
doronin this context.15:41
toan-tranok so now we need a scheduler as a completely independent component15:41
dorontrue, but noi immediatly15:42
toan-trando we need an API like instance group API for it15:42
toan-tranor RPC?15:42
n0anotoan-tran, that's the implication, I haven't bought into the need yet15:42
doronfising scale should be a closer goal15:42
MikeSpreitzerLet me ask again very specifically: will containers and VMs compete for the same hosts?  (Regardless of whether they use different hypervisors on those hosts)15:42
doronthen we can start discussing saas.15:42
*** romcheg has left #openstack-meeting15:42
doronMikeSpreitzer: isn't it a matter of a use case?15:43
MikeSpreitzerdoron: ?15:43
alaskiMikeSpreitzer: with the current work a host will have either containers or VMs, not both15:43
ekarlsowhen's the plan to deliver a alpha or beta ?15:43
doronMikeSpreitzer: in some places you'd separate them an in other setups you allow such competition15:43
ekarlsowrong chan ;p15:44
doronMikeSpreitzer: and I'm not representing LXC ;)15:44
MikeSpreitzerSo I'll take alaski's answer for now15:44
MikeSpreitzeralaski: and you mean that it is the cloud provider's job to manually allocate hosts to those two roles, right?15:44
*** Loquacity has quit IRC15:45
toan-trani'm ok if we set up in Nova to work with group of VMs15:45
alaskitoan-tran: I agree with n0ano, it's a bit early to look at a separate scheduler.  But there was talk of using RPC from projects to that scheduler, but I'm not convinced of that approach.  I'm sure it will be heavily discussed at a later time15:45
alaskiMikeSpreitzer: yes15:45
toan-tranhowever, if we introducing new API then we have to plan far ahead15:45
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
*** pablosan has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
* doron recalls the Docker session, which suggested such a separation15:46
*** apmelton1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:46
garykalaski: i agree. it is too early to discuss these issues. regardin tge rpc, not sure if we would want nova to speak to cinder with rpc when there is a well deifned REST api15:46
toan-tranthe API targets the nova only or plans to Neutron after?15:46
MikeSpreitzergaryk: why do you say "nova speak to cinder with rpc"?  I did not get that from alaski's remark15:47
garyktoan-tran: at the moment we are only targeting nova. once we get the basic instance groups in then we can start to build on15:47
garykMikeSpreitzer: at the moment nova uses the cinder client to interface with cinder. this is rest based.15:47
*** Loquacity has joined #openstack-meeting15:47
MikeSpreitzergaryk: connection to alaski's remark?15:48
garykrpc would be like having a backdoor. it may be the long term solution but at the moment seems like a hack.15:48
*** _jmp__ has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
*** SpamapS_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
*** Vivek_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
MikeSpreitzer(still confused)15:48
*** aloga_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
garykMikeSpreitzer: sorry i do not understand. was alaski refering to an external scheduler or the nova one?15:48
toan-trangaryk: i agree that we aim to close target15:48
alaskigaryk: I was referring to an external one15:49
garykalaski: ok, thanks for the clarification15:49
*** thelorax123 has joined #openstack-meeting15:49
toan-tranbut we're creating an API before designing an architecture ! and that's not good15:49
toan-tranif we get the group into nova15:50
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC15:50
*** afazekas_ has quit IRC15:50
toan-tranand the API into v315:50
toan-tranthen once the question of separte scheduler does out15:50
toan-tranwe have to redraw the design15:50
*** avishayb has joined #openstack-meeting15:50
garyktoan-tran: i think that we should focus on what we have at the moment.15:50
toan-tranrecreating the API once again to include neutron & cinder15:51
MikeSpreitzerI see two architectures with an external scheduler.  1: optional thing that is upstream from Nova and maybe some other services too.  2: required element that every service calls under the covers.15:51
*** ArxCruz has quit IRC15:51
*** jamespag` has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** jamespag` has quit IRC15:51
*** jamespag` has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** tanisdl has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** sfineberg has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
MikeSpreitzer2: s/every/some/15:51
*** ArxCruz has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
n0anooption 2 will be harder to push through, I'd prefer option 1 if those are my only choices15:51
*** samalba_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** koohead17_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:52
MikeSpreitzerDo you see other choices?15:52
*** juice_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:52
toan-tranMike: so Nova (API) => Scheduler => Nova again?15:52
*** edmund has quit IRC15:52
*** Vivek has quit IRC15:52
*** jamespage has quit IRC15:52
*** samalba has quit IRC15:52
*** SpamapS has quit IRC15:52
*** mordred has quit IRC15:52
*** sfineberg_ has quit IRC15:52
*** _jmp_ has quit IRC15:52
*** juice has quit IRC15:52
*** aloga has quit IRC15:52
*** apmelton has quit IRC15:52
*** alpha_ori has quit IRC15:52
*** koolhead17 has quit IRC15:52
n0anooption 3 - no external scheduler service15:52
*** juice_ is now known as juice15:52
*** alpha_ori_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:52
MikeSpreitzert-t: that's #215:52
*** alpha_ori_ is now known as alpha_ori15:53
toan-tranMike: when what's #115:53
MikeSpreitzern0ano: does option three do anything cross service?15:53
*** atiwari has quit IRC15:53
*** sacharya has quit IRC15:53
n0anoMikeSpreitzer, nope, each service does it's own scheduling15:53
*** ArthurBerezin1 has left #openstack-meeting15:53
MikeSpreitzer#1: (multi-service scheduler) -> [Heat ->] (Nova || Cinder || ..)15:53
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** samalba_ is now known as samalba15:54
*** atiwari_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** atiwari_ has quit IRC15:54
toan-tranMike: oh, i'm thinking like Heat -> scheduler -> nova ...15:54
*** tanisdl has quit IRC15:54
garykn0ano: the cross service scheduling is where things become of value. for example we want a cinder volume to be close to to the nova instance15:54
n0anoI put option 3 out for completeness, make sure we know what were are deciding upon15:54
garykthat is ciritical for performance15:54
*** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
MikeSpreitzerWell, orchestration is downstream from joint decision making15:54
garykif one is running a best effort cloud then cool.15:54
*** tanisdl has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
garykbut in order to provide a competitive service one needs to be able to provide some added value15:55
n0anoI've always been confused, exactly what does orchestration do and how does it interact with scheduling15:55
*** pablosan has quit IRC15:55
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC15:55
toan-trann0no: orchestration of workflow15:56
toan-tranit does not do scheduling (lcoation of VMs)15:56
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:56
toan-tranit only decides which VM should be initiated first15:56
MikeSpreitzerI was surprised at the claim that "orchestration means everything to everyone".  It thought it was agreed to mean calling the various service APIs in the right order to get things done.15:56
garyki think that the orchestration and scheduling are mutually exclusive. but that is my opinion15:56
MikeSpreitzer.. specifically to handle dependencies between resources15:57
alaskiorchestration is a very overloaded term.  it's used to talk about workflows within a service or creation of resources across services15:57
MikeSpreitzercreate/update/delete time dependencies15:57
garykalaski: agreed15:57
toan-tranalsaki: +115:57
n0anogaryk, sounds like they are more orthogonal than mutually exclusive but yes, not related15:57
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting15:57
MikeSpreitzeryes, orthogonal15:57
* n0ano loves the term orthogonal15:58
*** tianst has quit IRC15:58
MikeSpreitzerexcept that it makes no sense to do joint decision making downstream from orchestration15:58
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
garykyes, that is a better way of describing it15:58
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
toan-tranin my understanding, the orchestrator deicdes which goes first: scheduling, configuration, rollback, etc15:58
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
MikeSpreitzerSo, technically, "independent"15:58
*** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
garykit looks like we are at the end of the hour15:59
garykhopefully next week boris-42 will be here for the performance part15:59
*** pablosan has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
*** MikeSpreitzer1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
garykand yathi for the scheuling part15:59
*** mordred has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
MikeSpreitzer1lost some stuff in another connectivity glitch15:59
MikeSpreitzer1but we must be done now15:59
MikeSpreitzer1I'll read the log15:59
garyki am going to hand the baton back to n0ano and next week he'll run the meeting15:59
n0anogood discussion, let's continue this next week.15:59
n0anogaryk, great, now you guys will have me to beat up upon :-)16:00
doronthanks guys16:00
n0anotnx all16:00
garykso chat to you guys next week16:00
toan-tranthanks, bye16:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"16:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 16:00:38 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)16:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-11-19-15.02.html16:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-11-19-15.02.txt16:00
*** BillArnold has left #openstack-meeting16:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-11-19-15.02.log.html16:00
*** MikeSpreitzer2 has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** doron is now known as doron_afk16:00
primemin1sterp#startmeeting hyper-v16:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 16:00:58 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is primemin1sterp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.16:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.16:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: hyper-v)"16:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'hyper_v'16:01
*** doron_afk is now known as doron16:01
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC16:01
primemin1sterphi everyone16:01
*** PaulMurray has quit IRC16:01
*** primemin1sterp is now known as primeministerp16:01
*** devlaps has joined #openstack-meeting16:01
primeministerpwe'll give the others a minute or 216:01
*** ativelkov has left #openstack-meeting16:02
*** jmontemayor has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
*** MikeSpreitzer2 has quit IRC16:03
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
alexpilottihey there16:03
*** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC16:03
primeministerpalexpilotti: hey now16:03
*** MikeSpreitzer has quit IRC16:03
primeministerppnavarro: hi pedro16:03
pnavarrohi !16:03
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
primeministerphi everyone16:04
primeministerpfigured we'd run though some updates16:04
*** adalbas has quit IRC16:04
primeministerpalexpilotti: you had 2 that you wanted to address correct16:04
*** MikeSpreitzer1 has quit IRC16:04
*** eharney has quit IRC16:04
ociuhanduhi all16:04
alexpilotticloudbase-init updates16:05
primeministerpociuhandu: hey tavi16:05
alexpilottiand ceilometer fixes16:05
primeministerp#topic cloudbase-init16:05
*** adam_g is now known as adam_g_afk16:05
primeministerpalexpilotti: .. there were updates to cloudbase-init?16:06
*** sarob has quit IRC16:07
alexpilottiso, especially given all the recent work on heat templates16:07
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
alexpilottiwe worked on cloudbase-init to smooth a couple of issues that we had16:07
*** thouveng has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** adalbas has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
alexpilottiin particular we got rid of the extra reboot required when you change host name16:07
alexpilottithe trick is that we run cloudbase-init twice16:08
alexpilottionce during the specialize phase of sysprep16:08
*** koohead17_ is now known as koolhead1716:08
alexpilottiand the second time as a service, starting it in setupcomplete.cmd16:08
alexpilottithis way we solved also all the race consitions that users were randomly experiencing16:09
alexpilottidue to teh service being started while WMI was still not configured16:09
*** jgallard has left #openstack-meeting16:09
alexpilottithe next feature we're gonan add is WinRM support16:09
alexpilottiwe need it for CI testing of cloudbase-init16:10
alexpilottiand for users that want to access the VMs w/o RDP16:10
alexpilottiok, that's it16:10
primeministerpalexpilotti: great thx16:10
alexpilottiAH, and we updated the 2012 R2 eval VMs :-)16:11
primeministerp#topic 2012 R2 eval VMs16:11
*** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting16:11
primeministerpalexpilotti: do you have a url?16:11
*** sarob has quit IRC16:11
alexpilotti#link http://www.cloudbase.it/ws2012r2/16:12
primeministerpalexpilotti: great thx16:12
*** IlyaE has quit IRC16:12
primeministerpalexpilotti: ceilometer fixes?16:12
*** rongze has quit IRC16:13
primeministerp#topic ceilometer fixes16:13
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC16:14
alexpilottiSo we had a few bug fixes for ceilometer16:14
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting16:14
alexpilottithey are all up for review / reviewed16:14
*** jamespag` is now known as jamespage16:14
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC16:14
alexpilottiIBBM is doing a great job in the review process16:15
*** katyafervent has joined #openstack-meeting16:15
*** mrodden has quit IRC16:15
*** ruhe has quit IRC16:15
alexpilottiwe should IMO thing about trying to move the scheduling to one where the guys from IBM China could join16:15
alexpilottis/IBBM/IBM/ :-)16:15
primeministerpalexpilotti: we can discuss16:16
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting16:16
alexpilottiso everything is good and well16:16
primeministerpalexpilotti: ok16:16
primeministerp#topic ci update16:16
primeministerpso I've put a push for additonal hw and I'm waiting to hear back16:17
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
primeministerphowever the first 2 racks of hyperv nodes should be ready by end of day thur16:17
primeministerpalexpilotti: we still need to get you connected btw16:18
*** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-meeting16:18
primeministerpalexpilotti: let's touch base before you leave16:18
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting16:18
*** dkranz has quit IRC16:19
primeministerpour zuul endpoint is also up, I still have the keys to connect and have verified I can get a data stream16:19
*** s3wong has quit IRC16:19
primeministerpadditoinally In terms of overally windows python bits, i've done some work w/ the chococolatey folks so that we can use coocolatey as the package provider16:20
primeministerpthis will get us to pix16:20
primeministerper pip16:20
primeministerpadditionally with a mingw package I had Rob rebuild for me16:21
*** sergmelikyan has quit IRC16:21
primeministerpwe can hopefully use pip for the rest16:21
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting16:22
primeministerpociuhandu: I also used your notes16:22
primeministerpociuhandu: on the mingw stuff16:22
primeministerpthat's all I have for now16:23
*** haomaiwang has quit IRC16:23
primeministerpalexpilotti: ociuhandu anything to add16:23
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting16:23
russellbi have something ... hyper-v-rdp-console blueprint status16:23
primeministerprussellb: sure16:23
primeministerpthat reminded me16:23
russellbjust looking for user docs16:23
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC16:24
russellband then i'll get on the code review16:24
alexpilottirussellb: hi16:24
primeministerprussellb: sure thing16:24
alexpilottirussellb: sure, it's on top of my list16:24
russellbjust wanted to make sure you knew what i was waiting on16:24
primeministerpI have some ironic stuff to talk about it16:24
*** avishayb has quit IRC16:24
primeministerpmordred: ping16:25
mordredprimeministerp: I was just talking about you in a meeting yesterday16:25
alexpilottirussellb: I'm still flying around this week, next one will be pure hacking :-)16:25
primeministerpmordred: i took a stab at it16:25
mordredprimeministerp: woot!16:25
primeministerpmordred: I need to rename some stuff16:25
primeministerpand test16:25
russellbalexpilotti: ok16:25
mordredNobodyCam: ping ^^16:25
alexpilottirussellb: so I should be done will all the docs and such16:25
*** markpeek1 has quit IRC16:25
mordredNobodyCam: primeministerp is adding windows support to ironic16:25
primeministerpmordred: however i've been swamped w/ other things16:25
NobodyCamok huh16:25
mordredNobodyCam: have you guys met?16:25
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
primeministerpas of now I have this16:26
primeministerpif you want to look16:26
*** Fdot has quit IRC16:26
primeministerpi added a template16:26
primeministerpas well as a method for creating only 1 partition16:26
NobodyCamat the summit16:26
NobodyCamgood morning primeministerp16:27
primeministerpNobodyCam: hi there16:27
*** vito-ordaz has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
*** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
mordredsweet. I'm excited to see that work! I just emailed that link around to a few people so that people who are less scatterbrained than me might help keep up with it :)16:27
primeministerpmordred: perfect16:27
primeministerpmordred: I want to remove the "window"s16:28
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC16:28
primeministerpand keep it generic16:28
primeministerpI need to find out the version of syslinux16:28
primeministerpbecause i'm currently using proxydhcp16:28
primeministerpand I think i had to do something different in my case16:28
*** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
primeministerpall it means is the template would change16:29
*** ildikov has quit IRC16:29
primeministerpbut the process is the same16:29
*** thingee has left #openstack-meeting16:29
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC16:29
*** vito-ordaz has joined #openstack-meeting16:30
primeministerpmordred: so I have person who just got back, i'm going to have him try it out16:30
primeministerpmordred: as my cycles are thin16:30
primeministerpmordred: as soon i can confirm it works I plan on commiting the bits16:30
*** vijendar has quit IRC16:31
*** ruhe has quit IRC16:31
primeministerpmordred: NobodyCam however if you both want to take a look and at least let me know if my thinking is correct, i'd appreciate it.16:31
mordredprimeministerp: awesome. well do!16:32
primeministerpmordred: perfecto16:32
NobodyCamsure, mordred did you include in that link email?16:32
primeministerp#topic ironic windows support16:34
primeministerp#link https://github.com/ppouliot/ironic16:34
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
primeministerpanyone have anything else16:34
NobodyCamawesome TY16:34
primeministerpNobodyCam: i'll probably be following up w/ you later16:34
NobodyCam:) sure16:34
primeministerpok then, I'm ending it16:35
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting16:35
NobodyCamwhere is openstack user16:36
*** IlyaE has quit IRC16:37
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** nprivalova has quit IRC16:38
*** changbl has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** jp_at_hp has joined #openstack-meeting16:39
*** jp_at_hp has quit IRC16:39
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting16:39
*** zbitter has joined #openstack-meeting16:40
*** yaguang has quit IRC16:40
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting16:40
*** dguitarbite has quit IRC16:42
*** dkranz has quit IRC16:42
*** vijendar has joined #openstack-meeting16:43
*** ativelkov has left #openstack-meeting16:43
*** zaneb has quit IRC16:44
*** rossella_s_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
*** zbitter is now known as zaneb16:44
*** rossella_s has quit IRC16:44
*** rossella_s_ is now known as rossella_s16:44
*** doron is now known as doron_afk16:44
*** diogogmt has joined #openstack-meeting16:45
*** lexx has quit IRC16:46
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC16:46
