Tuesday, 2014-11-18

*** DaSchab has quit IRC00:01
*** rrrobbb has quit IRC00:01
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC00:03
*** zehicle has joined #openstack-meeting00:03
*** Guest60909 has quit IRC00:03
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting00:04
*** Riddhi has quit IRC00:04
*** kebray has quit IRC00:05
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC00:06
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting00:06
*** darrenc has quit IRC00:07
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC00:07
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting00:07
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting00:08
*** dims_ has quit IRC00:08
*** safchain has quit IRC00:09
*** chuckC_ has quit IRC00:10
*** thedodd has quit IRC00:11
*** js1123 has quit IRC00:12
*** david-lyle is now known as david-lyle_afk00:13
*** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting00:13
*** dane_leblanc has quit IRC00:15
*** otter768 has joined #openstack-meeting00:16
*** pballand has quit IRC00:17
*** jecarey has quit IRC00:17
*** atiwari has quit IRC00:18
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting00:19
*** yingjun has joined #openstack-meeting00:20
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting00:21
*** darrenc has joined #openstack-meeting00:23
*** adalbas has quit IRC00:24
*** ChuckC has quit IRC00:25
*** tsekiyama has quit IRC00:26
*** tsekiyama has joined #openstack-meeting00:27
*** esheffield has quit IRC00:28
*** tsekiyam_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:28
*** mtanino has quit IRC00:28
*** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC00:29
*** funzo has quit IRC00:31
*** avozza is now known as zz_avozza00:31
*** padkrish has quit IRC00:31
*** tsekiyama has quit IRC00:32
*** Ark has joined #openstack-meeting00:33
*** Ark is now known as Guest2571900:34
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting00:35
*** tsekiyam_ has quit IRC00:35
*** jjmb has quit IRC00:36
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting00:37
*** noslzzp has quit IRC00:38
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC00:40
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting00:40
*** mudassirlatif has quit IRC00:40
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting00:41
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC00:42
*** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting00:43
*** chuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:45
*** Riddhi has joined #openstack-meeting00:46
*** bradjones has quit IRC00:48
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting00:48
*** ChuckC has quit IRC00:48
*** bradjones has joined #openstack-meeting00:48
*** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting00:49
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting00:49
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC00:51
*** xingchao has quit IRC00:51
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC00:51
*** stevemar has quit IRC00:52
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting00:52
*** shohel02 has quit IRC00:52
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting00:55
*** gokrokve has quit IRC00:56
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting00:57
*** gokrokve has quit IRC00:57
*** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:58
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC01:02
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** natarajk has joined #openstack-meeting01:03
*** natarajk has left #openstack-meeting01:03
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting01:04
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting01:04
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting01:06
*** yamahata has quit IRC01:07
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting01:07
*** yingjun has quit IRC01:07
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC01:08
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting01:09
*** pballand has quit IRC01:09
*** hemna is now known as hemnafk01:09
*** tkay has quit IRC01:09
*** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting01:10
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting01:10
*** jaypipes has quit IRC01:11
*** yingjun has joined #openstack-meeting01:13
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC01:14
*** stevemar has quit IRC01:14
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting01:16
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC01:16
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting01:16
*** wuhg has joined #openstack-meeting01:18
*** MaxV has quit IRC01:18
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting01:19
*** epico has joined #openstack-meeting01:19
*** banix has quit IRC01:19
*** hogepodge has quit IRC01:21
*** amcrn has quit IRC01:21
*** rmoe has quit IRC01:21
*** emagana has quit IRC01:24
*** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting01:26
*** dsetia_ has quit IRC01:27
*** spzala has quit IRC01:28
*** dsetia has joined #openstack-meeting01:28
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting01:28
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting01:28
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC01:29
*** jjmb has quit IRC01:29
*** achanda has quit IRC01:31
*** ebalduf has quit IRC01:31
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting01:32
*** dave-mccowan_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:33
*** dave-mccowan has quit IRC01:35
*** dave-mccowan_ is now known as dave-mccowan01:35
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting01:36
*** achanda has quit IRC01:36
*** rfolco has quit IRC01:37
*** rmoe has joined #openstack-meeting01:38
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting01:39
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting01:41
*** banix has quit IRC01:42
*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC01:42
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting01:45
*** mattgriffin has joined #openstack-meeting01:46
*** IanGovett has left #openstack-meeting01:46
*** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting01:47
*** pballand has quit IRC01:48
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting01:48
*** DaSchab has quit IRC01:49
*** lhcheng_ has quit IRC01:50
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting01:50
*** fnaval_ has quit IRC01:50
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting01:52
*** leeantho has quit IRC01:52
*** shohel02 has quit IRC01:53
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting01:53
*** banix has quit IRC01:54
*** haomai___ has joined #openstack-meeting01:54
*** garyduan has quit IRC01:54
*** garyduan has joined #openstack-meeting01:55
*** bdpayne has quit IRC01:55
*** haomaiwang has quit IRC01:56
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting01:56
*** dims has quit IRC01:58
*** cdub has quit IRC01:58
*** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting01:59
*** JRobinson__ has quit IRC02:00
*** mattgriffin has quit IRC02:01
*** shashankhegde has quit IRC02:05
*** rfolco has quit IRC02:08
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting02:08
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting02:08
*** aloga has quit IRC02:09
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC02:10
*** dsetia has quit IRC02:10
*** rfolco has quit IRC02:13
*** jjmb1 has joined #openstack-meeting02:15
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting02:16
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting02:17
*** jjmb has quit IRC02:19
*** rfolco has quit IRC02:21
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting02:23
*** killer_prince has quit IRC02:23
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting02:24
*** killer_prince has joined #openstack-meeting02:25
*** killer_prince is now known as lazy_prince02:25
*** lazy_prince has quit IRC02:25
*** killer_prince has joined #openstack-meeting02:27
*** killer_prince is now known as lazy_prince02:27
*** rfolco has quit IRC02:28
*** jjmb1 has quit IRC02:29
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting02:29
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC02:30
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting02:32
*** xingchao has quit IRC02:33
*** alex_xu has quit IRC02:33
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting02:33
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC02:37