*** sdake_ has quit IRC16:46
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC16:46
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:47
*** sdake_ has quit IRC16:47
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:47
*** hemna has quit IRC16:49
*** dprince has quit IRC16:50
*** sgordon has left #openstack-meeting16:50
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting16:52
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting16:52
*** garyk has quit IRC16:53
*** ociuhandu has left #openstack-meeting16:53
*** DennyZhang has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** lexx has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting16:58
*** chandankumar has quit IRC16:59
*** luis_fdez has joined #openstack-meeting17:01
*** sergmelikyan has joined #openstack-meeting17:02
*** sergmelikyan has quit IRC17:03
*** mmcgrath has joined #openstack-meeting17:04
*** markwash has quit IRC17:04
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
*** changbl has quit IRC17:05
*** afazekas_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:08
*** hemna has quit IRC17:09
*** sdake_ has quit IRC17:09
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC17:10
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:10
*** pdmars has quit IRC17:11
*** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting17:13
*** pdmars has quit IRC17:13
*** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting17:14
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC17:14
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** joesavak has quit IRC17:15
EmilienMluis_fdez: i think you failed the timing, time has changed :)17:15
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** vito-ordaz has joined #openstack-meeting17:16
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting17:16
*** toan-tran has quit IRC17:17
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC17:17
*** IlyaE has quit IRC17:20
*** nermina has quit IRC17:22
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting17:22
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting17:22
*** fbo is now known as fbo_away17:24
*** luis_fdez has quit IRC17:24
*** vuil has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
*** mrodden has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
*** belmoreira has quit IRC17:25
*** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting17:25
*** changbl has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** lexx_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** flaper87 is now known as flaper87|afk17:27
*** ItSANgo has quit IRC17:28
*** alfism has joined #openstack-meeting17:28
*** rongze has quit IRC17:28
*** lexx has quit IRC17:29
*** ItSANgo_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** comay has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** twoputt has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** twoputt_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** belmoreira has quit IRC17:30
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC17:30
*** luis_fdez has joined #openstack-meeting17:30
*** reed has quit IRC17:30
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC17:31
*** SpamapS_ is now known as SpamapS17:31
*** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting17:32
*** DinaBelova has quit IRC17:32
*** alfism has left #openstack-meeting17:35
*** doron_afk has quit IRC17:38
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC17:39
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting17:41
*** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting17:42
*** boris-42 has quit IRC17:44
*** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC17:47
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting17:48
*** stevemar-droid has joined #openstack-meeting17:48
*** marekd has joined #openstack-meeting17:48
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC17:50
*** pnavarro has quit IRC17:50
*** derekh has quit IRC17:51
*** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting17:52
*** fabio_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:54
*** fabio_ is now known as fabiog17:54
*** nermina has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** ericwb has joined #openstack-meeting17:58
*** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting17:58
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting17:59
*** rossella_s has quit IRC18:00
*** dstanek has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
dolphmayoung: morganfainberg: gyee: bknudson: o/18:01
*** topol has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
*** epim has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
dolphmgyee: i think you broke your arm18:01
dolphmgyee: or it's attached to your head18:01
ayoung   \.o./18:01
topolI made it on time this week!!!18:01
dolphmgyee: either way, see a doctor18:01
devlapsmorning all!18:01
*** jamielennox has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
dolphmtopol: we're having a meeting this week!18:01
*** thelorax123 has quit IRC18:01
gyeeyou should see morganfainberg18:01
topolwe had one without you last week!18:01
dolphmi "cancelled" last weeks meeting due to time change + post-conference naps18:01
*** nkinder has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
topolthanks for letting the rest of us know...18:02
*** thelorax123 has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
dolphmtopol: i put it on the agenda.18:02
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
dolphm#startmeeting keystone18:02
openstackdolphm: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress.  Use #endmeeting first.18:02
*** arunkant has quit IRC18:02
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"18:03
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 18:02:59 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:03
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-11-19-16.00.html18:03
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-11-19-16.00.txt18:03
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-11-19-16.00.log.html18:03
dolphmlol goodbye hyperv18:03
dolphm#startmeeting keystone18:03
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 18:03:14 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dolphm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.18:03
*** arunkant has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.18:03
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:03
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'keystone'18:03
ayoungall of our chatter will be at the end of their logs18:03
*** divyeshk has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
ayoungdolphm, will be #2 in most lines spoken18:03
dolphmprimeministerp: just ended your meeting :)18:03
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
topoldolphm cleaning up after others...18:04
dolphmi'm going to ignore the agenda order a bit and leave bigger topics for the end...18:04
dolphmso first up--18:04
*** nachi has joined #openstack-meeting18:04
dolphm#topic Deprecation of keystone.middleware.auth_token18:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Deprecation of keystone.middleware.auth_token (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:04
dolphmmorganfainberg: o/18:04
bknudsonI thought it was deprecated.18:04
morganfainbergi see the markings in the etherpad now18:04
dolphm#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56143/18:04
dolphmbknudson: it's deprecated18:04
*** DinaBelova has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
morganfainbergi'll unblock the removal review and we're good18:05
*** danwent has quit IRC18:05
dolphmbut we're not using the new deprecated() call on import18:05
morganfainbergi just wasn't 100% sure.18:05
bknudsonI think it's time to remove it.18:05
dolphmand i don't think it can be completely removed until the end of icehouse, given the summit outcome?18:05
gyeethe time has come18:05
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
*** jsergent has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
dolphmwas it deprecated during grizzly dev?18:05
dolphmif so, then rm it18:05
morganfainbergit was moved ot keystoneclient in grizzly18:06
dolphmoh, then done18:06
dolphmkill it!18:06
bknudsonwould be nice to have a blueprint for this one.18:06
dolphm#topic Update keystoneclient requirements failed in grenade18:06
bknudsonor but18:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Update keystoneclient requirements failed in grenade (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:06
dolphmbknudson: interesting idea18:06
ayoungdolphm, if people are tracking master and have not updated that particualr one, this will be a wakeup call, but an easy one for them to adjust to18:06
bknudsonjust so we advertise that it's removed.18:06
dolphm#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/125205718:06
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1252057 in grenade "keystoneclient requirements update fails grenade" [Undecided,New]18:06
dolphm#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56490/18:06
topolits like 1 file in a crisis18:06
ayoungbknudson, how a bout a generic deprecation blueprint?18:07
*** rongze has quit IRC18:07
bknudsonayoung: I like the general deprecation blueprint.18:07
stevemar-droidAyoung, That would be good18:07
ayoung#action bknudson to file blueprint as catch-all for deprecations18:07
topolquestion on deprecation. If I wanted to take a todo to deprecate stats do all I need to do is add the deprecated decorator evrywhere or do I need new test cases too?18:08
* ayoung knows how to delegate!18:08
dolphmayoung: ++18:08
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC18:08
ayoungtopol, oooh18:08
dolphmtopol: dstanek: thoughts on testing for deprecations?18:08
ayoungtopol, what if the tests failed on any deprecation warnings?18:08
*** ygbo has quit IRC18:08
topoljust asking, not recommending18:09
ayoungtopol, too late18:09
*** DennyZhang has quit IRC18:09
dstaneki don't know that testing that a method is being deprecated is all that valuable18:09
ayoung#action topol to make tests fail on deprecation warnings18:09
dolphmayoung: we can move in that direction on a more granular basis (fatally error on items that have been deprecated for a release or two)18:09
morganfainbergyou can't make all test always fail on deprecation warnings.18:09
*** dvarga has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
morganfainbergyou'd need to specifiy the release older-than to make it fail.18:09
ayoungmorganfainberg, sure you can18:09
dolphmayoung: no, you can't18:09
ayoungyou can't deprecate without providing an alternative18:10
ayoungah...cux of testing the told code, right18:10
jamielennoxthe only reason i can see that being useful is if we want to maintain some sort of list of what is deprecated in the code and have a test to make sure they really are18:10
*** shardy is now known as shardy_afk18:10
dstanekayoung: you still keep the tests the exercise the old code18:10
jamielennoxotherwise i don't think i'd bother18:10
dolphmdstanek: ++18:10
morganfainbergi want to work with dkranz and leverage the same mechanism as the exception tracking in gate to do a similar thing for tracking deprecated methods/functions18:10
gyeeits deprecated people, moving on18:11
bknudsonyour tests exercising the old code can check that a deprecation message was output18:11
topolso net is we can just start shoving deprecated on the things you want to deprecate?  Should we split those up?18:11
bknudsontopol: split what up?18:11
morganfainbergtopol, ther eis a review for V2 controllers being deprecated, that is basically the approach.18:12
ayoungtopol, so, while you don't need new tests for the old methods, you do need new methods, and @deprecated tells what to use in palce of the old method18:12
topolat the summit wasnt there a huge list of agreed things to deprecate?18:12
*** afazekas_ has quit IRC18:12
morganfainberg#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/50491/18:12
dolphmtopol: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-keystone-internal-apis18:12
ayoungso one way or anothter you are going to need a new test,  either to continue testing the old code, or to check the new18:12
morganfainbergayoung, while it's deprecated you need to continue testing the old code and check the new18:13
morganfainberguntil it's removed that is.18:13
dolphmi think we've covered deprecation pretty well for now :) let's move on to bknudson's grenade failure...18:13
morganfainbergthen the old test can go away18:13
ayoungmorganfainberg, we are in violent agreement18:13
dolphmayoung: ++18:13
ayoungproblem with grenade failures is then you need to call in EOD18:13
dolphmbknudson: care to explain/advertise the issue with grenade?18:13
bknudsonI added this topic because updating the requirements was a bit of a challenge recently18:13
bknudsonand still doesn't work... because of this grenade issue.18:14
bknudsonwell, it fails in grenade... not sure if grenade is the problem.18:14
morganfainbergbknudson, granade for master hasn't been bumped to stable/havana18:14
morganfainbergwhich is likely the issue here18:14
bknudsonok, so maybe this is a non-issue.18:14
bknudsonwasn't sure if opening a bug to grenade was the correct thing to do.18:14
bknudsonit's just failing and I don't know what the problem is.18:15
jamielennoxwhat is the collision with? having the requirements unversioned in keystoneclient is wrong but should make it easier in this case18:15
dolphmdtroyer: ping ^18:15
ayoungbknudson, looks like glance needs a patch18:15
morganfainbergi saw something in #openstack-infra about grenade not being bumped yet.  also it's impacting nova's collapse migrations work18:15
bknudsonit complains about a mismatch of requirements.18:15
ayoungwhy did they lock to that version of iso860118:15
morganfainbergerror: Installed distribution iso8601 0.1.4 conflicts with requirement iso8601>=0.1.818:15
dolphmayoung: there should be a bug referenced by the commit to pin in openstack/requirements18:16
jamielennoxbut who requested 0.1.4 because this seems like there bug18:16
morganfainbergiso8601 has (as i recall)... a source of random bugs.18:16
bknudsonis it the "old" (stable/havana) that needs the update?18:16
dolphmayoung: and a bug to unpin18:16
ayoungdolphm, looking now18:16
morganfainberghavana https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/stable/havana/global-requirements.txt#L2318:16
morganfainberguses 0.1.818:16
*** ruhe has quit IRC18:17
morganfainbergat least it should be according to global reqs18:17
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 961590 in glance "pip glance-2012.1~rc1 missing dependency iso8601" [Low,Fix released]18:17
jamielennoxthat's from a whie ago18:18
*** _jmp__ is now known as _jmp_18:18
ayoungFixes bug: 124250118:18
*** flaper87|afk is now known as flaper8718:18
*** shardy_afk is now known as shardy18:18
ayoung iso8601>=0.1.7 "parse_date()" could successfully handle date string18:19
ayoung    which only have date part like YYYY-MM-DD, it caused two Glance test18:19
ayoung    cases failure.18:19
ayoungguessing there is a "not" missing in that commit message18:19
dolphmnow i remember this conversation on list -- i was in favor of bumping to 0.1.8 :P18:19
bknudsonI think it was 0.1.7 had a bug that it didn't work anymore18:19
morganfainbergbknudson, that is my understanding18:19
*** hk_peter has joined #openstack-meeting18:20
ayoungah, wait...is the lower version locked  in Nova?18:20
dstanekso is this just an issue of another project having conflicting requirements?18:20
bknudsonthis is a tricky kind of problem because it involves so many different parts... grenade/keystoneclient/glance/stable/master...18:20
jamielennoxit seems like, so this is the bug of whoever locks to 0.1.418:21
ayoungbknudson, nah, we need them all to be in sync on dates18:21
morganfainbergayoung, nope nova is >=0.1.418:21
morganfainbergso, 0.8.1 should be acceptable18:21
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting18:22
*** mrunge has quit IRC18:22
bknudsonthere's no requirements.txt in glance stable/grizzly? http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/glance/tree/?h=stable/grizzly18:22
*** jpich has joined #openstack-meeting18:22
morganfainbergbknudson, tools/pip-requires ?18:22
bknudsonmorganfainberg: thanks, it's iso8601<=0.1.4 in there.18:22
morganfainbergbknudson, yep.18:22
dolphmbknudson: in where?18:23
morganfainberg#link http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/glance/tree/tools/pip-requires?h=stable/grizzly#n1918:23
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting18:23
dolphmwhy are we worried about grizzly here?18:23
ayoungdolphm, grenade18:23
dolphmgrizzly -> master migration?18:23
bknudsonso maybe it's just a matter of grenade needs to use havana and not master.18:23
dolphmbknudson: sounds right18:23
morganfainbergonce grenade bumps to stable/havana my guess is this will go away18:23
ayoungupgrade downgrade, guessing they are using the starting point being the stable branch?18:24
bknudsonI'll update the bug.18:24
dolphmbknudson: there's not a bug to move to stable/havana https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bugs18:24
bknudsonmorganfainberg: how did you know about the grenade issue?18:25
dolphmbknudson: maybe revise the title of your bug with the underlying issue?18:25
bknudsonthat it wasn't using stable/havana?18:25
dolphmbknudson: discussed on list, i think18:25
morganfainbergbknudson, i lurk in in #openstack-infra and i think something on the ML18:25
bknudsonok, that answers my questions about this.18:26
dolphm( bknudson- i think i can help you after the meeting on "assignments-doesn't-check-identity" -- mind if i skip that for the meeting, or save it for open discussion? )18:26
bknudsonwe can skip that one.18:27
ayoungReminder that I1 is going to sneak up on us.18:27
dolphmwoo! i think this next one is going to eat the next 30 minutes18:27
bknudsonalso, don't see henrynash.18:27
dolphmayoung: ++ two weeks!18:27
dolphm#topic Tenantless role assignments18:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Tenantless role assignments (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:27
gyeedolphm, is the detail schedule out yet?18:27
morganfainbergdolphm, oooooooh18:27
dolphmso first point -- not global role assignments18:27
ayoungRoles are always scoped18:28
dolphmgyee: yes, pay more attention to things https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icehouse_Release_Schedule18:28
*** johnthetubaguy has quit IRC18:28
*** jamielennox_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:28
ayoungeither to  a Domain or a Project18:28
*** johnthetubaguy has joined #openstack-meeting18:28
dolphmayoung: so this is a new scope18:28
dolphmand it's explicitly scoped to a a lack of context18:28
ayoungdolphm, "service scoped"  will make atiwari happy18:28
dolphmnot *any* context18:28
bknudsonturkey / football / reviews.18:28
gyeek, looks like it just got updated18:28
atiwariI think all the identity roles does not require a tenant18:28
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC18:29
dstanekwhat does the scope apply to if it's not global?18:29
dolphmlooking at a bunch of API's in openstack, they all fall into one of two categories...18:29
ayoungshardy, this is your use case.  Care to explain, or to link to an explanation18:29
dolphm1) it's an inheritenly multi-tenant operation (create compute)18:29
bknudsonone oddity is if you have admin role on any project then you have admin auth all over keystone18:29
dolphm2) it's an inherently tenant-less operation (create domain)18:29
dolphmor service catalog management18:30
shardyayoung: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/heat-management-api18:30
dolphmor some/all of heat's proposed administrative api18:30
morganfainbergso, to do project-management admin you'd still need to rescope to that project?18:30
shardyayoung: tl;dr, folks want a way to list all stacks owned by heat, not scoped to a tenant18:30
dolphmmorganfainberg: i'd like that to be the result, yes18:30
morganfainbergdolphm, i like the idea18:30
*** jamielennox is now known as jamielennox|away18:31
morganfainbergdolphm, i really dislike the "admin here admin everywhere" setup18:31
shardyayoung: stacks are what users of heat create18:31
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
dolphmso, the only way to consume a tenant-less assignment (that i'm in favor of) would be to generate an unscoped token -- which becomes an explicit operation to gain authorization for tenant-less operations18:31
dolphmmorganfainberg: i think we all do!18:31
shardyayoung: the point is, service deployers want a way of getting global information, like number of resources in a certain state, ie globally18:31
dolphmthis would be a way to fix "admin"ness18:31
bknudsonyou can assign roles for unscoped tokens?18:31
dolphmbknudson: that's the idea here18:31
morganfainbergbknudson, i don't think so at the moment.  that is the proposal18:32
atiwarior scope a role to service and for tenant less that wd be scoped to Keystone18:32
dolphmmorganfainberg: ++18:32
ayoungdolphm, so to date we have domains, and we have projects.  Domains own projects.  We have the Default domain, which has been suggested as the nominee for the "admin" domain.  But,  would having an explicit admin domain  solve this problem?18:32
bknudsona token scoped to a service could have roles ?18:33
ayoung"admin"  would mean "admin role on the default domain" or "admin domain"18:33
bknudsonlike heat service has admin role18:33
ayoungatiwari, Keystone is a service18:33
dolphmayoung: abusing the "default" domain in that way is insanely terrible18:33
*** david-lyle is now known as david-lyle_lunch18:33
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting18:33
dolphmayoung: so yes, this would be a more explicit approach that avoids that hack/abuse18:33
morganfainbergayoung, if we made the "admin domain" implicit, as in a code construct not a DB construct, i could see that as viable.  but i think you get more flexabvility with unscoped roles.18:33
ayoungdolphm, "default" probablty, but having an explict admin domain as a way to collect up the service resources is a valid use of the current abstraction18:34
ayoungroles are always scoped, we just need to determine to what are they scoped in this case.18:34
ayoungEither an existing abstraction or a new one18:34
ayoungatiwari has been pushing for service scoped roles for a while18:34
shardyayoung: would that require all services to know about domains though?18:34
atiwariayoung,  yes but it does not have any roles18:34
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting18:35
*** sarob has quit IRC18:35
morganfainbergshardy, if done properly, perhaps not18:35
gyeeunscoped roles are essentially scoped to keystone service, as atiwari mentioned18:35
atiwariif we create keystone specific role and make those roles assign to domain only18:35
gyeejust like unscoped tokens18:35
henrynash(henry-nash) joint (sorry to be late)18:35
atiwariHeat issue can be addressed18:35
ayounggyee, so scope them to a service, and make keystone that service18:35
henrynashjoined, even18:35
dolphmi don't think this proposal is new -- this is the valid use case for "global roles", but those deeply ingrained in the "multitenant architecture" train of thought find "global authorization" to be an offensive over step18:35
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting18:35
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:35
ayoungbut...still think services should be owned by a domain18:35
morganfainberghenrynash, welcome.18:35
dolphmhopefully i'm just wording that use case differently and narrowing the scope of application as much as possible18:35
ayoung"admin domain"  which, if not set, would be the "default domain"18:35
dstaneki see how this helps the services act in a global way, but how does it help the "admin"ness issue?18:36
morganfainbergdstanek, you wouldn't have admin powers in this context unles you were using a service scoped role vs. a domain/project role.  project/domain admin could only act on project/domain18:36
bknudsonwe'll need something to set in the policy.json.18:36
morganfainbergdstanek, that would be part of this change in scope capability18:36
dolphmi'd also like to kill the terminology of "unscoped tokens" in favor of "tenantless tokens" along the way -- there is and has always been a scope to "unscoped" tokens18:37
dolphm"tenantless" makes that a bit more clear18:37
morganfainbergprojectless? domainless?18:37
topolso how does this make things simple for shardy's use case?18:37
ayoungprojects are generic containers.  Domains are containers of projects.  Services, and even "role definitions" are resources, and should be put into a namespace.  Samething as we insit on with out python code18:37
atiwariayoung, service owned by domain on a project18:37
*** rongze has quit IRC18:37
dolphmmorganfainberg: projectless implies domain-scoped, and vice versa to me -- but i'm open to alternative suggestions18:37
dolphmmorganfainberg: thinking in terms of traditional tenancy led me to "tenantless"18:38
morganfainbergdolphm, maybe unscoped = service scoped.  always scoped tokens now.18:38
atiwariby keystone is little different it can not be owned by a domain18:38
dolphmmorganfainberg: regardless of what your deployment considers to be a "tenant" (per domain or per project)18:38
ayoungmorganfainberg, and implicitly, on keystone unscoped == scoped to keystone18:38
gyeeunscoped = keystone-scoped18:38
morganfainbergayoung, yes.18:38
morganfainbergayoung, +++ exactly18:38
ayoungso, just be clear, theser are "service scoped role assignments"  but atiwari 's proposal goes further18:39
shardytopol: If a request context doesnt' contain a request context, and the user has a special admin-ish role, we allow them to get data not filtered by tenant18:39
shardytopol: sorry doesn't contain a project in the context18:39
ayoungrole definitions should be scoped to other roles, and should be managed resources18:39
atiwariayoung, lets not messup with role assignment18:39
gyeeayoung, atiwari's proposal solved *service lifecycle management* use case18:39
ayoungatiwari, we need to address it18:39
bknudsondoes the service (via auth_token_middleware) need to know that this is a service-scoped token?18:39
*** yuanz has quit IRC18:39
topolwhat is the special admin-ish role?18:40
atiwaribut let role derive the service18:40
ayoungatiwari, that doesn't work18:40
dolphmbknudson: yes18:40
topolshardy sounds like the mob is moving to doing this with a service scoped token?18:40
shardytopol: some role you create and put in the heat config file18:40
*** sarob has quit IRC18:40
ayoungthat implies that a role is always per service, and that breaks all the existing roles18:40
dolphmbknudson: it wouldn't provide a X-PROJECT-* or X-DOMAIN-* but there would still be X-ROLES18:40
shardytopol: that would also work18:40
ayoungatiwari, we hashed this out...18:40
ayoungroles are 1st class objects already18:40
morganfainbergdolphm, ah for external services to consume service scoped18:41
dolphmi.e. heat!18:41
ayoungwe make it such that some container (I really don't care which) owns a role definition, and we provide for nesting of role definitions18:41
gyeeayoung, atiwari's proposal is backward-compatible18:41
*** johnthetubaguy has quit IRC18:41
*** yuanz has joined #openstack-meeting18:41
ayounggyee, not as it was origianll written it wasnt18:41
morganfainbergayoung, roles all the way down.18:41
ayoungmorganfainberg, pretty muich18:41
ayoungbascially, role-defs need a namespace18:42
gyeeexisting roles will be migrated to keystone namespace18:42
ayoungbut we don't need to inject yet another abstraction18:42
ayounggyee, nope18:42
atiwariayoung, but it can not be managed by service deployer18:42
ayoungthat does not work18:42
dolphmgyee: then you break everyone18:42
ayoungthos roles are "project" focused, not "keystone" focused"18:42
morganfainbergayoung, i'm fine with that approach. i don't want another domain / project grouping mechanism.  roles can contain roles and it's logical.18:42
gyeedolphm, no, this is the way we migrated the existing resource to the *default* domain when we introduced domain18:42
ayoungmorganfainberg, that is what I am proposing18:42
*** jamielennox_ has quit IRC18:42
*** jamielennox|away is now known as jamielennox18:42
morganfainbergayoung, more vehement agreement!18:43
ayoungnamespaceing roles to services is only one view of them, and it only makes sense in the use cases atiwari is looking to implement, but I would not say that his issue is a general problem in Openstack.18:43
topolso ayoung, net it out. how do we do this without breaking everyhting?18:43
henrynashayoung: but is that solving the problem that antiwar is trying to solve…which is you want a new service (that is not relate to an existing one) to be able to create roles that it and only it will consume (vis its policy file)?18:43
dolphmayoung: then where is it a problem?18:44
morganfainberghenrynash, if that service has a role grouping, sure?18:44
ayoungdolphm, for openstack right now, a role is implicitly multi-service18:44
gyeeayoung, atiwari is solving service lifecycle management use case18:44
gyeefor the second time :)18:44
morganfainberghenrynash provided policy enforcement can provide that i think it would work.18:45
ayoung_member_ is used implicitly for all sercvices wherea user needs access to aa project's resources18:45
dolphmayoung: i'd say that pretty explicit, considering nothing about authorization is bound to a particular service18:45
atiwariyes and that seems to me a general issue18:45
ayoungwe are not going to say " noav_memeber, glance_memeber...etc18:45
*** blamar has quit IRC18:45
dolphmayoung: _member_ is an explicit representation of v2 default tenancy18:45
ayoungKeystone cares nothing about this18:45
ayoungdolphm, and we can break things up more granularly, but thus far, we have ben careful not to impose on the implementoars view of things18:46
*** stevemar-droid has quit IRC18:46
ayoungbut _member_ is scoped to project, not to service18:46
henrynashis the "role grouping" proposal (as opposed to the role service model) documented anywhere?18:46
ayounghenrynash, I'm keeping it in the same BP18:46
henrynashayoung: ok18:46
ayoungno reason to have two competing ones, as I think this solves atiwari 's use cases18:46
ayoungit is just the more general solution18:47
ayoungso...we have two unmanaged resources right now:  services and roles...well, more than that, but lets start there18:47
ayoungwho can add a new service?  Who can add a new role? Keystone admin18:47
dolphmayoung: right, because _member_ is a representation of default tenancy -- not anything service-specific18:47
atiwariayoung, can you add your idea in etherpad ?18:47
ayoungbut, atiwari has the use case where many more services are going to be registered18:48
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting18:48
gyeeyes, AaaS for example18:48
ayoungand for each service, it needs to be able to define its own roles18:48
atiwariyes, may be non Openstack service18:48
ayoungmake a namespace for each service18:48
ayoungbut...don't force that namespace to be the service18:48
morganfainbergayoung, the way i see it is keystone scoped admin can add services.  adding a role to an service would be in the services namspace?18:48
*** insanidade has joined #openstack-meeting18:48
*** vahidh has joined #openstack-meeting18:49
ayoungmorganfainberg, so  keep the namespace and  service as separate but parallel18:49
ayoungservices get roles, but so do projects etc18:49
gyeemorganfainberg, ++18:49
morganfainbergayoung, that is what is forming in my head.18:49
dolphmayoung: services already define their own roles by defining their own authorization policy which converts user attributes into available capabilities18:49
ayoungdolphm, yeah, bascially, but they don't then go and register those roels in keystone yet, that is what is missing18:49
ayoungdolphm, I'm OK with the roles being namespaced, but even two different glance servers might have different role sets18:50
shardyayoung: surely that's just an install-time thing in most cases?18:50
morganfainbergayoung, i think new services need to be added by a keystone-service admin scoped role (yes there is a bootstrapping issue)18:50
ayoungshardy, absolutely install time.18:50
atiwarimorganfainberg, that is a dependency issue18:50
gyeemorganfainberg, we can create the bootstrap service-admin role at service creation18:51
atiwarikeystone should be out of hook18:51
ayoungso lets not lock ourselves into saying that the namespace exactly equals the service18:51
ayoungcuz that is very rigid18:51
gyeesame way we do default project, with the _member_ assignment18:51
dolphmayoung: "but they don't then go and register those roels in keystone" which is one reason why it was a mistake to make roles first class objects18:51
ayoungCreate a new service, get a role that has the same name as that service by default?  I'm fine with that18:51
ayoungthen that role serves as the namespace for all roles for that service18:51
ayoungdolphm, nah, in reality people need that18:52
ayoungyou have to have an enumeration18:52
ayoungthe implementation was a good first step18:52
ayoungwe just need a way to namespace roles, and to delegate the administration of the roles18:52
dolphmayoung: you can still enumerate strings18:52
dolphmayoung: which is all anyone cares about with roles18:52
dolphmayoung: the ID is useless, even auth_token reflects that18:53
ayoungdolphm, but you don't want to enumerate all strings on all role assignements.18:53
atiwariroles should be registered in keystone for assignments18:53
morganfainbergayoung, dolphm, are we arguing normalization vs non-normalized here?18:53
dolphmayoung: ? i'm saying a role is nothing more than a string18:53
ayoungdolphm, I know you feeel buyers remorse about creating the role enumeration abstraction, but I think it is a needed documentation18:53
dolphmayoung: there's no relevant metadata to a role entity18:53
ayoungdolphm, so the use case atiwari has is interesting, in that he wantss to be able to rename or even mve sets of roles18:54
ayoungso...roles as names becomes more like the regions thing18:54
ayoungthe roel assignment will have an ID, but you can change the name and all of the assignemtnes get updated18:54
atiwaridolphm, you are correct but there should be some management involved with role too and you can not do that until you name space it to service18:54
ayoungsay we create a role named glance18:55
dolphmi would be totally cool if PUT /v3/users/{user_id}/projects/{project_id}/roles/{role_name} created a new role automatically if it didn't exist with id={role_name}, name={role_name}18:55
ayoungand under that  glance/id18:55
ayoungthen realize that glance/id should have been really under swift, and been called swift/moderator18:55
morganfainbergayoung, if we do that i would use something like <role>.<role> (e.g. glance.member) nomenclature.18:55
atiwari#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/service-scoped-role-definition has the real issue we need to resolve18:55
ayoungall people that have that role will be updated when you move the id /change the role definition18:55
*** sushils has quit IRC18:55
ayoungmorganfainberg, either dots or slashes or slashdot18:56
dolphmayoung: that's not interesting at all, because services can already do that by changing their policy.json18:56
ayoungdolphm, no, they can only change what will be matched18:56
gyeethought we are having keyboard issue18:57
morganfainbergdolphm, i think the biggest win to have a structure is if you want to revoke a role completely.  if it's just strings in metadata it's expensive to remove that role from all users in a service.18:57
ayoungatiwari, so I am in strong favor of your requirement, I just don't want to make the mistake of locking it to the "service"  abstraction for the namespace.  Cool?18:57
henrynashmorganfainberg: although it won't be strings in metadata with the assignment table change….should be one SQL command18:58
dolphmmorganfainberg: eek, we didn't consider 'delete role' in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-token-revocation18:58
atiwariayoung, as I mentioned it is not locking18:58
morganfainbergdolphm, yeah.18:58
atiwarianyone service can have Admin roles18:58
ayoungservice scoped role should be a supported use case, but the abstraction is "role namespace"18:58
dolphmat least, maybe not very well18:58
*** rnirmal has quit IRC18:58
atiwarino one can stop them18:58
morganfainbergdolphm, oh i don't think we did.18:59
topolum, kinda getting lost. So how do we solve shardys use case?18:59
ayoungtopol, the question for shardy 's case is "what is the implicit scope"18:59
ayoungwhat scope does a "satack" live within?18:59
dolphmayoung: there is no "implicit scope" in his use case18:59
henrynashayoung: so I could be persuaded if I understand the additional problems that level of generic abstraction gets us19:00
shardyayoung: All user requests are tenant scoped, but these management requests wouldn't be scoped to anything19:00
ayoungdolphm, there is "always" implicit scope.19:00
ayounglets make it explicit19:00
gyeelets call it what it is, global roles19:00
dolphmayoung: that's the idea of tenantless role assignments19:00
dolphmgyee: it's not a global role at all - read the blueprint19:00
shardyayoung: or, it's scoped to the service, as it's a heat service adminstrator action19:00
ayounggyee, it is never "global" cuz the world is so big.  I think it is "scoped to this openstack deployment" maybe, but then we are already ignoring prior art19:00
morganfainbergshardy, that would be a good approach actually.19:00
dolphmtime's up!19:00
*** soren has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
ayoungwhe I startedo n Keystone, admin was supposed to be scoped to the "admin" project19:01
ayoungsomehow that got lost19:01
ayoungwe didn't have domains19:01
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"19:01
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 19:01:12 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)19:01
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-11-19-18.03.html19:01
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-11-19-18.03.txt19:01
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-11-19-18.03.log.html19:01
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
*** pabelanger has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
clarkbinfra meeting time?19:01
fungii believe it is19:01
*** fabiog has quit IRC19:01
fungijeblair: did you want to chair, or take a pass?19:01
morganfainbergclarkb, we could talk more about keystone if you guys don't want to :P >.>19:01
pabelangerjust in time19:01
clarkbmorganfainberg: no no we got this :)19:02
*** ericwb has left #openstack-meeting19:02
*** matrohon_ has quit IRC19:02
*** jlibosva has quit IRC19:02
jeblairfungi: hi19:02
fungimordred: around?19:03
jeblairfungi: i can do it, with your help, i think.  :)19:03
fungifull agenda, so we should probably get started19:03
*** brich1 has joined #openstack-meeting19:03
jeblair#startmeeting infra19:03
*** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting19:03
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 19:03:49 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.19:03
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.19:03
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: infra)"19:03
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'infra'19:03
jeblair#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting19:03
*** jcoufal has quit IRC19:04
jeblair#link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-11-12-19.03.html19:04
jeblair#topic Actions from last meeting19:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Actions from last meeting (Meeting topic: infra)"19:04
jeblair#action jeblair move tarballs.o.o and include 50gb space for heat/trove images19:05
jeblairclarkb: etherpad?19:05
clarkbetherpad-dev is dead, didn't get to etherpad.o.o yet. Plan to kill it post meeting19:05
*** brich1 has left #openstack-meeting19:05
*** danwent has quit IRC19:05
*** jamielennox has left #openstack-meeting19:05
clarkbthat work kept getting bumped for more important things over the week :/19:05
*** blamar has quit IRC19:06
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting19:06
jeblairclarkb: what are the things you want to double check before killing?19:06
clarkbjeblair: that the db backups properly overlap19:06
jeblairclarkb: (and more specifically, anything you need help/coordination with)19:06
clarkbso that I don't lose any potentially useful data19:06
clarkbI shouldn't need help with that19:07
*** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting19:07
jeblair#topic Trove testing (mordred, hub_cap)19:07
*** openstack changes topic to "Trove testing (mordred, hub_cap) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:07
hub_caphey. nothing to report here. still getting caught up w/ trove19:07
hub_capgoing to touch base in the next few days tho regarding resuming progress :)19:08
jeblairok.  makes sense, given the schedule of the past couple weeks.19:08
jeblairhub_cap: sounds good!19:08
*** divyeshk has left #openstack-meeting19:08
jeblair#topic Tripleo testing (lifeless, pleia2)19:08
*** openstack changes topic to "Tripleo testing (lifeless, pleia2) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:08
*** david-lyle_lunch is now known as david-lyle19:08
pleia2working through some basics with dprince and derekh, nothing to report on the infra side at the moment though19:09
jeblair#topic Wsme / pecan testing (sdague, dhellman)19:10
*** openstack changes topic to "Wsme / pecan testing (sdague, dhellman) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:10
jeblairsdague: might be busy/afk today?19:10