*** vkmc has quit IRC02:38
*** Viswanath has joined #openstack-meeting02:38
*** noelbk has quit IRC02:39
*** oomichi has joined #openstack-meeting02:40
*** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away02:40
*** Riddhi has quit IRC02:41
*** suro_ has quit IRC02:41
*** Viswanath has quit IRC02:41
*** Riddhi has joined #openstack-meeting02:41
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting02:41
*** padkrish has quit IRC02:42
*** Riddhi has quit IRC02:42
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting02:42
*** armax has quit IRC02:43
*** banix has quit IRC02:45
*** mberlin1 has joined #openstack-meeting02:46
*** mberlin has quit IRC02:48
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting02:48
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting02:50
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting02:51
*** s3wong has quit IRC02:51
*** noelbk has joined #openstack-meeting02:52
*** paragan has joined #openstack-meeting02:52
*** shohel02 has quit IRC02:53
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting02:56
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting02:57
*** alex_xu has quit IRC02:59
*** chuckC_ has quit IRC02:59
*** gokrokve has quit IRC03:00
*** chuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
*** dane_leblanc has joined #openstack-meeting03:02
*** bdperkin has quit IRC03:03
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting03:03
*** noslzzp has quit IRC03:03
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC03:04
*** sbalukoff has quit IRC03:04
*** bdperkin has joined #openstack-meeting03:06
*** bdperkin has quit IRC03:06
*** bdperkin has joined #openstack-meeting03:06
*** haomai___ has quit IRC03:06
*** armax has quit IRC03:07
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting03:09
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting03:12
*** dims has quit IRC03:13
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting03:13
*** jecarey_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:13
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC03:14
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting03:14
*** alop has quit IRC03:16
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting03:17
*** padkrish has quit IRC03:19
*** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:21
*** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC03:22
*** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:22
*** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC03:22
*** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:23
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC03:23
*** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC03:23
*** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-meeting03:23
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting03:25
*** naohirot has quit IRC03:27
*** spzala has quit IRC03:30
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting03:31
*** yingjun has quit IRC03:31
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting03:32
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting03:33
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting03:34
*** xuhanp has quit IRC03:34
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC03:34
*** nosnos has quit IRC03:35
*** pballand has quit IRC03:35
*** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan03:36
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting03:37
*** stevemar has quit IRC03:37
*** DaSchab has quit IRC03:38
*** chuckC_ has quit IRC03:39
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting03:42
*** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC03:47
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting03:48
*** alex_xu has quit IRC03:50
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting03:50
*** gokrokve_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:52
*** shohel02 has quit IRC03:53
*** gokrokve_ has quit IRC03:54
*** gokrokve_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:55
*** gokrokve has quit IRC03:55
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting03:56
*** xingchao has quit IRC03:57
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting03:58
*** chandankumar has joined #openstack-meeting03:58
*** armax has quit IRC03:58
*** gokrokve_ has quit IRC03:59
*** pensu has joined #openstack-meeting04:00
*** dave-mccowan has quit IRC04:01
*** chandankumar has quit IRC04:02
*** esheffield has joined #openstack-meeting04:02
*** naohirot has joined #openstack-meeting04:02
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting04:03
*** doude has quit IRC04:07
*** dane_leblanc_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:11
*** ebalduf has joined #openstack-meeting04:11
*** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:13
*** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC04:13
*** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:13
*** subscope has joined #openstack-meeting04:14
*** rushiagr_away is now known as rushiagr04:14
*** dane_leblanc has quit IRC04:14
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC04:16
*** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC04:17
*** padkrish has quit IRC04:18
*** banix has quit IRC04:18
*** shankarprasad has joined #openstack-meeting04:21
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting04:22
*** gokrokve has quit IRC04:24
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting04:24
*** gokrokve has quit IRC04:29
*** dboik_ has quit IRC04:29
*** ppai has joined #openstack-meeting04:33
*** armax has quit IRC04:40
*** prad has quit IRC04:43
*** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting04:44
*** suro_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** BharatK has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting04:48
*** pensu has quit IRC04:52
*** shankarprasad has quit IRC04:53
*** shohel02 has quit IRC04:53
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC04:55
*** suro_ has quit IRC04:57
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting04:58
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting04:58
*** epico has quit IRC05:01
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting05:01
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting05:02
*** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-meeting05:03
*** jjmb has quit IRC05:08
*** JRobinson__ has joined #openstack-meeting05:13
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting05:15
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting05:16
*** ebalduf has quit IRC05:20
*** hemna_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:21
*** s3wong has quit IRC05:21
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting05:21
*** hemna has quit IRC05:21
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting05:22
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC05:24
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting05:24
*** oomichi has quit IRC05:24
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting05:26
*** DaSchab has quit IRC05:27
*** subscope has quit IRC05:27
*** gokrokve has quit IRC05:28
*** rakesh_hs has joined #openstack-meeting05:35
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting05:35
*** pensu has joined #openstack-meeting05:36
*** lazy_prince has quit IRC05:36
*** chandankumar has joined #openstack-meeting05:36
*** lazy_prince has joined #openstack-meeting05:37
*** lpeer__ has quit IRC05:37
*** darrenc is now known as thewriterformall05:41
*** thewriterformall is now known as darrenc05:42
*** mdbooth has quit IRC05:43
*** banix has quit IRC05:43
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC05:45
*** pradipta_away is now known as pradipta05:47
*** mdbooth has joined #openstack-meeting05:48
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting05:48
*** oomichi has joined #openstack-meeting05:48
*** achanda has quit IRC05:51
*** shohel02 has quit IRC05:53
*** JRobinson__ has quit IRC05:56
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC05:57
*** Guest25719 has quit IRC06:01
*** neeti has joined #openstack-meeting06:02
*** oomichi has quit IRC06:02
*** alex_xu has quit IRC06:05
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC06:06
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting06:06
*** pensu has left #openstack-meeting06:07
*** oomichi has joined #openstack-meeting06:08
*** achanda has quit IRC06:08
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting06:10
*** lpeer__ has joined #openstack-meeting06:12
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting06:18
*** arnaud has joined #openstack-meeting06:18
*** shashankhegde has joined #openstack-meeting06:22
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting06:22
*** ildikov has quit IRC06:22
*** hemna_ has quit IRC06:24
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting06:24
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:24
*** alex_xu has quit IRC06:27
*** gokrokve has quit IRC06:29
*** hemna has quit IRC06:30
*** vigneshvar has joined #openstack-meeting06:30
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting06:30
*** shashankhegde has quit IRC06:31
*** aepifanov has joined #openstack-meeting06:31
*** adahms has quit IRC06:32
*** bdpayne has quit IRC06:32
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting06:34
*** sunrenjie has quit IRC06:34
*** Ark has joined #openstack-meeting06:36
*** Ark is now known as Guest9927506:36
*** sunrenjie has joined #openstack-meeting06:36
*** sunrenjie has quit IRC06:40
*** sunrenjie has joined #openstack-meeting06:41
*** shankar has joined #openstack-meeting06:42
*** harlowja is now known as harlowja_away06:45
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting06:48
*** shohel02 has quit IRC06:53
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting06:53
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting06:57
*** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away06:57
*** k4n0 has joined #openstack-meeting06:57
*** Guest99275 has quit IRC06:58
*** achanda has quit IRC06:59
*** mrda is now known as mrda_away06:59
*** nshaikh has joined #openstack-meeting07:00
*** bvandenh has joined #openstack-meeting07:08
*** sergef has quit IRC07:11
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting07:11
*** sridhar has joined #openstack-meeting07:14
*** SridharG has joined #openstack-meeting07:15
*** DaSchab has quit IRC07:15
*** bvandenh has quit IRC07:18
*** jdurgin1 has quit IRC07:21
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting07:24
*** gokrokve has quit IRC07:29
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting07:32
*** denis_makogon has joined #openstack-meeting07:38
*** denis_makogon has quit IRC07:38
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting07:39
*** padkrish has quit IRC07:39
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting07:42
*** xingchao has quit IRC07:44
*** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting07:45
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting07:51
*** Longgeek has quit IRC07:53
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting07:53
*** sunrenjie has quit IRC07:54
*** sunrenjie has joined #openstack-meeting07:54
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:56
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting07:56
*** Longgeek_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:57
*** suro_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:00
*** Longgeek has quit IRC08:00
*** achanda has quit IRC08:02
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting08:06
*** Ark has joined #openstack-meeting08:09
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting08:09
*** Longgeek_ has quit IRC08:09
*** Ark is now known as Guest4604308:09
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting08:10
*** nsaje has quit IRC08:10
*** mrmartin has quit IRC08:12
*** suro_ has quit IRC08:12
*** otter768 has quit IRC08:12
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC08:13
*** Guest46043 has quit IRC08:13
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting08:13
*** Longgeek_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:14
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting08:15
*** arnaud has quit IRC08:15
*** esheffield has quit IRC08:18
*** Longgeek has quit IRC08:18
*** sunrenjie has quit IRC08:19
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting08:24
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC08:25
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting08:26
*** ameade has quit IRC08:26
*** sweston has quit IRC08:26
*** erw has quit IRC08:27
*** s0mik has quit IRC08:27
*** ameade_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:27
*** sweston_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:27
*** erw has joined #openstack-meeting08:27
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting08:27
*** gokrokve has quit IRC08:29
*** zz_avozza is now known as avozza08:30
*** lhcheng has joined #openstack-meeting08:31
*** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting08:31
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting08:32
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting08:33
*** sergef has quit IRC08:33
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting08:33
*** luqas has joined #openstack-meeting08:34
*** rajeshr has joined #openstack-meeting08:35
*** sergef has quit IRC08:36
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting08:36
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting08:36
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting08:36
*** jlanoux has joined #openstack-meeting08:37
*** ToMiles has quit IRC08:37
*** MaxV has quit IRC08:39
*** matt_____ is now known as mattoliverau08:39
*** DaSchab has quit IRC08:39
*** jawed has joined #openstack-meeting08:40
*** mrmartin has quit IRC08:40
*** stannie has joined #openstack-meeting08:42
*** sergef has quit IRC08:42
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting08:43
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting08:44
*** ndipanov_gone is now known as ndipanov08:44
*** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:46
*** doude has joined #openstack-meeting08:46
*** ebalduf has joined #openstack-meeting08:47
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting08:50
*** ToMiles has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** ebalduf has quit IRC08:52
*** phil___ has joined #openstack-meeting08:53
*** noelbk has quit IRC08:53
*** padkrish has quit IRC08:54
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting08:56
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting08:56
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting08:58
*** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting08:59
*** DaSchab has quit IRC09:00
*** sergef has quit IRC09:01
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting09:02
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting09:02
*** sergef has quit IRC09:02
*** vigneshvar has quit IRC09:02
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting09:03
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting09:04
*** alex_xu has quit IRC09:08
*** DaSchab has quit IRC09:08
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting09:09
*** zz_johnthetubagu is now known as johnthetubaguy09:10
*** jcoufal has quit IRC09:11
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting09:13
*** zz_ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov09:14
*** sergef has quit IRC09:14
*** jcoufal has quit IRC09:14
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting09:14
*** aloga has joined #openstack-meeting09:16
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting09:16
*** oanufriev has joined #openstack-meeting09:18
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting09:20
*** BharatK has quit IRC09:20
*** pnavarro has quit IRC09:21
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting09:21
*** pradipta is now known as pradipta_away09:22
*** avozza is now known as zz_avozza09:23
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting09:24
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:25
*** ygbo has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
*** doron_afk has quit IRC09:27
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting09:28
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting09:29
*** gokrokve has quit IRC09:29
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC09:30
*** BharatK has joined #openstack-meeting09:32
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting09:32
*** rbowen has quit IRC09:33
*** sergef has quit IRC09:37
*** DaSchab has quit IRC09:37
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting09:38
*** aalekov has quit IRC09:38
*** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting09:44
*** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting09:45
*** KanagarajM has joined #openstack-meeting09:47
*** hareeshp has quit IRC09:50
*** DaSchab has quit IRC09:51
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting09:53
*** sergef has quit IRC09:53
*** nadya_ has quit IRC09:54
*** matrohon has quit IRC09:55
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting09:56
*** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting09:57
*** asalkeld has quit IRC10:04
*** lazy_prince is now known as killer_prince10:05
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting10:06
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting10:08
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting10:13
*** dane_leblanc_ has quit IRC10:13
*** pelix has joined #openstack-meeting10:14
*** ilyashakhat has joined #openstack-meeting10:16
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting10:16
*** xingchao has quit IRC10:22
*** matrohon has quit IRC10:22
*** JRobinson__ has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting10:24
*** pelix has quit IRC10:24
*** pelix has joined #openstack-meeting10:25
*** BharatK has quit IRC10:26
*** jgallard has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** naohirot has quit IRC10:27
*** nellysmitt has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** gokrokve has quit IRC10:29
*** paragan has quit IRC10:33
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting10:34
*** BharatK has joined #openstack-meeting10:38
*** stevemar has quit IRC10:39
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting10:41
*** vigneshvar has joined #openstack-meeting10:42
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC10:45
*** Fdot has joined #openstack-meeting10:54
*** sergef has quit IRC10:57
*** akuznetsova has quit IRC10:58
*** dteselkin has quit IRC10:58
*** rakhmerov has quit IRC10:58
*** yamamoto has quit IRC11:03
*** Longgeek_ has quit IRC11:04
*** masayukig has quit IRC11:04
*** masayukig has joined #openstack-meeting11:04
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting11:04
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting11:05
*** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:05
*** jgallard has quit IRC11:08
*** mfedosin_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:13
*** jawed has quit IRC11:15
*** DaSchab has quit IRC11:15
*** rbowen has quit IRC11:20
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting11:21
*** JRobinson__ has quit IRC11:22
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting11:24
*** haomaiwang has quit IRC11:24
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting11:27
*** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting11:28
*** gokrokve has quit IRC11:29
*** mfedosin_ has quit IRC11:29
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting11:31
*** dims has quit IRC11:32
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting11:32
*** aarefiev has joined #openstack-meeting11:34
*** aarefiev has quit IRC11:35
*** aarefiev has joined #openstack-meeting11:36
*** IanGovett has joined #openstack-meeting11:36
*** zz_avozza is now known as avozza11:37
*** chandan_kumar has joined #openstack-meeting11:37
*** aarefiev has quit IRC11:37
*** aarefiev has joined #openstack-meeting11:37
*** bradjones_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:38
*** bradjones has quit IRC11:39
*** bradjones_ is now known as bradjones11:39
*** bradjones has joined #openstack-meeting11:39
*** chandankumar has quit IRC11:40
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:41
*** rajeshr has quit IRC11:42
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC11:47
*** ToMiles has quit IRC11:48
*** igordcard has quit IRC11:52
*** avozza is now known as zz_avozza11:53
*** DaSchab has quit IRC11:53
*** mpaolino has quit IRC11:53
*** ppai has quit IRC11:53
*** killer_prince has quit IRC11:53
*** paragan has joined #openstack-meeting11:55
*** killer_prince has joined #openstack-meeting12:00
*** doron_afk has quit IRC12:00
*** killer_prince is now known as lazy_prince12:00
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting12:00
*** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-meeting12:02
*** ryu25 has joined #openstack-meeting12:02
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting12:04
*** BharatK has left #openstack-meeting12:06
*** ppai has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** yamamoto has quit IRC12:09
*** lazy_prince2 has joined #openstack-meeting12:13
*** kayaliu has joined #openstack-meeting12:13
*** baoli has quit IRC12:13
*** lazy_prince2 has quit IRC12:13
*** KanagarajM has quit IRC12:13
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting12:14
*** sergef has quit IRC12:14
*** MaxV has quit IRC12:15
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting12:15
*** kayaliu has quit IRC12:18
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting12:20
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC12:20
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting12:20
*** nealph_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:21
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting12:23
*** kayaliu has joined #openstack-meeting12:23
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting12:24
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting12:27
*** gokrokve has quit IRC12:29
*** kayaliu has quit IRC12:30
*** chandan_kumar has quit IRC12:32
*** oomichi has quit IRC12:33
*** jtomasek has quit IRC12:41
*** ayoung-dadmode has quit IRC12:42
*** aarefiev has quit IRC12:42
*** aarefiev has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** aarefiev has quit IRC12:43
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC12:43
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting12:44
*** jgallard has joined #openstack-meeting12:46
*** AlexF has joined #openstack-meeting12:46
*** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting12:47
*** chandan_kumar has joined #openstack-meeting12:50
*** chandan_kumar has quit IRC12:50
*** chandankumar has joined #openstack-meeting12:50
*** naohirot has joined #openstack-meeting12:51
*** shankar has quit IRC12:56
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting12:57
*** ajo has joined #openstack-meeting12:59
*** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting12:59
*** nealph_ has quit IRC13:00
*** k4n0 has quit IRC13:01
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC13:01
*** radez_g0n3 is now known as radez13:02
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting13:03
*** jawed has joined #openstack-meeting13:07
*** alex_xu has quit IRC13:08
*** erikmoe has joined #openstack-meeting13:13
*** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting13:13
*** dane_leblanc has joined #openstack-meeting13:16
*** dims has quit IRC13:16
*** rushiagr is now known as rushiagr_away13:16
*** radez is now known as radez_g0n313:16
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting13:17
*** ppai has quit IRC13:17
*** js1123 has joined #openstack-meeting13:21
*** aepifanov has quit IRC13:21
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-meeting13:22
*** che-arne has joined #openstack-meeting13:22
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting13:23
*** markvoelker has quit IRC13:23
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting13:23
*** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:26
*** topol has joined #openstack-meeting13:26
*** MeganR has joined #openstack-meeting13:28
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC13:29
*** nati_uen_ has quit IRC13:30
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting13:30
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting13:31
*** MeganR has quit IRC13:31
*** dane_leblanc has quit IRC13:32
*** lpeer has joined #openstack-meeting13:32
*** topol has quit IRC13:33
*** lpeer_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:33
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting13:34
*** lpeer__ has quit IRC13:34
*** weshay has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
*** dboik has quit IRC13:35
*** lpeer has quit IRC13:37
*** MeganR has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
*** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
*** DaSchab has quit IRC13:41
*** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting13:41
*** MeganR has quit IRC13:42
*** nosnos has quit IRC13:44
*** lukasa has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
*** neelashah has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** soulxu_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC13:46
*** tongli has joined #openstack-meeting13:47
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting13:47
*** alex_xu has quit IRC13:49
*** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting13:51
*** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting13:51
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting13:52
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting13:52