jeblairdhellmann: ping19:11
clarkbI do have an updated from the d-g side though19:11
fungiall week i think sdague said19:11
clarkbto get the havana periodic/bitrot jobs in I have started my refactoring of the d-g jobs19:11
clarkbI am trying to do one small step at a time for my sanity and for reviewers' sanity19:11
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting19:11
fungithere was also a suggestion i think that sqlalchemy-migrate might ought to get the same love as pecan and wsme as far as dependency gating goes?19:11
clarkbbut I think a path towards having better d-g job templates is emerging which should make the wsme jobs easy19:12
dhellmannwe are trying really hard to get rid of sqlalchemy-migrate19:12
fungithat sounds like a better solution anyway ;)19:12
dhellmannwe have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/54333/ open for running tox tests for pecan to gate against wsme, ceilometer, and ironic19:12
mordredwell, we are - but I think that adding pecan/wsme like gating to it would be good, based on the recent breakage19:12
dhellmannok, I wasn't aware of any breakage19:13
*** nachi has left #openstack-meeting19:13
mordreds-m made a release and it broke things :)19:13
*** hk_peter has quit IRC19:13
dhellmannmore testing is better, I was just trying to help avoid extra work19:13
*** rbrady has joined #openstack-meeting19:13
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting19:13
anteayamordred: s-m?19:14
clarkbif the JJB job refactor ends up where I would like to have it end up it may not be a whole lot of extra work19:14
jeblairanteaya: sqlalchemy-migrate19:14
*** rbrady has left #openstack-meeting19:14
jeblairclarkb: does the jjb refactor conflict with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/54333/5 ?19:15
*** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
clarkbjeblair: it shouldn't I am talking about the d-g jobs specifically19:15
jeblairclarkb: k19:15
clarkbsince they have grown very unweildy and need better templating19:15
*** epim has quit IRC19:16
jeblairclarkb: so your change would make it easier to add full devstack testing for wsme, which is additional to the tox jobs in 5433319:16
jeblaircool, makes sense19:16
* dhellmann has nothing to add19:17
jeblairdhellmann: thanks19:17
* mordred thins refactor is great19:17
jeblairclarkb: is etherpad still a separate topic, or already covered?19:17
clarkbjeblair: covered19:17
jeblairmordred: thin refactors are the best19:17
jeblair#topic  Retiring https://github.com/openstack-ci19:17
*** openstack changes topic to "Retiring https://github.com/openstack-ci (Meeting topic: infra)"19:17
jeblairwho wanted to talk about this?19:18
fungiwe talked about it,m but wanted to get your input too19:18
pleia2someone stumbled upon it recently and it was confusing19:18
*** Hunner has joined #openstack-meeting19:18
pleia2want to at least see about deleting publications and gerrit-trigger-plugin19:18
pleia2or close the whole thing down19:19
jeblairpleia2: i think there is more history in publications that need to be pushed into infra/pub19:19
clarkbor, add a dummy project with a README that says go to opensatck-infra instead19:19
jeblairclarkb: like https://github.com/openstack-ci/moved-to-openstack-infra19:19
fungiclarkb: that's already there19:19
jeblairpleia2: the existing historical publications need to be pushed and tagged so they show up19:19
jeblairpleia2: then i think publications can go away19:19
jeblairthat leaves gerrit-trigger-plugin19:20
*** shardy is now known as shardy_afk19:20
*** epim has joined #openstack-meeting19:20
fungijeblair: i thought we retained the history for pubs and then cleaned it, so the master branch still has those commits, they just need tags19:20
fungior better, separating into branches19:20
jeblairfungi: yeah, i think to be compatible with the new system, we need to make some new commits that move each pub into a top level and then tag those19:21
*** adalbas has quit IRC19:21
jeblairgerrit-trigger-plugin is a genuine fork; i'm not sure if all our changes were upstreamed19:22
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC19:22
mordredI don't believe they were19:22
jeblairi think we need to figure out the status of that, and decide whether it's a useful historical artifact19:22
fungiso it sounds like we have a couple bugs/action items out of this topic... branchify/tag the old pubs, and decide the fate of g-t-p19:23
jeblairi'm not in a position to volunteer for those right now, but will certainly do publications if no one gets to it first.19:24
pleia2I could use some practice with tag/branch fun if someone will be available to answer questions as I go19:24
fungipleia2: i can help you on that19:24
clarkbpleia2: happy to19:24
pleia2ok cool, action me for digging into publications then19:24
jeblair#action pleia2 add historical publications tags19:24
jeblairpleia2: thanks!19:25
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting19:25
jeblair#action jeblair file bug about cleaning up gerrit-git-prep repo19:25
jeblair#action jeblair file bug about cleaning up gerrit-trigger-plugin19:25
jeblair#topic Savanna testing (SergeyLukjanov)19:25
*** openstack changes topic to "Savanna testing (SergeyLukjanov) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:25
jeblairSergeyLukjanov: ping19:25
SergeyLukjanovnothing interesting to report atm19:25
SergeyLukjanovis it ok to make a job to build images using savanna-image-elements and publish them to tarballs.o.o?19:25
SergeyLukjanovjust to clarify19:26
jeblairSergeyLukjanov: absolutely; i believe trove will need to do something similar19:26
jeblairmordred, hub_cap: ^19:26
mordredthat's correct19:26
mordredwe'd like to generalize that19:26
SergeyLukjanovyep, we talked about this need with hub_cap at summit19:26
*** Seriously has joined #openstack-meeting19:27
SergeyLukjanovand eventually it'll be great torun integration tests in this images...19:27
ruheSergeyLukjanov, would it be possible to run Savanna integration tests on those images before they get published?19:27
SergeyLukjanovruhe, we can publish master and release images I think19:28
SergeyLukjanovand eventually add integration tests to the gate pipeline19:28
SergeyLukjanovwhen will achieve 'hadoop vs. nested virt.'19:28
fungisimilar to how we do branch-tip, pre-release and release tarballs i expect19:28
SergeyLukjanovso, nothing to add from my side, still hope to start creating CRs this week19:29
*** ivasev has quit IRC19:29
SergeyLukjanovfungi, yep, it should work ok19:29
jeblairSergeyLukjanov: ok cool, thanks19:30
jeblair#topic Goodbye Folsom (ttx, clarkb, fungi)19:30
*** openstack changes topic to "Goodbye Folsom (ttx, clarkb, fungi) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:30
*** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting19:30
*** sarob_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:30
fungi#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2013-November/001723.html19:30
fungii've officially eol'd the integrated projects19:30
fungistill need to know what we're supposed to do (if anything) with things like devstack, grenade, oslo-i, manuals, tempest, reqs19:30
jeblairfungi: kill them all19:31
clarkbwith fire!19:31
fungithey have stable/folsom branches. tag then delete, same as the rest?19:31
jeblairfungi: i believe that is the correct thing to do.  note that many of them will have significant trouble landing patches to those branches now.  :)19:31
fungiand the topic more properly should have been goodbye folsom, hello havana since clarkb worked on getting the new stable/havana jobs in last week19:32
clarkbdefinitely reqs, devstack and tempest19:32
clarkbsince we can't effectively test them on folsom anymore19:32
clarkboh and grenade, might as well do them all19:32
fungiclarkb: i approved your job templating last night and it seems to have worked19:32
clarkbyes we have periodic/bitrot jobs for havana now and changes to d-g are tested against havana and grizzly as well as master19:33
*** bgorski has quit IRC19:33
fungithough dprince's fgrenade change is still grinding in the gate of doom19:33
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/5706619:33
*** sarob has quit IRC19:33
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting19:34
fungi(to move the base for master tests to havana instead of grizzly)19:34
*** stanlagun has quit IRC19:34
*** sarob_ has quit IRC19:34
jeblairfungi, clarkb, dprince: thanks for this!19:34
jeblair#topic Jenkins 1.540 upgrade (zaro, clarkb)19:34
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:34
*** openstack changes topic to "Jenkins 1.540 upgrade (zaro, clarkb) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:34
dprincefungi: I am actually a bit perplexed by my grenade failure there.19:35
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz19:35
*** henrynash has quit IRC19:35
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting19:35
dprincefungi: can take that offline w/ sdague/dtroyer perhaps though19:35
fungidprince: i suspect it's just the volume of tempest tests being run against d-g coupled with the nondeterminism in the gate right now19:35
zarothe reason we want to upgrade jenkins is that there was a major fix to reduce number of threads by 75%19:36
sdaguedprince, there is a grenade patch that needs to land as well for that to work19:36
clarkband with recent jenkins trouble, we figure it is worth a shot to upgrade and run jenkins that doesn't have so much overhead19:36
sdaguemaurosr was working on it, I don't know it's status19:36
anteayasdague: hello19:36
zaroclarkb has latest jenkins on jenkins-dev.o.p19:36
dprincefungi: thanks, sdague: can you point me to it... or in the right direction?19:36
clarkbI upgraded jenkins-dev yesterday, it seems to be fine but the jenkins test script in config is very old d-g and old zuul oriented19:36
* maurosr reading19:37
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting19:37
fungiand the release notes for new jenkins mention a lot of churn in parts of the api we use, i think19:37
clarkbjeblair: fungi: mordred: any opinions on how we should test jenkins-dev (they upgraded the ssh-slaves and credentials plugins that are bundled with jenkins and changed some of the permissions around node creation/update/delete)19:37
mordredoy. that sounds like fun19:37
jeblairclarkb: i think the api calls it exercises should still be about the same, right?  add/remove nodes, etc...19:37
clarkbjeblair: possibly. they actual calls are made in the zuul and d-g source code19:38
sdaguemaurosr, this is the patch that takes the version specific upgrade scripts into that separate directory, instead of just based on the branch we're in in grenade19:38
jeblairclarkb: ah, heh.19:38
clarkbjeblair: so I think rewriting it to use nodepool is what we may need to do?19:38
clarkbor and this was my crazy idea this morning19:38
anteayacould we introduce a new jenkins master with the upgrade? and then move over from there?19:38
clarkbmaybe we can point prod nodepool at jenkins-dev?19:38
clarkbI don't think prod nodepool at jenkins-dev will work due to ssh key mismatches19:39
maurosrsdague: yup, I'm finishing it, I can submit it today (yesterday and friday had some troubles and the holiday that didnt let me work on it)19:39
*** marun has quit IRC19:39
*** sarob has quit IRC19:39
maurosrbut will submit it today for sure19:39
*** sarob_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:39
jeblairclarkb: so maybe we need a nodepool-dev? ugh.19:39
maurosrreplacing the other one which cleans everything19:39
clarkbanteaya: that is one possibility but we should be able to do an upgrade in place19:39
clarkbjeblair: that was another thing I considered, possibly just run it on jenkins-dev19:40
fungiclarkb: mordred has had success getting nodepool running on his laptop... maybe something similar could be pointed at jenkins-dev instead of needing a nodepool-dev server?19:40
jeblaircolocating nodepool-dev service on jenkins-dev sounds fine19:40
*** rongze has quit IRC19:40
fungioh, or locally installed on jenkins-dev itself. yeah, not a bad idea at all19:40
anteayaclarkb k19:40
jeblairclarkb: sound like a plan?19:41
*** IlyaE has quit IRC19:41
clarkbzaro: any chance you want to work on the puppet to do that?19:41
*** markmc has quit IRC19:41
zaroclarkb: can do.19:42
jeblairclarkb, zaro: in fact, i think that may actually be how the old devstack-gate stuff was set up on jenkins-dev.19:42
*** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting19:42
clarkb#action zaro setup dev nodepoold on jenkins-dev19:42
*** sarob_ has quit IRC19:42
jeblair#topic New devstack job requirements (clarkb)19:42
*** openstack changes topic to "New devstack job requirements (clarkb) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:42
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting19:42
clarkbone of the things that came out of adding havana d-g jobs was that we have two large classes of d-g jobs. There are d-g jobs that run against patches and d-g jobs that run periodically against tip of $branch19:43
clarkbI would like to propose that we require and new d-g jobs supply both forms as two different templates so that when icehouse rolls around adding d-g jobs for it is as simple as updating zuul layout.yaml19:44
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:44
clarkbwith havana I was juggling a lot of missing pieces and I think staying on top of that through a cycle would be better19:44
jeblairclarkb: i agree with the proposal in principle; i may want to see your refactor before agreeing to the specifics19:44
fungiand i think the current state with regard to that is great now, after your last change went in19:45
*** Seriously has quit IRC19:46
clarkbjeblair: thats fair, there is a little more work to coalesce the branch specific check jobs with the rest of the check/gate jobs and stable branche periodic jobs with master periodic jobs19:46
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting19:46
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting19:46
clarkbright now we have ~4 distinct classes of d-g job and I think I can roll that into two19:46
*** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov19:46
clarkbso getting it to two is a good first step19:46
*** sarob has quit IRC19:47
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:47
jeblaircool; if there are any new d-g jobs while clarkb works on this, we should probably run those changes by him to make sure it fits with this work19:47
*** chuck__ has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
fungiyes, agreed19:48
jeblair#topic Increased space yet again on static.o.o (fungi)19:48
*** openstack changes topic to "Increased space yet again on static.o.o (fungi) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:48
*** DrBacchus has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
fungithis was more of a public service announcement19:48
*** DrBacchus has quit IRC19:48
pleia2time to add some disk space monitoring?19:48
*** DrBacchus has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
*** sarob has quit IRC19:48
jeblairfungi: was this during the summit, or once again, afterwords?19:49
fungii increased the logs volume during the summit to 4tb, but then caught it again last week just before it filled up and pushed it to 5tb19:49
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:49
*** rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting19:49
fungi#link http://cacti.openstack.org/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=717&rra_id=all19:49
*** markvan has quit IRC19:49
fungii confirmed the deletion weekly cron job is working as intended to expire 6-month-old content19:50
fungiwe're just on an ever-increasing treadmill of log collection19:50
jeblairfungi: that's exciting.19:50
fungisimilarly, docs-draft is up to 400gb now19:50
*** rushiagr has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
clarkbwe have a giant firehose filling water ballons19:51
fungianyway, that's all i wanted to mention on the topic19:51
jeblairfungi: i think we should make those volumes be at 50%19:51
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
*** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
fungijeblair: i'm happy to do that19:51
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
jeblairfungi: cool, thanks19:51
fungi#action fungi grow logs and docs-draft volumes so they're 50% full19:52
jeblairi believe we had expected them to stabilize.  we might have been wrong about that.  :(19:52
clarkbso I haven't been able to confirm this yet19:52
clarkbbut the nova logs exploded in size (~8MB compressed for n-cpu??) due to the iso8601 logging19:52
clarkbfungi: any idea if that caused a significant uptick in log size?19:53
fungiclarkb: it was hard to tell, but i'd expect compression to water that increase down if it's repetitive lines19:53
jeblairhrm, total artifact size by zuul job would be a nice metric; the new log uploading system could report that.19:53
fungialso, there was no obvious uptick in utilization on the voume, just a fairly steady linear progression there19:54
jeblair#topic Open discussion19:54
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: infra)"19:54
* zaro meeting topic, sorry came in late.19:54
zaronew jjb release19:54
*** syerrapragada has joined #openstack-meeting19:55
zaroanybody have issues with that?19:55
clarkboh ya, we had someone submit a bug requesting a new release and I am +1 on doing it19:55
*** bswartz has joined #openstack-meeting19:55
pabelangerAlso wanted to remind people about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56107/ maybe get some feedback about the packaging import19:55
clarkbI do think we should get the new jjb-ptl group change in so that zaro and maybe others can do the releases19:55
*** dolphm has quit IRC19:55
clarkb#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56823/19:55
jeblairclarkb: jjb has a ptl?19:56
anteayaI'm continuing to work in -neutron19:56
clarkbjeblair: no, but read the the change comments for why it was named that way :)19:56
*** markvan has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
clarkbjeblair: mordred wanted consistency19:56
* mordred doens't feel strongly about it19:56
jeblairclarkb: well, the group is named that way to remind us to keep it small.  :)19:56
mordredbut I know we've pushed back on people before making a thing not called -ptl19:57
clarkbI am fine with the name19:57
jeblairmordred: i'm not opposed to the name19:57
mordredthat said - perhaps -ptl is the wrong name for that role and -release-manager is a better name?19:57
* mordred doesn't want to bikeshed too much19:57
jeblairmordred: i'm not sold on the _idea_19:57
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC19:57
*** sarob has quit IRC19:57
*** sarob_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:57
clarkbjeblair: so I suggested it because openstack-ci-core has really taken a back seat in JJB reviews lately19:57
jeblairclarkb: one of us has been on vacation19:58
clarkbI think a subset of the jjb core group is in a better position to cut releases19:58
*** sarob_ has quit IRC19:59
*** yassine has quit IRC19:59
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:59
fungiand that's about it for time19:59
jeblairclarkb: the people who can make releases should definitely be a subset of the jjb core group.  it currently is.19:59
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"20:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 20:00:12 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)20:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-11-19-19.03.html20:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-11-19-19.03.txt20:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-11-19-19.03.log.html20:00
ttxWho is around for the TC meeting ?20:00
*** jasondot_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:00
bswartzI'm here this time!20:00
ttxrussellb, annegentle, mikal, mordred, jgriffith, vishy, markmcclain, lifeless, sdague: around ?20:01
markmcjust said to ttx - I may have to drop off sooner than I thought from this; coming in to land20:01
ttxbswartz: welcome!20:01
lifelessttx: oh hi20:01
*** pabelanger has left #openstack-meeting20:01
*** sarob has quit IRC20:02
russellbwow, that time already?20:02
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting20:02
ttxrussellb: heh20:02
*** jasondotstar has quit IRC20:02
ttxso we momentarily have enough people, let's get it started20:03
lifelessdum dum dum daaaaah!20:03
ttx#startmeeting tc20:03
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 20:03:17 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.20:03
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.20:03
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)"20:03
*** gregsfortytwo has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'20:03
ttxOur agenda today:20:03
ttx#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/TechnicalCommittee20:03
*** zul has quit IRC20:03
ttxbusy busy20:03