*** soulxu__ has joined #openstack-meeting13:53
*** krtaylor has quit IRC13:55
*** FJB has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** amuller_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** dkranz has quit IRC13:55
*** soulxu_ has quit IRC13:55
*** noslzzp has quit IRC13:56
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
*** sergef has quit IRC13:57
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
*** rbowen has quit IRC13:58
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
*** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
*** jprovazn has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
nati_uenohi13:59
jlibosvahi13:59
marios_o/13:59
lukasao/13:59
*** neeti has quit IRC13:59
ajohi :)13:59
rkukurahi13:59
*** nadya_ has quit IRC13:59
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
mesteryhi folks!13:59
blogan\o/13:59
carl_baldwinhi13:59
amuller_hiya13:59
mlavallehi13:59
banixhi13:59
dougwigo/14:00
*** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
sballemorning14:00
obondarevhi14:00
*** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
enikanorov_hi14:00
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
*** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
a2hillo/14:00
evgenyfhi14:00
*** dave-mccowan has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
glebo'lo14:00
bobmelHi14:01
*** mrunge has quit IRC14:01
*** tomoe has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
mesteryamotoki salv-orlando SumitNaiksatam: ping14:01
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
ChuckCo/14:02
yamamotohi14:02
*** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
hareeshpHi14:02
mestery#startmeeting networking14:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 14:02:35 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mestery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.14:02
*** BrianB_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:02
*** rushiagr_away is now known as rushiagr14:02
tomoehello14:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking)"14:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'networking'14:02
beagleshi!14:02
SumitNaiksatamhi all!14:02
mestery#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/Meetings Agenda14:02
russellbo/14:02
dkehnhi14:02
marunhi14:03
pc_mhi14:03
SridarKHi14:03
mesteryWelcome back folks! I missed everyone in Paris, hope everyone had a great trip :)14:03
*** regXboi has joined #openstack-meeting14:03
dougwigwe did, and congrats to you.14:03
*** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting14:03
mesteryThanks dougwig.14:03
mesterySounds like a lot of really great discussions happened.14:03
nati_uenocongrats!14:03
*** aepifanov has joined #openstack-meeting14:04
mestery#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Kilo_Release_Schedule14:04
regXboi+1 for the new mestery - hope all are doing well :)14:04
mesteryI wanted to make sure people are aware of the Kilo release schedule.14:04
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting14:04
mesteryThanks nati_ueno and regXboi. :)14:04
*** nadya_ has quit IRC14:04
mestery#info Kilo-1 date: 12-18-201414:04
mesteryThat's the first date of importance for folks.14:04
amuller_mestery: Do we have the spec proposal freeze and spec approval freeze dates?14:04
mesteryamuller_: I will have those by EOD today and send email to the list.14:05
amuller_Great :)14:05
amuller_thanks14:05
mesteryAnd document them as well.14:05
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
*** yalie__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
mesteryAlso, one more announcment14:05
mestery#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints/NeutronKiloSprint Mid-Cycle14:05
*** ddieterly has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
mesteryPlease note if you're attending, send your contact information to Jun from Adobe so he can presetup your wifi access14:06
mesteryAny other announcements for the team?14:06
*** xgerman has joined #openstack-meeting14:06
mestery#topic Bugs14:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Bugs (Meeting topic: networking)"14:06
mesteryenikanorov_: Hi there!14:06
enikanorov_hi14:07
*** johnbelamaric has joined #openstack-meeting14:07
mesteryenikanorov_: How current is the bug section of the meeting page?14:07
enikanorov_mestery: it's not actual, i'll update14:08
enikanorov_so the update for today14:08
mestery#action enikanorov_  to update the bugs section of the meeting page.14:08
enikanorov_there is a bug in tempest or neutron that is being hit in the gate quite often14:08
enikanorov_let me find the link14:09
enikanorov_https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/135705514:09
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1357055 in tempest "Race to delete shared subnet in Tempest neutron full jobs" [Undecided,Confirmed]14:09
mesteryenikanorov_: I recall discussing this bug with armax or markmcclain yesterday14:09
mesteryLooks like this is assigned to salv-orlando at the moment.14:10
enikanorov_yep14:10
enikanorov_so I guess he's not here right now14:10
mesteryCommment #29 indicates it's a Tempest bug as well.14:10
mesteryYes, salv-orlando must be predisposed at the moment.14:11
enikanorov_another bug which has raised quite a bit of discussion is https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/138206414:11
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1382064 in neutron "Failure to allocate tunnel id when creating networks concurrently" [High,In progress]14:11
*** nealph_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:11
enikanorov_this one was discovered during cuncurrent api tests (via rally)14:11
*** soulxu_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:11
*** changbl has quit IRC14:11
enikanorov_and revealed major flaw in id allocation logic14:11
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
mesteryenikanorov_: Yiikes! Are you looking into this one?14:12
salv-orlandomestery: that bug from what I gather is a tempest thing, but in the past two weeks I did not find time to look at it.14:12
*** jgrimm is now known as zz_jgrimm14:12
*** lzachery has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
mesterysalv-orlando: Thanks for the update there!14:12
enikanorov_mestery: the fix is on review and we have quite long discussion there with amuller_14:12
enikanorov_actually the discussion spans beyong particular fix14:13
amuller_enikanorov_: mestery: I think Eugene, Mike and myself showed our perspectives clearly and we probably need 3rd party feedback on the patch14:13
mesteryExcellent! Thanks for tackling that one enikanorov_ and amuller_!14:13
* markmcclain sneaks in late due to traffic14:13
*** amotoki_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:13
enikanorov_i hope we'll get a few minutes at the end of the meeting to describe underlying problem14:13
mesteryamuller_: All the comments are in the review for this one then?14:13
enikanorov_*to discuss14:13
amuller_mestery: yeah14:13
mesteryenikanorov_: We can do that right here if you want.14:13
mesteryWe can use 5-10 minutes now.14:13
enikanorov_well, it's general question about getting rid of with_lockmode('update') (for the sake of galera/mysql) and related diffuculties14:14
enikanorov_i think it's better to postopne in to the end of the meeting14:14
mesteryenikanorov_: OK, that sounds fine.14:14
*** lpeer_ has quit IRC14:14
*** soulxu__ has quit IRC14:15
mesteryenikanorov_: I just wanted to also highlight the email you sent to the list last week on neutron bugs:14:15
mestery#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-November/049975.html14:15
*** DaSchab has quit IRC14:15
mesteryHave you had much luck in getting additional people to signup for triage, recreationg, etc?14:15
*** ildikov has quit IRC14:15
enikanorov_yes, I've got a couple of contacts14:15
*** nealph_ has quit IRC14:15
mesteryenikanorov_: Perfect, glad to hear that!14:16
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC14:16
*** xgerman has quit IRC14:16
mesteryenikanorov_: Also, what are your thoughts on doing a bug-day in the coming weeks? I'm thinking it would be a good thing for the community to partake in and help clear the bug count a bit.14:16
enikanorov_i'm planning to go over some open bugs that don't have updates for last couple of weeks, probably reassigning them to other people14:16
enikanorov_enikanorov: yes, i think we need to have it as a regular event14:16
mestery#action mestery to work with enikanorov_ on a bug day in the coming 2 weeks.14:17