ttx#topic Manila incubation request: final discussion20:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Manila incubation request: final discussion (Meeting topic: tc)"20:03
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-October/016370.html20:03
bswartzfirst off I'd like to apologize for missing last week -- I was on a plane because I stayed in HK a few days after the conference20:03
ttx#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila_Overview20:03
markmcbswartz, did you see the logs and https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ManilaIncubationApplication ?20:04
bswartzalso I was under the impression that manila incubation wouldn't come up for consideration until today because I simply misread the email from ttx -- sorry about that20:04
markmclots of questions in there20:04
bswartzmarkmc: yes I did20:04
*** Guest_____ has joined #openstack-meeting20:04
ttxbswartz: I think I can summarize by saying the strongest objection to incubation in last week's discussion was about the maturity of the project20:04
bswartzI'm happy to answer those today20:04
ttxBoth in terms of number of commits and number of developers involved20:04
ttx(We rejected Designate on similar grounds over the last cycle)20:04
ttxAlso seemed like Manila could benefit from another round of discussion regarding its relationship with Cinder20:05
annegentleo/ here20:05
bswartzso I understood that designate was basically a one-company effort20:05
ttxSo all in all it appeared to be a bit early to consider incubation.20:05
*** ryanpetrello_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:05
bswartzthere is broad interst in Manila, if not active participation as of yet20:05
mordredbswartz: yah. that was the main thing with designate too20:05
*** IlyaE has quit IRC20:05
mordredbroad support, not tons of multi-company participation yet20:05
ttxThat said... I think we need a more formal way to designate (haha) projects where the topic is promising and we'd like to encourage more people to participate20:06
bswartzso we have several companies interested in working on back ends20:06
russellbttx: +120:06
ttxThe soft encouragement we used for Designate did not really attract the masses, which is why I was thinking about a more shiny badge they could wear20:06
*** Hunner has left #openstack-meeting20:06
*** sushils has joined #openstack-meeting20:06
bswartzthe main thing stopping them is that we recognized some archtectural limitations and we're working on addressing those20:06
ttxLike "OpenStack Emerging Technology project"20:06
jeblairi read the logs and i agree with ttx's assesment; i personally think it's a great idea and it should be in openstack; the project should grow a bit, and i'd really like to see jgriffith and russellb weigh in on the integration/overlap points20:06
ttxWe could grant that category extra resources at summits to make sure more people converge to what sounds like a good idea.20:06
jeblairttx: we should be _really_ _really_ careful with that20:08
*** sarob has quit IRC20:08
bswartzttx: I'm not interestined in a badge or publicity -- we have more publicity than we need at this stage of development20:08
ttxbswartz: it might be relevant to address those issues before getting into incubation20:08
mordredyeah - I'm not sure we need new catagories20:08
bswartzwhat we want is to be allowed to integrate with things such as devstack/tempest20:08
russellbyou just need more contributors :)20:08
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting20:08
mordredI think the TC even saying "hey man, we like that, good job"20:08
russellbso how do we help you get more contribution?20:08
jeblairttx: there's already a tendency for stackforge projects to overstate their involvement in openstack20:09
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC20:09
*** ryanpetrello_ is now known as ryanpetrello20:09
bswartzit makes things a lot easier when we can fit into the mold that other projects use20:09
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting20:09
ttxjeblair, mordred: yes... I just don't feel us syaing "nice idea, please come back when you mature" was *that* succcessful in getting more people to contribute to designate20:09
russellbyou can already integrate with devstack, and even devstack-gate, easily20:09
ttxso I hesitate in proposing that for manila20:09
russellbttx: it's either that, or lowering the bar for incubation, right?20:09
annegentleI want to hear from jgriffith20:09
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting20:09
ttxalso I think I'd like us to adopt sdague's constraints on new incubated projects sooner rather than later20:09
jgriffithannegentle: haha20:09
dhellmannshould we have the meta-discussion about badges first?20:09
bswartzwe don't need help increasing our contribution level -- that will come as soon as we get past the technical hurdes we face (I'm estimating 4-6 weeks on that)20:09
flaper87since it's ok for projects to be incubated for more than 1 release cycle, I think it'd be fair to incubate projects that are definitely a good idea and give them the time to mature20:09
jgriffithso we seem to have skipped past that initial discussion/convo20:09
sdaguettx, yeh, I'd really like to not add another project to incubation until we decide on that20:09
flaper87while being incubated20:09
jeblairbswartz: while it is a recent change, devstack, devstack-gate, and tempest are all now modular enough that any stackforge project can do it; wsme and sqlalchemy-migrate are working on that now.20:09
lifelessbswartz: what are the technical hurdles?20:09
annegentlejgriffith: I think yes we need technical discussion :)20:10
*** sparkycollier has joined #openstack-meeting20:10
* annegentle needs to type faster20:10
jgriffithI'd like a better idea of scope/direction of the project20:10
bswartzrussellb: I'll talk to you offfline about the devstack stuff - I wasn't aware there was a path to use devstack pre-incubation20:10
russellbyeah i just did it with a couple hours work for solum yesterday20:10
lifelessbswartz: see the patchset to enable it in solum20:10
lifelessbswartz: it's pretty self explanatory20:10
jgriffithbswartz: see my comment above ^^20:10
lifelessbswartz: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/57036/20:10
bswartzlifeless: thanks20:11
lifelessbswartz: what are the technical hurdles you face?20:11
jgriffithbswartz: I know we talked about the LVM question20:11
russellbbswartz: and related, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/5709820:11
ttxbswartz: so it's extremely likely that we'd require you to have gate jobs before being accepted into incubation20:11
bswartzregarding "technical issues" it's clear that the code we wrote initially only works for single tenant environments -- properly supporting multitenant environments requires a different design20:11
bswartzwe've been working for the last 3 months on designing that and it's about ready to go in20:12
jgriffithttx: bswartz can we first get a better idea of what the goal is here?20:12
lifelessbswartz: wow20:12
russellbthat's a pretty fundamental requirement for openstack things :)20:12
russellbif that's not there yet ...20:12
jgriffithttx: bswartz the code is not necessarily idicative right now based on conversations I had with bswartz20:12
ttxjgriffith: now I'm scared. there is stuff going on that I don't see ?20:13
jgriffithttx: good things (I think)20:13
bswartzrussellb: it's still useful in many application in a single tenant mode -- but solving it for multi tenant is dramatically more difficult20:13
lifelessSo incubation is the process of taking a functional project and getting it fully integrated; I am feeling more and more that this is premature.20:13
jgriffithbswartz: cmiw...20:13
jgriffiththe block management code/drivers won't stay20:13
ttxlifeless: same here20:13
jgriffithmanilla will actually consume cinder resources20:13
bswartzit's only since establishing the project that we've gotten the kinds of ideas and participation that have allowed us to come up with solutions20:13
sdaguebswartz, you won't be able to run in the gate in any real way without multi tenancy, so that's really table stakes20:13
flaper87lifeless: +1 for functional projects20:13
lifelessThe question i have is what can we do to help you get ready for integration?20:14
flaper87AFAIK, one of the requirements for a project to be incubated is to have a stable API20:14
russellblifeless: ++20:14
lifelessIs it a mentoring issue? Resources? Architecture?20:14
lifelessI'm very excited by the idea of in the cloud fs's on demand :)20:14
markmcme too20:15
bswartzif having a stable API is a requirement then we definitely don't have that20:15
jgriffithlifeless: I'm still trying to confirm that's the plan and what it *means* to manilla20:15
markmcsounds like we're not at the point of architectural stability, though20:15
bswartzI didn't see that requirement listed anywhere20:15
lifelessjgriffith: ack; thats important120:15
zanebbswartz: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Approved/NewProjectProcess#Process20:16
jgriffithso gating/devstack etc is kinda secondary right now IMO20:16
dhellmannmarkmc: it sounds to me like we aren't even sure what the feature set is20:16
markmcbswartz, gathering requirements here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/incubation-and-integration-requirements20:16
lifelessbswartz: ok, so lets loop back around to jgriffith's point, which is the start of it all :)20:16
ttxbswartz: "incubation" is actually about integration with other openstack bits and the ability to deliver stuff in the common release every 6 months -- not really about project maturation20:16
zaneb"The maturity of the project. Has it been used in production and deployed at scale?"20:16
zanebnothing about a stable API specifically20:16
markmcbswartz, so e.g. "Technical stability and architecture maturity"20:16
* markmc has to drop off, sorry20:16
*** markmc has quit IRC20:16
*** pballand has quit IRC20:17
zanebbut "need to rewrite in order to handle multi-tenant" is hard to reconcile with "mature"20:17
bswartzokay so I'm hearing that this group expects projects to basically be complete by the time they enter incubation20:17
jgriffithbase functional complete20:17
ttxI think it's safe to say at this point that this incubation request is a bit early. We can issue a statement that it sounds like a very interesting thing to have in openstack, though.20:18
jeblairttx: agreed20:18
zanebwell, nothing is ever complete20:18
flaper87bswartz: base functionality must exist20:18
jgriffithzaneb: +1 :)20:18
sdaguettx: +120:18
russellbttx: +120:18
dhellmannttx: +120:18
flaper87and ttx +120:18
markmcclainttx: +120:18
russellband I think we owe the community in general more clear incubation expectations20:18
bswartzttx: what about your proposal for a "OpenStack Emerging Technology project" designation20:18
russellbwhich is something we have in progress20:18
*** jtomasek has quit IRC20:18
annegentleI have to drop off in a few mins but will be back I hope20:18
sdaguehonestly, I think we'll end up with a better formal definition of the incubation / integration bars in the near term20:19
lifelessttx: +120:19
jgriffithJust to throw a wrench in the works ;)20:19
ttxbswartz: it's a separate topic, we haven't discussed if that was actually a good idea.20:19
lifelessrussellb: +1 too :)20:19
bswartzmany people are looking for some kind of official blessing of the project20:19
ttxbswartz: but I'm fine with a formal statement saying the same we said to designate20:19
bswartzmy interests are only to build something that works20:19
annegentlebswartz: I am so glad to hear you're getting good ideas before incubation though, keep it up20:19
jgriffithI think some good points were raised last week regarding what the *right* path is here20:19
ttx"looks awesome, come back when you're more ready"20:19
ttx"hey everyone, htat souhnds like a very nice project to spend time on"20:20
ttxerr... "that sounds"20:20
jeblairbswartz: in particular, no one has said "this is out of scope"; "we would like this in openstack" is a significant thing to take away from this.20:20
bswartzjeblair: yeah that's the impression I've gotten for quite some time20:21
ttxbswartz: if we get to establish a "emerging tech" label, I'd definitely apply it to Manila20:21
ttx(and Designate)20:21
*** vipul is now known as vipul-away20:21
*** vipul-away is now known as vipul20:21
ttxOther comments before we move to next topic ?20:21
bswartzokay so I heard we have a solution for devstack inclusion20:22
bswartzwhat can we do with our tempests tests before we can be incubated?20:22
ttxsdague: wanna answer this one ?20:23
sdaguebswartz, that's a little more complicated, because tempest doesn't have a stable internal API. But we can chat in -qa later about options20:23
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting20:23
bswartzsdague: thanks20:23
russellbsdague: i'm interested there too btw20:23
sdaguerussellb, sure. Though it's not really a great answer at this point. But lets take that there20:24
sdagueand let ttx move on20:24
ttx#agreed We would like to have Manila in OpenStack one day, needs more maturation, solve multi-tenant concerns and get devstack-gate integration before revisiting incubation request20:24
ttxdoes that sum it up well enough ?20:24
mikalWorks for me20:24
ttxok, moving on20:24
ttx#topic Program proposal: OpenStack User Experience20:25
*** openstack changes topic to "Program proposal: OpenStack User Experience (Meeting topic: tc)"20:25
ttx#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/UX/ProgramProposal20:25
ttxSo... Personally I'm a bit torn on this... I think UX should be a primary concern in every program... not necessarily needing a specific, separate program20:25
ttxIMHO "good user experience" is like "massive scalability", it's a design goal. Are we going to create a program for each design goal ?20:25
zanebttx: s/UX/docs/ ?20:25
ttxSo in the same way I want people caring about security and scalability in every project, I want UX-caring devs *in* every project20:25
lifelessit's a bit like it20:25
lifelessbit its also different20:25
ttxzaneb: docs end up producing stuff in a separate repo20:26
jeblairzaneb: docs has specific output that exceeds the specific projects20:26
lifelessmassive scale is easier for technical devs to understand and execute (and even then its not easy)20:26
russellbso, we've said before that programs are largely about groups of people working together on some effort20:26
russellbwhat does the group of people look like here?20:26
ttxHaving design goals under specific programs/teams doesn't look like the best way to get those concerns prioritized in each project core team20:26
ttxI see how separate teams could just create conflicts20:26
sdagueit seemed pretty gui focussed as well. I was kind of wondering whether something like logging harmonization would fit there, or was considered by the group20:26
*** gregsfortytwo has left #openstack-meeting20:27
jcoufalso basically at this moment we are much more focused on GUI, it's the most obvious are where we can help20:27
flaper87and CLIs20:27
jeblairrussellb: from the program proposal, it looks like it's mostly a group of devs focused on horizon20:27
russellbjeblair: yeah ...20:27
flaper87but I'd like to hear an answer to russellb question20:27
ttxI don't really mind if people with UX experience work on various projects... I just question the need for an official progral to support this work20:27
jcoufalbut in general this is also about unification of command in CLI or API, where we didn't put much focus yet20:28
dhellmannthey do talk about the CLI, and I talked to dtroyer about the work he has already done there -- he's interested in their input, but has already done a lot of the analysis for the cli20:28
flaper87ttx: +120:28
ttxthe lack of a progral so far didn't prevent UX people to get involved in horizon20:28
ttxproograM, damn you keyboard20:28
russellbi'm not sure the unified CLI fits into this20:28
sdagueright, I guess that was my question, what does being a program do to make it better, vs. just doing it?20:28
russellbi actually have been thinking that a program around clients could make sense20:28
sdaguerussellb, I was thinking the same thing re: clients20:29
dhellmannrussellb: they specifically call out the cli work in the proposal20:29
russellbi know they do, just saying i'm not sure it makes sense20:29
jcoufalttx: well one of the things is, that these people doesn't have to have much code contribution20:29
jcoufalttx: and they deserve to be also recognized20:29
dhellmannrussellb: hmm, why not?20:29
jeblairjcoufal: did you see sdague's question about logs?  more generally: would you consider "operator experience" part of UX?20:29
ttxjcoufal: we have a process set up to recognize those contributions though, you benefitted from it20:30
vishyinternet failure :(20:30
jcoufalfurthermore on sumit we have so little place to discuss various issues and it was very welcome to talk about those topics, but we were stealing slots from other projects20:30
*** Guest_____ has quit IRC20:30
*** markpeek has quit IRC20:30
sdagueso summit session time is a tangle, I can understand that concern20:30
jeblairjcoufal: i don't think it's stealing at all.  projects _should_ be considering ux as part of their design...20:30
ttxjcoufal: I'd rather have UX concerns discussed in projects slots rather than on a specific track tbh20:30
jcoufaljeblair: not yet, but it sounds like it might belong into our are as well20:30
sdaguetangible... also typing issues20:30
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
jgriffithttx: +100020:30
markmcclainttx: +120:31
flaper87ttx: +120:31
sdaguethis does get us back into the weeds on the need for some cross project tracks20:31
jcoufalrussellb: one of the targets is also to setup official group of users/clients for testing20:31
ttxjcoufal: last thing you want is discuss UX in an echo chamber and then come and ask devs to do it20:31
jgriffithjcoufal: I'm just not sure how you separate the two effectively20:31
jgriffithjcoufal: other than providing valuable feed-back20:31
jgriffithjcoufal: if you're trying to drive the projects from this program I don't know how effective that would be20:31
ttxsdague: yes, I think there are smarter ways to address that concern20:31
david-lyleI think the main concern is that a lot of the user experience issues are cross project, focusing efforts in individual projects results in the inconsistencies we have today20:31
jcoufaljgriffith: we want to be very close to projects and support them, not driving actually20:32
sdaguettx: agreed20:32
jgriffithjcoufal: right, so why not participate directly?20:32
jgriffithjcoufal: rather than have a "separte" category20:32
ttxdavid-lyle: I agree with that, we need to have some cross-project time carved into next summit20:32
lifelesswe have had some success with technology choices across programs20:32
lifelesse.g. pecan20:32
jcoufaljgriffith: because of the cross-project relations20:32
jgriffithjcoufal: I suspect we're talking in a circle :)20:32
lifelessis there something about UX that works differently?20:32
sdaguedavid-lyle: that's fair, I think however we can tackle it without a program per say. My intent with the log harmonizing was to just tiger team it for the cycle, grab a handful of interested folks and go after multiple projects20:33
jcoufallifeless: differently then what?20:33
anteayattx +1 for cross-project time20:33
*** maxdml has quit IRC20:33
ttxsdague: yes, and I don't think we need a log harmonization program to make it happen20:33
david-lylesdague: and what keeps that effort going once logging has been normalized for now?20:33
sdaguettx: agreed20:33
sdaguedavid-lyle: guidelines for the projects, which lead to reviewing rules20:34
sdagueconceptually like HACKING.rst20:34
jgriffithjcoufal: I guess my point was if you have folks interested in doing this why can't they participate in the projects?20:34
david-lylesdague: who do new projects go to with questions regarding logging standards, api standards,20:34
ttxIf the key rationale behind this program request is to make sure there is time for cross-project UX discussion at the summit, I think that's the wrong solution for a real problem20:34
sdaguefix the issue, set the guidelines, change the culture20:34
jgriffithjcoufal: regardless you're going to have to do that anyway IMO20:34
zanebjcoufal: how would folks be recognised as ATCs for this program? (for other programs it's from patches landed)20:34
lifelessjcoufal: differently than the way we code convergence on technology stack20:34
lifelessjcoufal: which was folk having discussions on the list and IRC and doing the odd experiment + reporting back.20:35
*** jtomasek has quit IRC20:35
david-lyleI think the hope here is to help user experience, via testing/surverys/design guide future practices20:35
ttxzaneb: yes, that was my concern #2 about this : who would be considered an ATC under this program ? Who would vote in its PTL election ? What would constitute "contribution" to it ?20:35
david-lylethat the results are documented in a common location20:35
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC20:36
ttxzaneb: I'd rather have existing PTLs proposing UX people for ATC in their own program, like Gabriel did for Jaromir last cycle20:36
flaper87I think most of the arguments related to this program could be discussed in the mailing-list and that'd benefit the community overall20:36
*** vipul is now known as vipul-away20:36
jcoufalzaneb: we don't have it decided yet, I need to have a look and agree on that, but I expect contribution in delivered solutions, supporting questions, contributing in duscussion, then the person should be proposed and accepted20:36
flaper87ttx: +120:36
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting20:36
jcoufalttx: yes, something similar, nothing automatic20:37
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting20:37
*** n0ano has quit IRC20:37
ttxjcoufal: it's actually easier to do if you don't have a program and a PTL yourself20:37
*** nermina has quit IRC20:38
ttxso my summary so far is that no TC member is really excited by this, and we'd rather fix summit to make sure UX is properly prioritized and discussed, rather than create a program for it ?20:38
zanebttx: yeah, you don't have to bootstrap some source of legitimacy that way ;)20:38
lifelessttx: mmm20:39
flaper87UX is something that I'd prefer all projects to take under consideration - I'm not saying this is not the case - rather than having a single program that takes care of it. I'd like to see all this discussions - UX ones - happening in the mailing list and have projects chiming in20:39
lifelessI think UX is important, often poorly understood and hard for non-experts to deliver on.20:39
*** hemna has quit IRC20:39
lifelessI think we need to do more than say 'yeah, talk @ the summit.'20:39
ttxjcoufal: I know having to crash into horizon slots was unconfortable last summit, but we want to have time for cross-project stuff next time20:39
lifelesse.g. I'd like to put some guidance directly to programs to engage with UX in the same way we do for engaging with docs.20:40
jcoufallifeless: yeah, I wanted to use docs example as well20:40
*** rongze has quit IRC20:41
dhellmannI have questions about having this as a separate program, but I also have questions about the proposal in front of us. It looks like a lot of things that will be done, but not things that have been done. We just told the Manilla folks we wouldn't incubate them under similar circumstances. Should we let the team start doing some of the work they have planned before we decide on whether it should be a program?20:41
lifelessdhellmann: +120:41
ttxlifeless: the end result for docs is that it's almost a completely separate team though. I feel like having UX people infiltrating projects rather than bing a standalone expert group makes more sense20:41
lifelessttx: I agree with that.20:41
lifelessttx: It doesn't conflict with what I said AFAICT.20:41
david-lylettx: there definitely is a need for an embedded nature20:41
ttxlifeless: so I see them as the OSSG (opensatck security group). They have a list, a meeting, people can tap in it. Not a progral though.20:42
zanebttx: is there a chance that having a UX program would encourage more companies to hire UX folks to work on OpenStack?20:42
ttxzaneb: that would also make a poor reason for creating it20:43
* anteaya hands ttx a new keyboard with an M20:43
lifelessttx: I think we're talking past each other.20:43
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting20:43
ttxlifeless: that happens20:43
lifelessttx: I'm not talking about how it's structured. I'm talking about how we help achieve success within the programs.20:43
jcoufalzaneb: I believe it might encourage companies to being more involved20:43
vishylifeless: concrete steps is the only way to achieve success imo20:43
lifelessttx: I have not disagreed with any of your comments on structure. But it seems clear to me that structure alone won't be very successful, based on previous observation of UX <-> programmer interactions.20:44
lifelessvishy: yup; actionable items!20:44
*** IlyaE has quit IRC20:44
vishytake an idea like standardize logs or implement pagination in all apis20:44
zanebttx: it's entirely possible that a lot of companies don't even know there's a place/need for UX folks20:44
vishyand make it happen20:44
vishythe only way to gain cross-project respect is to actually achieve something20:44
ttxhmm, looks like we may need to continue this one next week, I want to cover a bit more ground today20:45
jcoufalvishy: we have a launchpad at the moment of stuff which we need to attack, currently full of horizon / tuskar stuff (GUI)20:45
vishysince the projects are all technical meritocracies20:45
jcoufalbut should get filled with logs, etc20:45
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting20:45
vishyonce the projects see value, then there is room for turning it into a program or some such20:45
ttxjcoufal: is it a separate project, or a tag ?20:45
jcoufalttx: separate launchpad20:45
vishyuntil then it will just seem like a degree from on high and it won't go anywhere20:45
lifelessvishy: decree?20:46
ttxjcoufal: and I think that's symptomatic of the problem here. You want to evangelize UX, not do it separately20:46
jcoufalbut it's very new20:46
sdagueyeh, it seems like this should be a tag on existing bug trackers20:46
sdaguenot it's own20:46
ttxif you have bugs that "normal" developers never see... not the vbest way to get them to care about ux20:46
sdagueif this is about cross project things20:46
vishy+1 to tags20:46
vishythat said you can also target the bug at both projects20:47
ttxBasically I see UX as an advocacy thing. Maybe I'm wrong, but like for security, I'd like for everyone to care about it a bit20:47
flaper87ttx: +120:47
ttxand making a separate team is not the best way to achieve that20:47
vishyttx: I agree that everyone should care about it, but someone has to set the standards20:47
vishyand that needs to be actionable items20:47
sdaguevishy: +120:47
jcoufalttx: who will be creating the guidlines?20:47
sdagueyou still need champions20:47
vishyor we will have another year of "boy wouldn't it be great if the logs in nova didn't suck"20:48
flaper87vishy: and teach others what those standards are20:48
ttxjcoufal: UX-caring people, discussing on [UX] threads on the ml ?20:48
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting20:48
sdaguejcoufal: honestly, I think you can champion it without being an official program. In most cases people are looking for guidance, and if there are solid recommendations out there, people will follow them instead of doing their own thing20:49
vishyi would say write a plan for one area and start implementing it20:49
*** DinaBelova has quit IRC20:49
dhellmannvishy: +1, start on something concrete20:49
sdaguevishy: +120:49
anteayajcoufal: if people know where to find you they will come to you20:49
ttxso I propose, as the next step, to push this discussion to the ML (the original post didn't trigger anything) -- at the very least it should show that we care about UX so much that we prefer it everywhere rather than somewhere20:50
* dhellmann sees baseball fields20:50
anteayadhellmann: ha20:50
flaper87jcoufal: bring up UX issues to the mailing list20:50
ttxjcoufal: a "how to push for better UX in projects" thread.20:50
flaper87I'm pretty sure there are common UX issues among several of OS projects20:51
ttxthen if consensus is that a program is the best way to achieve that, then why not. But I think there are better ways of achieving those goals20:51
jcoufalalright, let's move to ML20:51
ttxok, let's skip next topic and cover the governance repo schanges in progress before the end of the meeting20:52
ttx#topic Other governance changes in progress20:52
*** openstack changes topic to "Other governance changes in progress (Meeting topic: tc)"20:52
ttxWe have a set of changes for review on the governance repo, which I'll accept once they get YES from the majority of voters20:52
ttxAmend TC charter language to reflect Gender Parity: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/5615020:52
lifelessless bias FTW20:52
ttxthat one is pretty obvious, yes20:52
ttxChange Ceilometer official name to OpenStack Telemetry: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56402/20:53
*** jasondot_ has quit IRC20:53
*** jamezpolley has joined #openstack-meeting20:53
ttxSo, about this one -- the responsibility for picking the OpenStack official name is a bit of a grey area, so we need to make sure we also include folks like the marketing team in the naming loop20:53
*** Linz has quit IRC20:53
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting20:53
ttxso I'd hold until they bless it20:53
zanebholy mixed metaphor, batman!20:53
russellbit's a generic term, so hopefully it won't cause any trouble ...20:54
jeblairttx: i'm not sure about the responsibility being a grey area, but i'm supportive of including the marketing team's input.20:54
*** termie has quit IRC20:54
sdaguefriendly hint to jd__ to update the wiki with all the refs20:54
lifelessisn't it a legal question?20:54
sdagueit's still called the metering meeting, for instance20:54
*** markpeek has quit IRC20:54
lifelesstrademark search etc?20:54
dhellmannsdague: I think we're waiting for approval before changing everything20:54
ttxlifeless: generally not because it's a function, but yeh20:54
sdaguedhellmann: ok, fair20:54
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
ttxanyway, it's just a question of waiting a few more days to let Lauren come back from vacation20:55
annegentlettx: was Metering thrown out by the ceilometer team itself?20:55
annegentle(by thrown out I mean discarded)20:55
ttxannegentle: I think so yes20:55
russellbno longer reflected their full scope20:55
annegentlerats, I was rooting for not having to change docs20:55
ttxso far those names were mostly some form of consensus20:55
*** jasondotstar has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
ttxlast one on the board is Update PTLs: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/57079/20:56
ttxpretty obvious cleanup too, will APRV it once it gets 7 +2s20:56
russellbi'll have another one soon ... adding a mission statement for the compute program20:56
mordredttx: do we need a full TC vote on that one? it seems pretty mechanical20:56
russellbposted to the ML for feedback before submitting to the governance repo ... http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/019677.html20:56
dhellmannmordred: good point, that one seems like it's just updating a statement of the outcome of the election, which is already published and accepted20:57
ttxmordred: then it should get 7 +2s quite easily :) Not suire how I can make calls on what needs a formal vote and what doesn't20:57
ttxmordred: if you trust me, I'll make those calls as chair, but I don't want to abuse my APRV power20:57
* russellb trusts you fwiw20:58
mordredttx: I think we can trust you20:58
mordredand if you abuse, we'll remove you20:58
russellbright :)20:58
russellbpitchforks and all20:58
* dhellmann cracks knuckles20:58
annegentlewe really need autopublish to the wiki soon with all these changes, what's the latest on that?20:58
jeblairttx: i think factual updates and typos are ok for the chair to update without votes20:58
ttxhahahahaha. my evil plan worked20:58
mordredjeblair: ++20:58
*** ivasev has joined #openstack-meeting20:58
ttxI can now rule the galaxy^W^W^Wpush changes to a repo20:58
sdagueannegentle: do we really want to autopublish to the wiki, or do another docs tree instead for some of the more official docs?20:58
dhellmannit feels weird to publish static documents to a wiki20:59
jeblairsdague, annegentle: yeah, i think we wanted more of a docs-publish location and deprecate the wiki...20:59
sdagueyeh, I think that's a discussion for anotehr day20:59
russellblink to cgit from the wiki?20:59
annegentlejeblair: sdague: oh, ok20:59
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC20:59
ttxdhellmann: one side of the issue is that we have URLs we'd like to preserve20:59
ttxsome of them bing in the damn BYLAWS.20:59
dhellmannedit the pages with links to the new locations20:59
sdagueannegentle: but I'm with you on using these as the source of truth20:59
*** DrBacchus has quit IRC21:00
ttx(well, in bylaws appendixes, but you get the idea)21:00
jeblairttx: also on that subject, i'd like to change the acls (as i suggested in my message on this way back) so that tc members can vote +/-1, and non members may only leave comments; chair can vote +/-2 and aprv21:00
ttxjeblair: hmm, why ?21:00
dhellmannthat would make it easier to count the votes21:00
*** rushiagr has quit IRC21:01
jeblairfor two reasons: dhellmann's is the first.  and second: i do not believe the tc membership has a right to veto motions, which is what a -2 is.21:01
ttxdhellmann: I kinda liked giving ordinary people the right to express their opinion though21:01
mordredjeblair: ++21:01
jeblairttx: definitely not suggesting that people can't or should not express their opinion21:01
dhellmannttx: everyone can comment21:01
jeblairttx: only saying they shouldn't vote.21:01
russellbcan we just remove -2?21:01
russellband only have +2 (and +/-1)21:01
ttxrussellb: that's how I count "no"21:01
ttxwe need to count 'no'21:01
mordredrussellb: we can, but then why would we vote +1 ever? it seems odd21:02
*** hartsocks has joined #openstack-meeting21:02
ttxjeblair: so... ok, better do it now while nobody is actually attached to that21:02
ttxand we are way over time21:02
jeblairttx: i believe you have just expressed the most succinct reason this needs to be done21:02
markwashif there were a controversial measure, wouldn't it be nice to see a summary of how many non-tc folks were for or against?21:02
* jd__ nods21:02
ttxmarkwash: yeah, that was my concern21:02
jeblair(-2 is not possible, and member -1 is not distinguishable from non-member -1)21:03
anteayaunless you refer to the TC member list21:03
dhellmannjeblair: you and ttx are interpreting -2 in different ways21:03
markmcclainI think a high comment volume would get our attention21:03
mordred-2 has a meaning in gerrit that we can't avoid21:03
jeblairdhellmann: gerrit is interpreting it differently.  :)21:03
mordredit's not about interpretation21:03
*** radix_ has quit IRC21:03
dhellmannjeblair: fair enough21:03
ttxwe have a problem if some members vote "no" using their -2s but there are more YES and the motion should be approved.21:03
mordredonce we're on 2.8, we might be able to re-add non-member votes21:04
ttxthose -2s will prevent us from approving21:04
ttxjeblair: so fix it.21:04
jeblairttx: will do.21:04
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"21:04
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 21:04:17 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)21:04
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-11-19-20.03.html21:04
sdaguejeblair: we could always just write some prolog :)21:04
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-11-19-20.03.txt21:04
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-11-19-20.03.log.html21:04
* mordred punches sdague21:04
ttxdhellmann, dolphm, notmyname, jd__, markwash, jgriffith, russellb, stevebaker, david-lyle, markmcclain, hub_cap: around ?21:04
*** jbryce has quit IRC21:04
ttxsorry for the overrun21:04
ttx#startmeeting project21:04
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 21:04:46 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.21:04
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.21:04
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: project)"21:04
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'project'21:04
mordredttx: I've got weird time needs - can we do the library thing up top?21:05
ttxmordred: how top ? top top ?21:05
ttx#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting21:05
mordredwhenever - I'm probably just only online for another 15-20 minutes21:05
*** IlyaE has quit IRC21:05
ttxmordred: ok, #2 for takeoff21:05
ttx#topic New meeting format21:05
*** openstack changes topic to "New meeting format (Meeting topic: project)"21:05
ttxAt the design summit we discussed a new format for this project / release status meeting21:06
ttxThe idea is to avoid spending the whole meeting doing per-project status updates, and make the meeting more focused on cross-project communication21:06
ttxWhich may well make it shorter and more relevant to everyone21:06
ttxFeel free to add discussion topics on the wiki page if you want anything discussed here, ideally before EOD Monday21:06
ttxFor example, sdague/QA could add a topic to raise top gate offenders21:06
ttxWe might also just skip the meeting if we don't have anything cross-project to discuss21:06
* mordred imagines zero days when that will be the case21:07
ttxDoes that sound good ?21:07
hub_caphey ttx21:07
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting21:07
russellb#vote yes21:07
annegentleI like this idea a lot and want to register that affectation here.21:07
*** vahidh has quit IRC21:07
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting21:07
ttxawesome. handling the project 1-to-1s updates today was a bit crazy, but we'll see if I survive it21:07
jeblairannegentle: i add my +1 to your +121:08
annegentlettx: you can DO it!21:08
dolphmttx: that is going to become your tuesday21:08
hub_cap++11 jeblair?21:08
*** vuil has quit IRC21:08
annegentlehub_cap: concationation ftw21:08
ttxdolphm:  indeed21:08
markwashwhere did we end up on a separate room for those meetings?21:08
jeblairttx: how do you do it, btw?  what's the process?21:08
ttxmarkwash: I figured #openstack-dev could be abused, so that everyone hears our chat21:09
dhellmannmarkwash: #openstack-dev wasn't very noisy for mine, but it was early in the day in the US21:09
markwashttx: its nice until people show up to talk about other stuff21:09
ttxpre-arranged 15-min slots over the Tuesday. 10 of them21:09
dolphm#openstack-dev worked for me, but it was an otherwise quiet time slot21:09
ttxdolphm: we'll move elsewhere if it ends up not bing workable there21:09
markwashit happened like twice in mine, not a huge deal but hurts my brain and seems unnecessary21:09
russellbi had people see me talking and interjecting or messaging asking for things like blueprint reviews or code reviews21:10
russellbit was awesome21:10
lifeless+1 on skipping de meeting :)21:10
* dhellmann wishes he was as popular as russellb 21:10
russellbdhellmann: you don't, i promise21:10
markwashnot sure if awesome, or. . .21:10
ttxOK, quick topic for markwash/mordred/ttx question about client lib branches21:10
* jd__ waits for someone to throw a blueprint to review at russellb 21:10
ttx#topic Client lib branches (markwash)21:10
*** openstack changes topic to "Client lib branches (markwash) (Meeting topic: project)"21:10
ttxmarkwash: so you had a question, before mordred leaves21:10
markwashso, its about time to make some backwards incompatible changes in python-glanceclient21:10
markwashand release it as 1.021:11
markwashbut there are lots of those, and its hard to pick a time in master to just say "okay now we don't release until we have every backwards-breaking change we want"21:11
markwashso it would be cool to use branches in gerrit to deal with that21:11
ttxso.. my understanding was that doing backward-incompat changes in a client library was a really bad idea, due to the way we encourage people to use those21:11
mordredI have two sets of thoughts21:11
stevebakermarkwash: can you make old and new parallel-installable?21:11
mordredone is that we do have the capabilities of doing branches and making releases with a major rev increase21:12
lifelessmarkwash: why do you need to make backward incompat changes?21:12
mordredhowever, what ttx said is my main concern21:12
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC21:12
mordredwhich is that backwards incompat changes in client libraries is GIANTLY disruptive to people21:12
lifelessmarkwash: there will always be backwards incompat changes desired.21:12
lifelessmarkwash: can we do it gracefully over (say) a 1 year deprecation period21:12
notmynameisn't the whole point of semantic versioning to be able to easily communicate when there are such changes?21:12
lifelessnotmyname: it is, but it doesn't make doing it free :)21:13
mordredit is. we should definitely rev the major version if we make such a change21:13
notmynameno, absolutely. it shouldn't be encouraged, but it's a good tool to have21:13
mordredthe thing is - we have multiple different consumers21:13
markwashttx, how are we trying to encourage people to use those?21:13
notmynameand not something to be feared21:13
markwashI'm a little lost21:13
*** nkinder has left #openstack-meeting21:13
mordredone of them are our end users (of which openstack-infra is)21:13