mesteryenikanorov_: Agreed, we'll make it happen.14:17
HenryGHow many bugs have assignees but they have effectively abandoned work on them?14:17
*** soulxu__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:17
enikanorov_HenryG: i don't know14:17
*** andreykurilin_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:17
*** dane_leblanc has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
*** nshaikh has quit IRC14:18
*** jehb has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
mesteryOK, thanks for the updates on the bugs enikanorov_, and we'll get a bug day rolling soon.14:18
enikanorov_mestery: cool14:18
*** soulxu_ has quit IRC14:18
* mestery doesn't see emagana around for a docs update ...14:19
mestery#topic Docs14:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Docs (Meeting topic: networking)"14:19
mestery#action emagana to update docs section of meeting page14:19
mestery#topic Technical Debt in the Agents14:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Technical Debt in the Agents (Meeting topic: networking)"14:19
* mestery isn't sure who added this to the agenda ...14:19
marios_i did on behalf of carl_baldwin14:19
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting14:20
mesterymarios_ and carl_baldwin: Excellent!14:20
mestery#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-neutron-agents-technical-debt14:20
marios_it came up at the end of last week's l3... carl_baldwin ?14:20
dkehnmaybe a good point to mention the possibility of DHCP sub-group14:20
mesterymarios_: I'll let you and carl_baldwin lead us through this discussion then if you guys are ready.14:20
marios_so i really haven't prepared anything. it was mostly for a discussion point about where/how to organise the work14:20
carl_baldwinmarios_: Go for it.14:20
*** sergef has quit IRC14:21
marios_so all the agents are discussed together in the etherpad. for example, the l2 fixes, should they be discussed under ml2 subgroup?14:21
marios_or do we need a new group etc14:21
markmcclainplease no more groups14:21
marunI can imagine it needing to be separate14:21
marunbut I'm not suggesting how14:22
*** mlavalle_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:22
mesterymarkmcclain: +114:22
marunml2 -> integration point14:22
*** phil___ has quit IRC14:22
marunagents -> control plane14:22
salv-orlandowhat would be the reason for a sub group? a regular weekly meeting?14:22
*** andreykurilin_ has quit IRC14:22
*** soulxu_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:22
dkehnsalv-orlando: all those reason and focus14:23
carl_baldwinWondering specifically about how to organize the L2 agent improvements discussed in the etherpad above.  Attaching to some weekly meeting could help get things started.14:23
marios_salv-orlando: i guess so, somewhere to discuss progress on that work14:23
*** andreykurilin_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:23
*** jnrao has joined #openstack-meeting14:23
dkehnsalv-orlando: & accountablility14:23
regXboican we carve out some time at the end of this meeting to start with before spinning a new group?14:23
*** lpeer_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:24
rkukurawe could include L2 agent discussion in the weekly ML2 agenda as needed14:24
mesterycarl_baldwin: I would propose we coudl use part of the weekly Neutron meeting for this as well in the on-demand agenda, especially to bootstrap.14:24
marios_+1 I think this was suggested by someone last week too, perhaps carl14:24
carl_baldwinmestery: rkukura:  I’d be fine with either.14:25
*** mlavalle has quit IRC14:25
russellbif it's high priority core neutron work, seems to make perfect sense to discuss here14:25
russellbwhich it sounds like it is14:25
mesteryrussellb: ++14:25
russellbit's really hard to follow all of these groups14:25
markmcclainrussellb: agreed14:25
dougwigwe need a new subgroup to discuss adding new groups.14:25
marios_lol14:25
sballedougwig: +114:25
russellbbasically, i'm not even trying, because there's too many :)14:25
salv-orlandoif you want to have a task force focused on repaying debt in any agent for this release cycle and set up a meeting for it I’m ok with it. I just don’t want to create permanent sub groups of subject matter experts14:25
lukasadougwig: +114:25
* dougwig ducks14:25
regXboioh please dear lord, no!14:26
glebodougwig: +114:26
mesteryYes, we have too many subgroups without clear charters or missions.14:26
* regXboi runs screaming from the chat room14:26
*** soulxu__ has quit IRC14:26
mesterySo, lets discuss the agent things each week in this meeting.14:26
salv-orlandofor instance in the last releae cycle we did this “db meetings” but at the end of the day it was just a bunch of folks (4 maybe 5) syncing up on a task of making migrations idempotent14:26
mesterySound good to everyone?14:26
*** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting14:26
regXboimestery:+114:26
salv-orlandosounds good to me14:26
lukasamestery: +114:26
carl_baldwinmestery: +114:27
amotoki_sounds good to me14:27
glebowfm14:27
marios_yup14:27
mestery#info Agent refactoring discussion to happen in weekly neutron meeting going forward14:27
salv-orlandoanything that needs more bandwidth… use #openstack-neutron or the mailing list14:27
mesterysalv-orlando: +114:27
markmcclainsalv-orlando: ++14:27
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting14:27
mesteryAs a team, we need to refocus to having these discussions in the team meeting, and use ML and IRC for higher bandwidth discussions as needed.14:27
russellbmestery: +114:27
mesteryWe can't scale with 10s of sub-teams meetings all the time. :)14:28
amotoki_In addition, regarding subgroup meeting, all meetings listed at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#OpenStack_Networking_.28Neutron.29 will be held in Kilo cycle? If not, please update.14:28
mesteryamotoki_: I'm going to request sub-teams to have a clear charter by next week's neutron meeting, and if htey don't, they should disband.14:28
mesteryWe need to be having discussions in the broader meeting and not require people to attend all these other meeitngs.14:28
mesteryIt's not scalable.14:28
*** soulxu__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:28
*** johnbelamaric has quit IRC14:29
ajo+114:29
dougwigmestery: +114:29
dkehnmestery: +114:29
*** nfedotov has joined #openstack-meeting14:29
amotoki_mestery: +114:29
markmcclainmestery: +114:29
*** oanufriev has left #openstack-meeting14:29
mesteryI'll send email to the list post meeting on this, and add agenda item for next week.14:29
regXboimestery: +114:29
mesteryAnything else to discuss on the agent item today?14:30
glebomestery: +114:30
*** doron_afk has quit IRC14:30
mestery#topic Services Split Update14:31
*** openstack changes topic to "Services Split Update (Meeting topic: networking)"14:31
carl_baldwinmestery: marios_:  We need to identify who will be working on this.  Maybe a mail to the ML could help bootstrap this?14:31
mestery#undo14:31
openstackRemoving item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x1bf9410>14:31
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting14:31
mesterycarl_baldwin: I think that would be ideal, yes.14:31
marios_carl_baldwin: people have claimed stuff in the ehterpad but we can make sure they are still up for it14:31
mestery#action carl_baldwin to send email to list to get a quorum of folks for agent refactoring.14:31
mesterycarl_baldwin: I know in the past banix has expressed interest here as well.14:31
*** soulxu_ has quit IRC14:31
carl_baldwinWill do.  I think we can move on.14:32
mesteryThanks carl_baldwin!14:32
mestery#topic Services Split Update14:32
*** openstack changes topic to "Services Split Update (Meeting topic: networking)"14:32
mesterySo, the short story here is there is no update yet. :)14:32
bloganlol14:32
mesterymarkmcclain and I are working on this with the TC at the moment.14:32
bloganany idea when the TC will be able to have an official meeting about it to decide?14:32
mesteryFrom a proposal perspective. markmcclain, did I miss anthing else?14:32
markmcclainblogan: likely next week14:33
*** andreykurilin__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:33
mestery#info TC to have services split discussion next week14:33
*** andreykurilin_ has quit IRC14:33
markmcclainbecause of the async way we consider items… I'll propose for this week and for adding to next week's agenda14:33
SumitNaiksatammestery markmcclain: thanks, whats the proposal that is put in front of the TC?14:33
russellbmarkmcclain: should probably have a ML thread to introduce it first, with about week lead time before it hits TC agenda14:34
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting14:34
*** soulxu_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:34
markmcclainSumitNaiksatam: to divide the main neutron repo into two that are managed by the networking program14:34
mestery#action markmcclain and mestery to send email to ML prior to TC agenda addition14:34
mesteryrussellb: Good idea14:34
markmcclainrussellb: right wanted to wait until folks were back to introduce so that the thread didn't get skipped14:34
russellbcol14:34
russellbcool, too14:34
mesterylol :)14:35
mesterySo, that's the update on services split. Look for the ML discussion soon.14:35
blogananything we can do in the meantime?14:35
salv-orlandoblogan: you can wait for a message on the ml ;)14:35
mesterylol14:35
dougwiglol14:35
bloganlol thanks salv14:35
mestery#topic Open Discussion14:36
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: networking)"14:36
* mestery notes we may end a bit early today.14:36
markmcclainblogan: dougwig has been working on the proposed code organization item14:36
mesteryenikanorov_: This is your slot! :)14:36
*** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting14:36
*** jecarey_ has quit IRC14:36
mesteryenikanorov_: For the previous discussion.14:36
enikanorov_ok14:36
*** che-arne has quit IRC14:36
bloganmestery: can we talk about the meetup as well after?14:36
dkehnDHCP direction, or god forbid I say sub-grou[14:36
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting14:36
enikanorov_so here's the issue, we're trying to get rid of locking tables (with_lockmode)14:37
* regXboi listens14:37
enikanorov_in some cases consistency can't be achieved without that, so retries need to be used to achieve the result14:37
*** soulxu__ has quit IRC14:37
markmcclaindkehn: you have to file the form for the subgroup on subgroups :)14:38
dkehnmarkmcclain: thanks14:38
*** padkrish has quit IRC14:38
enikanorov_the problem is that such operations are performed under transactions which in mysql have 'repeatable read' isolation level14:38
*** KLevenstein has joined #openstack-meeting14:38
*** ildikov has quit IRC14:38
enikanorov_and hence retry logic just don't work because the code fetches the same values over and over again14:38
regXboienikanorov_ are the cases where consistency can't be achieved corners or are they in the main space?14:38
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting14:38
markmcclainenikanorov: the API refactoring plus separation into tasks should remove much of the need for the locking we're doing now14:38
*** rakesh_hs has quit IRC14:38
rkukurashouldn’t the transaction be inside the retry loop?14:39
enikanorov_rkukura: that seems to be an obvious solution, but that just a small method called by, say, create_network, that has one big transaction14:39
enikanorov_markmcclain: can you explain about the tasks?14:40
markmcclainenikanorov_: it was a bit about what we talked about in the sessions in Paris14:40
*** mattgriffin has joined #openstack-meeting14:40
salv-orlandomarkmcclain: since that’s not happening tomorrow it still makes sense fixing in the existing code base14:40
enikanorov_markmcclain: i mean how it helps14:40
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC14:40
enikanorov_salv-orlando: agree14:41
*** che-arne has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
markmcclainsalv-orlando: yeah… not sure we'll be able to make a meaning lock_mode fix for Juno14:41
salv-orlandoenikanorov_: what markmcclain is saying is that we’ll pretty much rewrite eveyrthing14:41
enikanorov_salv-orlando: i like rewriting stuff :) but...14:41
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
salv-orlandoeverything… even ourselves ;)14:41
marios_lol14:41
amuller_In the mean time we have https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1382064 (Concurrent network creations all try to use the same segmentation ID, and the retry loop just tries the same number 10 times and fails)14:41
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1382064 in neutron "Failure to allocate tunnel id when creating networks concurrently" [High,In progress]14:41
enikanorov_you know, we're dealing with issues that appear in distributed environment14:41
amuller_We need a short term solution to that bug14:42
enikanorov_retry logic is a correct way to deal with those14:42
*** hashar has joined #openstack-meeting14:42
maruncan we special case things that need to retry like this to use a different isolation mode?14:42
enikanorov_if we somehow serialize access - that would mean we create contention point14:42
*** david-lyle_afk is now known as david-lyle14:43
enikanorov_marun: exactly. that is a proposed solution14:43
marunenikanorov_: are there any drawbacks to that approach?14:43
enikanorov_marun: potentially, in 'update' operations, but anyway, postgress already uses 'read committed' isolation level that is fine for retry logic14:43
amuller_marun: In my mind it destroys my ability to reason about the code base. If a subtransaction deep in the stack (Such in the patch proposed) sets a different transaction level, I have no way of knowing that unless I'm just familiar with the entire code base.14:44
enikanorov_so for now the solution for mysql is to change tx isolation level from default to 'read committed'14:44
amuller_I no longer know what transaction level each transaction uses14:44
amuller_And I have to constantly check and think about what that means for every flow14:44
enikanorov_amuller_: you don't know it anyway, because it is backend-dependent right now14:45
amuller_each DB has a default14:45
marunenikanorov_: That would seem to be pretty dangerous if code has been written to assume 'consistent read' :/14:45
amuller_at least it's consistent14:45
amuller_if different parts of the code base use different levels... I don't know, that seems insane to me to be honest14:45
enikanorov_marun: correct14:45
marunor are we safe there?  I mean, postgres uses read committed and the code is fine, right?14:45
enikanorov_marun: good news is that 'create' operations are safe for that14:45
dkehnenikanorov_: I would leave the isolation where it is, becuase its the default for everyone, and look at the length the lock is there14:45
enikanorov_marun: we don't have anough concurrent api testing to say that code is fine with postgres14:46
enikanorov_*enough14:46
*** chandankumar has quit IRC14:46
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
marunenikanorov_: fair enough14:46
enikanorov_so if any call chain issues the same query twice for the same object, that is a potential issue14:47
yamamotoeither way it's better to use the same isolation level for mysql and postgres14:47
marunyamamoto: well, that implies a pretty significant change then.14:47
enikanorov_yamamoto: i tend to agree.14:47
amuller_I proposed an alternate on the patch14:47
enikanorov_marun: agree as well14:47
amuller_https://review.openstack.org/#/c/129288/4//COMMIT_MSG14:47
carl_baldwinRandom will be fine as long as the available space is sparsely consumed. As soon as the space is not sparsely consumed then it will be terrible. Won't this be the case for VLAN ids?14:48
*** absubram__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:48
enikanorov_carl_baldwin: exactly14:48
amuller_carl_baldwin: We can provide a different solution for tunneling and VLANs, since, they're different..14:49
emaganaemagana won the prize for being the one confusing the time for the networking meeting.. DLT!!!! I hate you!!14:49
marunWhat about writing tests that attempt to validate concurrency of the operations in question?14:49
enikanorov_marun: well... wei use rally in our lab14:49
marunWe can debate the merits of an approach in theory, but unless we're validating our assumptions the debate will have to continue into production environments.14:49
enikanorov_*we14:49
mesteryemagana: lol14:49
*** cbouch has joined #openstack-meeting14:49
carl_baldwinWon’t it also be the case if the configured available range of ids (regardless of type) is small?14:50
ajoemagana, not sure if you won ;), I was here 1 hour before ;D, and missed the last one14:50
enikanorov_the issue was found with rally, and that's how i validated the fix14:50
emaganamestery: sorry.. and I thought I was early!!  LOL14:50
enikanorov_carl_baldwin: for tunnels there is not much sense to configure small ranges14:50
marunenikanorov_: Hmmm, so rally is sufficient testing then?14:50
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting14:50
marunenikanorov_: Can we change the transaction isolation to 'read committed' for mysql and retest to see if issues appear?14:50