jeblairmarkwash: specifically, this is about backwards-incompat changes to the _python_ api provided by python-glanceclient, right?  (not anything to do with the wire protocol)?21:13
*** ruhe has quit IRC21:13
markwashjeblair: right21:13
ttxnotmyname, markwash: mordred sold me to the client library versioning system by telling me we would never have more than one branch to support (no stable branch for client stuff)21:14
*** ndipanov has quit IRC21:14
david-lyleso the http part of the client maintains compatibility?21:14
markwashwell, I'm not saying I necessarily need to have two active branches at the same time. . just I need a place to gather changes and then eventually pull the trigger on glanceclient 1.021:14
dolphmkeystoneclient is moving towards a separate execution path with features that would otherwise be backwards-incompatible and 1.0-ish21:14
stevebakerthere is also the cli interface to consider21:15
ttxnotmyname, markwash: I fear that we'd create a reason for people to NOT use the latest version, hence the need to have stable branches to say, backport security fixes21:15
dolphmand we're going to properly deprecate and support the current execution path for a couple of releases of the services (i.e. 1 year)21:15
mordredI do not think that this is the same as my opposition to stable/grizzly type branches21:15
mordredsaying "this is the grizzly client library" is just stupid21:15
mordredand makes no sense21:15
mordredhaving a stable/0.0 branch after having released a 1.0 for security fixes isn't silly from a dev perspective21:16
ttxmarkwash: you can use a feature branch to develop elsewhere than in master, if that's what you mean21:16
*** nermina has joined #openstack-meeting21:16
mordredthe thing I'm more concerned with is the idea that we need user-facing incompat changes21:16
markwashso I'm pretty strict about those changes not landing, for example I had to revert a change to the default page size21:16
markwashyou can see why I'd like to move changes like that into a major release21:16
jeblairmordred: agreed, i believe that is what we discussed possibly needing to do in this situation (i'm not sure we'd call it stable/0.0, or something else, but that idea))21:17
mordredespecially as it relates to pinning in our server projects21:17
mordredand, specifically...21:17
mordredwhat it means for grating21:17
mordredon stable/* releases in devstack21:17
lifelessmarkwash: I'm confused why these changes are tied to 1.021:17
notmynamemordred: wouldn't that be a feature of the requirements for a server project?21:17
jeblairmordred: i assume stable/* releases would need to pin to <1.0 ?21:17
mordredlifeless: it's a major version bump21:18
mordredjeblair: right. but then how do we gate stable/*21:18
lifelessmordred: I got that much :)21:18
mordredjeblair: and how do we test cahnges to stable/0.0 ?21:18
jeblairmordred: indeed, we would try to pull stable/grizzly, fail, and fall back on master.21:18
ttxI think tat opens a whoel can of worms. Might be workable, but we won't solve it in meeting21:18
mordredjeblair: because master *client will no longer be able to participate in the gate combo21:18
lifelessbut in my head we should not be breaking up to date clients with a major version bump21:18
*** jamezpolley has left #openstack-meeting21:18
mordredjeblair: but once a 1.0 is cut that's not compat, and we have a version pin in stable/grizzly that's <1.021:18
mordredwe've got an issue with our automation21:19
lifelesswe should get the new functionality it. Deprecate the old. Wait. Then bump the major version and remove teh deprecated things.21:19
mordredI think we need to sort out the exact impacts21:19
mordredand then come back with some suggestions21:19
notmynamemordred: it's like you need a good dependency solver ;-)21:19
mordrednotmyname: it's more complex than that21:19
lifelessif the 'Wait' is as long or longer than our support period for stable branches...21:19
jgriffithlifeless: +121:19
lifelesswe'll have no issue at all.21:19
markwashlifeless: that's what I've done I think. . .21:19
ttxlifeless: yes, I'd prefer slow deprecation too21:19
jgriffithlifeless: re the deprecation cycle21:19
mordrednotmyname: it actually has nothing to do with pip versions21:19
mordredit has to do with how we combine branch versions in the gate21:19
dolphmmarkwash: can you support a new way to instantiate the client to allow consumers to indicate which behavior of the client they expect? (and support both old and new)21:19
lifelessso there shouldn't be any need to change gate stuff, no?21:19
notmynamemordred: actually it could if a particular project isn't using 1.0 yet21:19
lifelessmarkwash: cool21:20
jeblairmordred: the last time we talked about this, i don't believe server projects _used_ client libs.  now they do, and it has complicated our proposed solution.21:20
dolphmmarkwash: that way the gate still works and you allow for people to opt-in to a user experience21:20
markwashlifeless: well, there are things that have been deprecated for a long time (like the legacy glance client) and also things that are just minor but I'm strict about them (i.e. default page sizes for listing images)21:20
*** ildikov has quit IRC21:20
*** huats has quit IRC21:20
ttxmordred, markwash: should we continue this on ML ? I don'ty want to spend the whole meeting on it, especially as we are still trying to grasp what that would cascade-trigger21:21
lifelessmarkwash: so the acid test for me is 'is someone using current glance client APIs going to still work with 1.0'21:21
lifelessmarkwash: if the answer is 'yes', then it's graceful.21:21
lifelessmarkwash: if the answer is 'no', then it's disruptive21:21
markwashttx: I would love it if someone would try to summarize briefly what on earth was said :-)21:21
ttxmarkwash: i'm pretty sure mordred can do that21:22
dolphmlifeless: 'forever' or 'for a reasonable period of time' ?21:22
markwashlike "no never make backwards compatible changes"21:22
* mordred has to run...21:22
markwashor "gate doesn't work with branches"21:22
markwashor something :-)21:22
lifelessdolphm: at the time the discussion for releasing a major version bump is happening21:22
ttxmordred: how about you summarize the problem on a ML thread and continue discussion there ?21:22
*** huats has joined #openstack-meeting21:22
jeblairlifeless: i agree that a deprecation cycle longer than our support cycle eliminates many problems.  :)21:22
markwashs/compatible/incompatible/ in case that wasn't clear21:22
lifelessdolphm: major version bumps are where compat is broken, and IMO it's fine to break compat - gracefully. Which is where the deprecation + grace period comes in.21:22
dolphmlifeless: ++21:23
dolphmlifeless: that's the approach keystoneclient is taking21:23
lifelessand I think this is a /feature/ not a gate limitation.21:23
lifelessIt's better for our users.21:23
lifelessIt's better for deployers.21:23
ttx#action mordred to summarize problem and push discussion on ML21:23
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting21:23
ttxlet's move on, please21:23
lifelessIt's better for distributors.21:23
ttxsince we lost mordred he got assigned the action21:23
ttx#topic Finalizing icehouse release schedule21:24
*** openstack changes topic to "Finalizing icehouse release schedule (Meeting topic: project)"21:24
ttxThe proposed schedule, as discussed at the design summit, is here:21:24
ttxTwo things I wanted to insist on:21:24
ttxicehouse-1 is placed on December 5, which means features completed by December 321:24
*** davidhadas_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:24
russellb2 weeks, eep21:24
ttxThat's only two weeks... so icehouse-1 can mostly be used to tag work that landed really early on (and even pre-summit) in icehouse21:24
ttxwhich I think is fine, now that I think more of it21:25
dolphmone of which is thanksgiving week in the US21:25
russellbdolphm: good point, productivity-- for us here21:25
ttxthe other thing I'd like to have some agreement on is the recommended "off" week.21:25
ttxFTR this would be a week where we'd actually encourage people to take time off OpenStack development / review, hopefully resulting in a "light" week to catch up21:25
jd__yep, icehouse-1 seems so close and short that almost nothing will target it21:25
dolphmwhich means if it's not done this week, it won't stand much of a chance seeing iteration21:25
ttx(jd__: but pushing it back one week would just result in more questions asking what to target to it)21:26
ttx(so using it to clean up the slate before starting real work is fine by me)21:26
*** vipul-away is now known as vipul21:26
ttxOn the ML thread there was a slight preference for the middle week, which is definitely less scary if we have to handle post-release fires21:26
*** davidhadas has quit IRC21:26
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting21:26
ttxany string objection to that one ?21:27
ttxor strong ?21:27
annegentlettx: I'd be slightly leaning towards the middle week21:27
annegentlettx: but again I think week after summit may make more sense overall21:27
ttxannegentle: I'll let you know where I go for vacation21:27
annegentlettx: heh21:27
*** lblanchard has quit IRC21:27
russellb2 weeks off then21:28
ttxok, middle week it is then21:28
ttxand schedule considered approved21:28
ttxunless someone objects and discovered a man was burning on Apr 16 or something21:29
ttx#topic Icehouse roadmapping21:29
*** openstack changes topic to "Icehouse roadmapping (Meeting topic: project)"21:29
ttxI talked to you all earlier today, the goal being to have a clear roadmap for icehouse-1 today21:29
*** IlyaE has quit IRC21:29
ttxthe proximity of it paradoxically makes it easier to do21:29
ttxsince anything unsure can safely be bumped to i-221:30
ttxThe goal is to cover the missing stuff and i-2/i-3 targeting in the following weeks21:30
*** rockyg has quit IRC21:30
ttxI'll switch http://status.openstack.org/release/ to icehouse ASAP tomorrow21:30
lifelessttx: you didn't talk to me :P21:30
*** pablosan has quit IRC21:30
ttxlifeless: that's because you're not part of the integrated release21:31
*** esker has joined #openstack-meeting21:31
ttxMost projects have pretty complete i-1 plans by now21:31
*** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting21:32
ttxmarkmcclain: neutron still needs some love21:32
lifelessttx: I was teasing. I know :)21:32
ttxsame for heat21:33
ttx(should set priorities to those undefined ones)21:33
markmcclainttx: it's still on my list for today21:33
*** pablosan has joined #openstack-meeting21:33
ttxand cinder21:33
* stevebaker is going through heat now21:33
ttxmost of the others (including nova !) are in pretty good shape21:33
jgriffithttx: working on it21:34
jgriffithttx: will be set later today21:34
*** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:34
russellbi think we have nova in better shape for i1 at least21:34
ttxso, for next week... Would be great to have most blueprints filed, targeted and prioritized so that we can start having a good picture of what will likely be in icehouse21:34
ttxmight take more than a week though21:34
ttxquestions on the roadmapping ?21:35
ttxI guess not21:36
*** atiwari has quit IRC21:36
ttx#topic Blocked blueprints (a.k.a. "Red Flag District")21:36
*** openstack changes topic to "Blocked blueprints (a.k.a. "Red Flag District") (Meeting topic: project)"21:36
ttxso this will be a recurrent topic21:36
ttxWe'll use "Blocked" status to flag blueprints that are blocked on cross-project dependencies and need to be discussed in meeting21:36
ttxlike https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/user-locale-api21:37
ttxdolphm: wanted to raise this one ?21:37
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting21:37
dolphmyep -- we had this leftover from havana development21:37
dhellmannthere's some work going on in oslo related to this, too21:37
dolphmAccept-Language header support was disabled late in the cycle across all projects21:37
dolphmi left the bp open for icehouse, but it's effectively blocked by the above ^21:38
dolphmand then re-enabling in gettext init21:39
*** armax has left #openstack-meeting21:39
dhellmanna changeset went up earlier today for oslo21:40
dolphmhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/56093/ ?21:40
dhellmannI need to review it, but based on the description I got in a separate email I may have some issues with the implementation.21:40
ttxdhellmann: i18n-messages is targeted to i-221:40
dhellmannwe're still having the philosophical discussion about whether a translatable message, with its state, *is* a unicode object or *has* a unicode object21:41
ttxdolphm: do you need it completed earlier ?21:41
*** pnavarro has quit IRC21:41
dolphmttx: no21:41
*** rongze has quit IRC21:41
dhellmannttx: yes, because I wasn't sure I was going to be able to get consensus on an implementation before then21:41
dhellmannor at least by i-1, I should say21:41
dolphmalright, if we're in the philosophy debate phase, i'll bump to i2 for sure :)21:41
dhellmanndolphm: I welcome your input on that :-)21:41
dolphmdhellmann: i'll send bknudson your way :)21:42
dhellmanndolphm: please!21:42
ttxany other cross-project concern anyone wants to raise ?21:42
ttxfyi I'm working on making rootwrap a standalone package in i-1 (rather than oslo-incubator copy)21:42
ttxso I'll probably make neutron/cinder/nova switch to using that during i-2 timeframe21:42
dolphmttx: does grenade count?21:43
ttxdolphm: I would say yes21:44
dolphmi tried to get dtroyer's attention during the keystone meeting, but no go21:44
dolphmwe ran into an upgrade issue in master, we THINK caused by attempting to go from grizzly -> master21:44
ttxgrenade is part of QA so sdague should be able to give you advice21:44
dolphmthere's a patchset in review that should resolve21:44
dolphmour bug- https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/125205721:44
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1252057 in grenade "keystoneclient requirements update fails grenade because using stable/grizzly" [Undecided,New]21:44
dolphmdprince's patch - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/57066/21:45
dolphmto openstack-infra/devstack-gate ^21:45
sdagueyeh, maurosr is working on a patch to flip us to havana as the stable branch, there were a few kinks in this system as it will be the first time running multiple grenade configs21:45
dolphmsdague: ah cool21:46
dolphmthat's all from me then :)21:46
ttxany other red flag / concern ?21:46
ttx#topic Incubated projects21:47
*** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects (Meeting topic: project)"21:47
ttxSo for this cycle we currently have Ironic, Marconi and Savanna in incubation.21:47
*** dvarga has quit IRC21:48
ttxDo we have people from those projects around ?21:48
ttxHey SergeyLukjanov, must be late where you are21:48
ttxSergeyLukjanov: When do you plan to align internal savanna releases to the common milestones ?21:48
SergeyLukjanovttx, starting from the i121:48
ttxSergeyLukjanov: oh, great21:49
ttxSergeyLukjanov: what about you tag this one, and I'll take over and start doing it by icehouse-2 ?21:49
SergeyLukjanovwe're cleaning up LP to have issues/bps mapped to corresponing milestones21:50
SergeyLukjanovttx, great, ok for me21:50
*** bdpayne has quit IRC21:50
ttxSergeyLukjanov: fwiw the icehouse-1 tag is actually "2014.1.b1"21:50
SergeyLukjanovttx, got it21:51
*** denis_makogon_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:51
ttxSergeyLukjanov: if you have questions, just let me know21:51
ttxdevananda: is Ironic getting closer to shippable state ?21:51
SergeyLukjanovttx, sure, thx21:52
*** jamezpolley has joined #openstack-meeting21:52
devanandattx: yep. I should be doing a client release soon, too21:52
*** radix_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:52
*** jamezpolley has left #openstack-meeting21:52
devanandattx: we're still working on the nova driver and some bits for the image deployment glue, but all other things seem good21:52
ttxdevananda: When do you plan ro be able to align internal ironic releases to the common milestones ?21:52
ttxicehouse-2 ?21:52
devanandattx: yes, i-2.21:53
*** sparkycollier has quit IRC21:53
ttxsounds good to me21:53
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting21:53
*** same5336_ has quit IRC21:54
*** jamezpolley has joined #openstack-meeting21:54
ttxkgriffiths is not around, anyhone speaking for Marconi ?21:54
ttxwhat's wrong with my fingers today21:54
*** jamezpolley has left #openstack-meeting21:54
ttx#topic Open discussion21:55
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: project)"21:55
ttxWill close the Horizon PTL election in 4 minutes, so here is your last chance to vote if you're an Horizon ATC21:55
SergeyLukjanovttx, btw 0200 AM in my tz :)21:55
*** luis_fdez has quit IRC21:56
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting21:56
*** jasondotstar has quit IRC21:56
*** bdehamer has joined #openstack-meeting21:56
ttxSergeyLukjanov: wow, you're farther east than I thought21:56
devanandattx: do you have scripts to create milestones for incubated projects? Ironic doesn't have i2/i3 yet21:56
ttxdevananda: I have scripts, but if it's just to create two milestones you better do it by hand21:57
devanandattx: ack21:57
ttxdevananda: for the curious, script at https://github.com/ttx/openstack-releasing/blob/master/create_milestones.py21:57
ttxdevananda: but in this case just go to https://launchpad.net/ironic/icehouse and create them21:58
ttx("create milestone")21:58
SergeyLukjanovI'm using some of this scripts for moving bugs and checking tarballs, it's really useful21:58
*** insanidade has left #openstack-meeting21:58
SergeyLukjanovthx for ttx21:58
*** henrynash has quit IRC21:58
*** gyee has quit IRC21:58
ttxI shall move them under openstack/ somewhere as part of the relmgt program21:59
*** denis_makogon_ is now known as denis_makogon21:59
ttxclosing horizon PTl election in 10 seconds21:59
ttxdavid-lyle: looks like you win21:59
*** nermina has quit IRC21:59
ttx#link http://www.cs.cornell.edu/w8/~andru/cgi-perl/civs/results.pl?id=E_cd16dd051e519ef221:59
lsmoladavid-lyle, congratulations22:00
ttxand that closes our meeting, thanks everyone22:00
mrungedavid-lyle, congrats!22:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"22:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 22:00:25 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)22:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-11-19-21.04.html22:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-11-19-21.04.txt22:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-11-19-21.04.log.html22:00
david-lylethanks mrunge!22:00
mrungedavid-lyle, well deserved!22:00
david-lyleI truly appreciate you running22:00
bdehamerdavid-lyle, congrats22:00
julimcongrats david-lyle22:01
anteayadavid-lyle mrunge good election!22:01
jpichdavid-lyle, congratulations22:01
mrungedavid-lyle, I truly appreciate, you won!22:01
david-lylethanks everyone22:01
david-lyle#startmeeting Horizon22:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 19 22:01:43 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is david-lyle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.22:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.22:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'horizon'22:01
jcoufaldavid-lyle: congrats22:02
julimhi all22:02
jtomasekcongrats david-lyle22:02
david-lyleHello everyone!  I now know none of you have any sense, at least no the majority of you22:02
*** Toshi has joined #openstack-meeting22:03
david-lyleI'll do my best22:03
david-lyleI started an agenda at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Horizon22:04
david-lyleAs I said in the last meeting please add your agenda items there in the week prior to the meetings22:04
david-lyleBut I'm going to insert a topic first22:05
david-lyle#topic Blueprints22:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Blueprints (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:05
david-lyleI was hoping to wait until the election was concluded to have the blueprints prioritized, but Icehouse-1 is on Dec 5 (feature freeze Dec 3) and we needed a more rational plan for icehouse-1 other than everything.  So I rearranged some bps. https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/icehouse-122:05
david-lyleBasically, if there wasn't code already up for review it got bumped22:06
*** dcramer_ has quit IRC22:06
*** litong has quit IRC22:06
david-lylethat's not to say things can't get added back in, but there's already a lot to review out there22:06
david-lyleIs anyone close with another BP that they think should be in the list?22:06
*** IlyaE has quit IRC22:07
david-lylesilence sounds like a no22:07
jcoufaldavid-lyle: what about Navigation, I belive we might start with implementation fairly soon22:07
david-lylejcoufal: I think we can, but <2 weeks seemed tight22:08
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting22:08
*** pdmars has quit IRC22:08
jcoufaldavid-lyle: alright, no need to push it22:08
david-lyleI don't think early i-2 is any worse22:08
david-lyleanything on  the list that is problematic?22:08
david-lyleactually, I see one22:08
david-lyleI think the Hyper-V RDP is not in nova yet, I need to follow up on that22:09
david-lyleso that may move out too22:09
jcoufaldavid-lyle: inline editation - I am not sure about the very latest state, but last thing I saw needed more work to do22:09
jcoufalmaybe lsmola might say more...?22:10
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC22:10
lsmolayeah true, my old patch22:10
lsmoladavid-lyle, i have almost forgot it :-)22:10
mrungethe last time, I saw that, it was quite good22:10
lsmoladavid-lyle, yeah that stands there and was prepared in H322:10
jomaradavid-lyle: there's already a PR for the angular blueprint (the blueprint showed up after the PR) and its not on the list, but we have a separate agenda item to discuss that22:10
david-lyleok, I remember reviewing it, but wanted to try it out, and never got to it.  Do you think it needs help?22:11
mrungelsmola, what was the issue, why wasn't that approved?22:11
jpichI remember it was pretty neat when I tried it last, too. Must review again22:11
mrungeI don't remember any more22:11
jpichToo close to feature freeze?22:11
mrungeyes, it worked quite well22:11
lsmoladavid-lyle, would be good to merge it at some point :-) otherwise it will rebase me to death :-D22:11
david-lyleI think that was the primary concern22:11
*** pcm_ has quit IRC22:12
mrungeI tested it in a very early state22:12
*** yamahata_ has quit IRC22:12
*** lexx_ has quit IRC22:12
jcoufalalright, then it looks like achievable BP, sorry for confusion :)22:12
david-lylemay need a rebase now, but you're still good with the idea lsmola?22:12
david-lylejcoufal: good to be clear on it22:12
david-lyle#topic IA proposal22:13
*** openstack changes topic to "IA proposal (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:13
lsmoladavid-lyle, ok, i can rebase it tomorrow22:13
david-lyleSo last meeting I took on a task to propose some IA guidelines.22:13
david-lyleShort story, I failed to get that far22:13
jcoufalNeither me. I need to revisit that as well22:14
*** davidhadas_ has quit IRC22:14
david-lyleHopefully, jcoufal and others can help me with that this week and we can at least introduce it next meeting22:14
*** bswartz has quit IRC22:14
jcoufaldavid-lyle: yeah, we should take a stab on that22:14
*** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting22:15
jcoufalat least some first draft22:15
david-lyleI do think it's important to set up the broad guidelines at least and maybe haggle the finer points a little later22:15
jcoufaldavid-lyle: +122:15
david-lylethanks jcoufal22:15
julimhappy to help22:15
david-lyleany help is appreciated julim22:15
david-lyleI think we just need to reconcile the proposals22:16
david-lyle#topic Discuss using AngularJS22:16
*** openstack changes topic to "Discuss using AngularJS (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:16
jcoufaldavid-lyle: we can discuss here: http://ask-openstackux.rhcloud.com/question/1/openstack-ui-information-architecture/22:16
jcoufal(belongs to previous topic)22:16
david-lylethanks jcoufal22:16
david-lyleSo this topic should probably include Discuss non-JS support soft requirement22:17
david-lylebecause they hinge on each other22:17
david-lyleI've been looking into the non-js requirement and got some valuable feedback from Gabriel regarding the matter too22:17
*** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC22:18
david-lyleThe core of that requirement stems from accessibility standards that are over 6 years old22:18
david-lylewhen JavaScript support in browsers was not very uniform22:18
*** joesavak has quit IRC22:19
david-lyleThat said, there may be some government based installations that still are tied to antiquated browsers, regulations22:19
jcoufalyeah, it's very common for all the accessibility documents - they are very old, especially from governments22:19
*** twoputt has quit IRC22:19
bdehamerSo, the issue is not no-js specifically -- it's more about accessibility22:19
*** topol has quit IRC22:19
*** twoputt_ has quit IRC22:20
david-lyleWell, I've read both22:20
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting22:20
david-lylebut I think the main issue is accessibility22:20
lsmoladavid-lyle, so does it mean it runs some old version of openstack?22:20
jtomasekand accessibility topic has been also touched here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/018887.html22:20
david-lylewhich I think we can address with client-side means22:20
jcoufaldavid-lyle: but since openstack UI is not supported in antique browsers we don't have to care about that anyway, right?22:20
mrungeI don't think it's related to OpenStack at all22:20
david-lylenot openstack, say IE 222:21
mrungeand IMHO, if you want to sell something to governments, your stuff needs to be accessible22:21
david-lylethat's not a real example of course, but say a group that is barred from having JS enabled22:21
*** DrBacchus has joined #openstack-meeting22:21
mrungei.e. readable by screen readers22:21
david-lyleI think mrunge is right22:21
david-lyleWe don't support lower end browsers already22:22
jtomasekaccording to what jomara sent to the discussion, the javascript is not a blocker for accessibility and screenreaders22:22
jomarascreen readers and JS can get along, if you design your application well22:22
*** dprince has quit IRC22:22
david-lyleso as long as screen readers are supported, I think we can move forward22:22
mrungein my experience, the group of folks (0.2% or so) will shout out loudly22:22
mrungewhen cut off22:22
david-lyleI would like to take it slowly though22:22
jcoufal+1, if we can support screen readers, we don't have to support non-js22:23
mrungebut agreed +122:23
jomara+1 to that22:23
*** thomasem has quit IRC22:23
david-lyleI have a large concern that we are moving away from the core coding strength of OpenStack which is python22:23
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting22:23
jtomasekdavid-lyle: yes we should maintain some affordable level of non-js support (graceful degradation)22:23
lsmoladavid-lyle, with angular?22:23
jcoufaldavid-lyle: I wouldn't like to see everything JS based22:24
jtomasekwe should definitely not try to convert horizon to pure js single page application22:24
david-lyleThe more involved the client side becomes, the less likely new project teams like Heat, Trove will be able to contribute the base UI implementation of their support22:24
mrungeyupp, completely agree22:24
lsmoladavid-lyle, well, there is base UI implementation22:25
*** henrynash has quit IRC22:25
jomarathe angular implementation only supplants the *existing* js implementation22:25
*** vuil has joined #openstack-meeting22:25
david-lylewhich would create a high burden on an already taxed Horizon development team22:25
david-lylejomara: for now, right?22:25
lsmoladavid-lyle, and there are fancy pages based on well written and tested angular libraries22:25
david-lyleIt certainly could22:25
*** fifieldt has joined #openstack-meeting22:25
*** maxdml has joined #openstack-meeting22:25
jtomasekdavid-lyle: let's keep js to UI features only? (matches the intent of using angular directives)22:26
jomarafor now / the foreseeable future - theres quite a bit of work to do22:26
david-lyleI think that sounds like a great rule of thumb22:26
david-lyleIs there anyone that has a strong concern with this direction?22:26
jcoufal-4 lsmola22:27
jomarai was going to rewrite the entire app in node js, but i guess i'll stop now =(22:27
lsmolajcoufal, thanks for auto correction22:27
*** ayoung has quit IRC22:28
david-lyleSo, let's review jomara's change, and I'll add it back to target i-122:28
*** ArxCruz has quit IRC22:28
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC22:28
jomaragreat - im still working on patch2, itll probably be tomorrow22:28
david-lylejust remember...  accessibility22:29
jomaramaxv gave me a bunch of great feedback i need to fix22:29
*** vijendar has quit IRC22:30
david-lyle#topic Horizon/Openstack-dashboard split22:30
*** openstack changes topic to "Horizon/Openstack-dashboard split (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:30
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting22:30
david-lyleThis was discussed at the summit and I talked to mordred this morning about it.22:30
mrungeI must admit, I havenÄt had the time to put more effort into that22:30
david-lyleI think he's not online right now22:31
david-lylemrunge no worries22:31
*** sdake_ has quit IRC22:31
mrungedavid-lyle, at least, mordred is listed here22:31
mrungein the users list22:31
*** jhenner has quit IRC22:32
david-lylehe has an idea of just leaving the horizon repo as is with openstack-dashboard below it and stripping out the current horizon/horizon dir and renaming that22:32
david-lylehe has a server that's always on22:32
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:32
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:32
mrungeI see22:32
david-lylethat would minimize package compatibility problems going forward22:32
*** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC22:33
jcoufalwell the dashboard itself is a bit confusing name though22:33
jcoufalif we are going to rename, I would do it properly22:33
david-lylewe could even rename the openstack_dashboard dir if we wanted to22:33
david-lylewell, we want the Horizon name to stick with the actual UI, that would accomplish that22:33
*** ArxCruz has joined #openstack-meeting22:33
david-lylethe stripped out h/h directory would get the new name and package22:34
david-lyleand become a dependency22:34
mrungeIf I could choose, I would rename both22:34
bdehamerany thoughts on what the new name for h/h would be?22:34
lsmolahmm I kinda like Horizon for UI22:34
mrungeto confuse everyone22:34
*** Toshi has quit IRC22:34
jpichSeems fine to me - keeping 'openstack_dashboard' as a directory would avoid a lot of renaming in our codebase and for already existing plugins who consume us22:34
david-lylehis suggestion was just django-horizon or something22:35
jcoufalright, but then openstack_dashboard dir doesn't make big sense then22:35
jpichdavid-lyle: Oh, so keep 'horizon' also in the 'framework-bits' name?22:35
jcoufalyeah, something like django-ui-lib, django-horizon-lib, or similar :)22:35
mrungemy intention was to strip out the outer horizon dir at all22:35
david-lylebut it doesn't really matter either way what the directory is called, it need to be there22:35
david-lylemrunge, you still likely want the directory22:36
mrungethen we'd have another horizon (the framework) and openstack_dashboard for the UI stuff22:36
jpichThese conversations get confusing quickly22:36
mrungeexactly jpich22:36
bdehameryeah, I think I just got lost22:37
david-lyleI think we need to mark it up somewhere rather than in just text22:37
jcoufaldiagram would help :)22:37
jpichPictures :-) Diagrams!22:37
mrungenooo. if you can't express in just a few words ;-)22:37
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting22:37
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC22:37
david-lyletwo packages horizon and django-horizon22:38
*** dkranz has quit IRC22:38
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting22:38
david-lylehorizon is the same as today22:38
mrungeat least I'd call it openstack-horizon22:39
david-lyleexcept the second horizon directory is stripped out into a new package called say django-horizon22:39
*** hartsocks has left #openstack-meeting22:39
mrungebut, yes!22:39
david-lylemy concern was the upgrade path for existing installs22:39
mrungedavid-lyle, package-wise that shouldnÄt be a problem at all22:39
david-lyleif we change the name and directory structure we push a lot of work outside of just the Horizon team22:39
jtomasekjust a point, django-horizon should then undergo some changes eg moving js files and _scripts.html into horizon, there might be more places that will need these decisions22:40
david-lylewhere if it were still Horizon (which people associate with the UI anyway) they just upgrade, and pull down a new dependency22:40
david-lylejtomasek: yes there are some finer details, ack22:40
mrungeas someone to do the work outside: that's just a matter of an hour or so22:41
jpichjtomasek: Definitely some things need to be moved around still22:41
mrungeIMHO more confusing or requiring work would be the static stuff, such as js .less etc....22:41
*** stevemar has quit IRC22:42
david-lyleyes, that will be trickier, because essentially both assume those files are present22:42
*** rongze has quit IRC22:42
david-lylealright, mrunge I believe you own this one anyway, correct?22:43
*** rnirmal has quit IRC22:43
*** jecarey has quit IRC22:43
mrungedavid-lyle, own what?22:43
lsmolathe bp?22:43
david-lylethe bp, or did you just propose?22:44
david-lylewe can just move forward commenting in the blueprint then22:44
*** same5336_ has joined #openstack-meeting22:44
david-lyleand you can determine what's rational :)22:45
*** fkak_ has quit IRC22:45
jpich...and add a link to a diagram :-)22:45
david-lylewill do22:45
jcoufalcolors included please :)22:45
* david-lyle needs to remember to generate diagram22:46
*** jamezpolley has joined #openstack-meeting22:46
*** jamezpolley has left #openstack-meeting22:46
jtomasekjcoufal can help you, he likes drawing rectangles :)22:46
david-lylecolored rectangles?22:46
jcoufalyeah, but I have problems with circles :-/22:46
david-lyleI hear color's important22:47
david-lyle#topic Open Discussion22:47
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Horizon)"22:47
lsmolai have a quick one22:47
lsmolacould you review a https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-reusable-charts22:47
david-lylelsmola: sure22:47
lsmolathere is a WIP review that shows the chart in action with mock data22:48
lsmolareal overview pages will land in I222:48
david-lyleoh yeah, reviews.  Thanks!22:48
david-lylesince, the list of bp's for i-1 is only items up for review, please try to have a go at them22:49
*** arosen has quit IRC22:49
david-lyleincluding reusable-charts22:49
lsmolacool :-)22:49
lsmolathank youuu :-)22:49
david-lylesome of lsmola's follow on work builds on those charts22:49
david-lyleand no I have reviewed them either yet22:49
jtomasekjust an update on Bootstrap 3, saschpe told me he's tackling last bugs in Lesscpy, I'll make sure I test it, so we're moving on!22:50
david-lylebut I know how the rest of my week is looking :)22:50
david-lylejtomasek: great news22:50
jpichjtomasek: Awesome!22:50
jcoufal! go Botstrap 3 go!22:50
openstackjcoufal: Error: "go" is not a valid command.22:50
jcoufallol :)22:50
jpichgo should totally be a valid command22:50
david-lylethe most basic of commands22:51
lsmolajtomasek, cool22:51
jcoufalthis is awesome22:51
jcoufalit will generate other BP which are blocked22:51
jcoufalless decomposition, icon-font, etc22:52
jomarahorizon + wingdings?22:52
*** Linz has quit IRC22:52
david-lyle+1 wingdings22:52
*** Linz has joined #openstack-meeting22:53
jcoufalif I get at least five other +1s, I will take that seriously :)22:53
jcoufalmore voters for wingdings?22:53
jomara+1 wingdings22:53
mrungeanything else?22:54
david-lyleso object browsing, is any one actively using this?22:54
david-lyleany would they be opposed to a wholesale rewrite to make it usable?22:54
*** denis_makogon has quit IRC22:54
jpichI think kspear is using it, though making it better never sounds bad22:55
david-lyleok, I will ping him22:55
*** jecarey has joined #openstack-meeting22:56
jcoufalreminds me - today in ML there started follow up thread on Search project, which is very related to Horizon22:56
lsmoladavid-lyle, never tried more than 2 objects :-)22:56
jcoufalI recommend everybody to read that, very interesting effort22:56
david-lylelsmola: try nest objects22:56
lsmoladavid-lyle, :-O22:56
*** vito-ordaz has quit IRC22:56
jcoufal#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/019742.html (Search Project)22:57
david-lyleyes the search project could provide a solution to limited filtering in the service APIs22:57
jpichThe 2mn video is pretty cool22:58
lsmoladavid-lyle, jcoufal , cool, looking forward to that22:58
david-lyleI would think especially useful for admins, but also non-admins with larger domains/projects22:58
david-lyleit's pretty young currently, but there is strong potential there22:58
julimIt would help not just admins but also navigation issues, filtering, etc.22:59
julimmuch needed I would say.22:59
david-lyleyes, but at least 2 releases away optimistically22:59
lsmoladavid-lyle, :-(23:00
*** flaper87 is now known as flaper87|afk23:00
mrungeno honestly, lsmola23:00
*** markpeek has quit IRC23:00
*** markpeek1 has joined #openstack-meeting23:00
jpichI hope the thread generates some discussion from the other projects as well23:00
jpichOk, we're overtime23:01
david-lyleWell, our time is almost up.  I want to thank everyone for their vote of confidence.  I would also like to thank mrunge for allowing us to have an election for PTL.  I think that should be the case for all OpenStack projects.  And I look forward to all of your help going forward in Icehouse.23:01
*** ryanpetrello_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:02
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC23:02
*** ryanpetrello_ is now known as ryanpetrello23:02
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"23:02
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 19 23:02:15 2013 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)23:02
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-11-19-22.01.html23:02
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-11-19-22.01.txt23:02
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-11-19-22.01.log.html23:02
jcoufalthanks david-lyle and everybody23:02
jpichSounds good. Thanks david-lyle!23:02
lsmolathanks everybody, good night23:02
mrungethanks everybody!23:02
julimthanks all23:02
jtomasekthanks and good night!23:02
jpichGood night/day/breakfast everyone23:02
devlapsthanks all!23:02
*** thedodd has quit IRC23:03
*** julim has quit IRC23:03
*** jpich has quit IRC23:04
*** mrunge has quit IRC23:04
*** bdehamer has quit IRC23:04
*** sushils has quit IRC23:05
*** lsmola has quit IRC23:06
*** jcoufal has quit IRC23:06
*** burt has quit IRC23:07
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC23:07
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting23:07
*** jtomasek has quit IRC23:08
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:08
*** dolphm has quit IRC23:09
*** diogogmt has quit IRC23:10
*** jcooley_ has quit IRC23:10
*** henrynash has quit IRC23:11
*** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting23:11
*** atiwari has quit IRC23:11
devanandadhellmann: is there something I need to do besides :webprefix: /some/uri to get the HTTP GET/POST/etc to show up?23:12
*** SvenDowideit has quit IRC23:13
*** SvenDowideit has joined #openstack-meeting23:15
devanandadhellmann: also, fyi, it looks like i needed to isntall oslo.sphinx ?23:15
*** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting23:16
dhellmanndevananda: oslo.sphinx is a surprising dependency, that may be unintentional23:17
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC23:17
dhellmanndevananda: are your controllers subclassed from pecan's RestController class?23:17
devanandadhellmann: yes23:17
dhellmannok, they should just work then23:17
dhellmannit's about dinner time here, but if you put a branch somewhere and email me a link I can look at it in the am for you23:18
devanandadhellmann: ack. will do23:18
*** sacharya has quit IRC23:19
dhellmanndevananda: np23:21
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting23:23
*** weshay has quit IRC23:23
*** neelashah has quit IRC23:24
*** jmontemayor has quit IRC23:25
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting23:26
*** markvan has quit IRC23:27
*** dkranz has quit IRC23:27
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting23:28
*** tanisdl has quit IRC23:31
*** lanlan has joined #openstack-meeting23:31
*** lanlan has left #openstack-meeting23:32
*** oubiwann has quit IRC23:35
*** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting23:38
*** vipul is now known as vipul-away23:41
*** tanisdl has joined #openstack-meeting23:42
*** sdake_ has quit IRC23:43
*** rongze has quit IRC23:43
*** diogogmt has joined #openstack-meeting23:45
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC23:47
*** changbl has quit IRC23:48
*** loq_mac has joined #openstack-meeting23:48
*** loq_mac has quit IRC23:49
*** banix has left #openstack-meeting23:49
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting23:52
*** rfolco has quit IRC23:56
*** epim has quit IRC23:58
*** eharney has quit IRC23:59

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