enikanorov_marun: it's load/concurrency/performance testing framework for which a couple of api tests for neutron is written14:51
marunglobally, I mean14:51
marunOr have you already done so?14:51
ajoenikanorov_but people tend to do, for some reason, so could be an issue, or we'd need to state clearly that they need to use broad tunnel id ranges14:51
enikanorov_marun: that's what i did. it fixes the issue14:51
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting14:51
enikanorov_ah, globally14:51
enikanorov_yeah, we can test that.14:51
marunenikanorov_: It is a small change with a potentially big impact.14:51
marunenikanorov_: But at least it has consistency on its side.14:52
marunDoes anyone have any objection to attempting to move to the new isolation level?14:52
marunIt could cause problems, but we're early in the cycle.14:52
*** akuznetsova_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:52
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:52
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC14:52
enikanorov_and also, postgres is already 'read committed'14:52
markmcclainHas jaypipes looked at it?14:52
marunAlso, has anyone consulted mike bayer on the issue?14:52
rossella_smarun: let's test that at least...the lock wait timeout bugs are hitting us anyway14:53
*** rakhmerov has joined #openstack-meeting14:53
carl_baldwinmarun: I think it is worth some testing.14:53
marunrossella_s: agreed, testing is the first step.14:53
* regXboi wonders if we have to back off and treat concurrent access like we would treat multi-master14:53
markmcclainJay and I talked about this class of problem before and he had some feedback14:53
*** doron has joined #openstack-meeting14:53
carl_baldwinenikanorov_: Yes, postgres is using ‘read committed’ but we’re not testing that as much.14:53
enikanorov_carl_baldwin: true14:53
*** funzo has joined #openstack-meeting14:54
enikanorov_carl_baldwin: i just mean that at the level of confidence that gates give us, it was fine at times we tested neutron with postgres14:54
*** doron_afk has quit IRC14:54
rossella_smaybe it's worth writing to the ML so that other people can give their feedback? They might have tried it in other projects...14:54
enikanorov_rossella_s: will do14:55
ajorossella_s: +114:55
mesteryrossella_s: That's a good idea actually14:55
*** DaSchab has quit IRC14:55
ajotrying "READ COMMITED" globally sounds like a good approach to me from the consistency point of view, ...14:55
ajobut it will be good to hear other's experiences on that.14:55
carl_baldwinenikanorov_: Fair enough.  I just wanted to point out that it won’t necessarily be a slam dunk.14:56
*** jackmccann has joined #openstack-meeting14:56
mesteryenikanorov_: Are you going to send the mail to the list?14:56
enikanorov_mestery: yes14:56
gleboenikanorov: ought we time bound the ML + responses time, and set a target date for decision?14:57
mestery#action enikanorov_ to send mail to ML around locking issues with bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/138206414:57
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1382064 in neutron "Failure to allocate tunnel id when creating networks concurrently" [High,In progress]14:57
*** lxsli has joined #openstack-meeting14:57
mesteryOK, 3 minutes left folks.14:57
regXboiI'd like to point out that a solution to that problem may also buy you multi-master for essentially free14:57
mesteryAnything else quick this week?14:57
gleboenikanorov: decision specifically for if we do the test or not14:57
marios_i have a quick question/clarification14:57
marios_wrt the functional tests coverage for technical debt - we *are* talking about in-tree functional tests right (not tempest). I have starting poking at the dhcp_agent (non-existant in-tree functional tests afaics) testing and want to make sure I don't go off on a tangent14:57
ajoregXboi: +1 I was thinking of that, but at cost of higher query inter-locking...14:57
SridarKmastery: we could continue the planning for the adv services spinout meetup while the TC deliberation is happening.14:57
*** dteselkin has joined #openstack-meeting14:58
enikanorov_glebo: we will do such test, by sayin 'we' i mean, me and my colleauges14:58
salv-orlandoI just want to throw this bombshell… I think the application should not make assumptions on the underlying database isolation mode. But don’t take me seriously I just want to stir up the discussion.14:58
SridarKmestery: #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/advanced-services-kilo-midcycle14:58
mesterysalv-orlando: lol14:58
amuller_marios_: in-tree, yes14:58
regXboiajo: I think we can avoid the query inter-locking at the cost of "eventual consistency" :(14:58
marios_amuller_: thx :)14:58
salv-orlandoI want to make sure the meeting finishes at 15GMT14:58
mesterySridarK: That's ongoing yes, we'll get that sorted out, expect email soon14:58
gleboenikanorov: ah, cool. Thx.14:58
enikanorov_salv-orlando: somewhat true, somewhat not ;)14:58
SridarKmestery: thanks14:58
gleboenikanorov: so we'll do in parallel then. Good to know.14:58
amuller_marios_: Please add me as a reviewer as soon as you have something up :) It should be similar to the L3 agent functional testing I think?14:58
mesteryOK, we're winding down now.14:59
marios_amuller_: indeed and will do14:59
*** Fdot has quit IRC14:59
mesteryIf you got an action item, please review post meeting.14:59
glebomestery: action to enikanorov for doing the test in parallel and reporting back?14:59
mesteryI'll walk through those next week at the meeting.14:59
ajomarios_, add me too ;)14:59
*** Fdot has joined #openstack-meeting14:59
marios_ajo: ack14:59
*** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting14:59
bloganmestery: lbaas feature branch reviews14:59
mesteryWe'll see you all next week!14:59
mestery#endmeeting14:59
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"14:59
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 14:59:47 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)14:59
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.html14:59
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.txt14:59
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.log.html14:59
nati_uenobye!!14:59
*** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting14:59
regXboioom14:59
yamamotobye15:00
marios_\o15:00
amuller_tata15:00
dougwigbye15:00
marunciao15:00
ajo:D15:00
lukasa\o bye all15:00
markmcclainbye15:00
emaganaciao...15:00
*** regXboi has left #openstack-meeting15:00
banixbye15:00
obondarevbye15:00
ajohasta la vista! ;)15:00
*** topol has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
glebol8r15:00
amotoki_bye15:00
salv-orlandoadieuuuu15:00
rkukurabye15:00
jaypipesmarun, markmcclain: reading back...15:00
*** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting15:00
n0ano#startmeeting gantt15:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 15:00:50 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is n0ano. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.15:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: gantt)"15:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'gantt'15:00
n0anoanyone here to talk about the scheduler?15:01
edleafe\o15:01
*** soulxu_ has quit IRC15:01
lxslio/15:01
*** s3wong has quit IRC15:01
*** lukasa has left #openstack-meeting15:01
*** amuller_ has left #openstack-meeting15:01
jgallardhi!15:02
vigneshvarhi15:02
*** vishwanathj has left #openstack-meeting15:02
bauzas\o15:02
bauzas(sorry, was late)15:02
jaypipeso/15:02
n0anojust about to ping you two :-)15:02
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC15:02
n0anoanyway, let's start15:02
*** PaulMurray has joined #openstack-meeting15:02
n0ano#topic code cleanup tasks15:02
*** openstack changes topic to "code cleanup tasks (Meeting topic: gantt)"15:02
bauzasso, maybe we can take a look at the wiki page ?15:03
n0anoI hope everyone has studied the email threads and the wiki page at:15:03
n0anohttps://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Gantt/kilo#Tasks15:03
bauzas+115:03
lxsli#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Gantt/kilo#Tasks15:03
*** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:03
n0anoI've tried to distill down what needs to be done at the wiki, the general question is did I miss anything or is something there that's not needed15:04
*** KLevenstein has left #openstack-meeting15:04
bauzasn0ano: lgtm15:04
PaulMurrayn0ano, the RT objects one needs updating - I'll do it15:04
n0anoPaulMurray, tnx15:04
jaypipesn0ano: there's refactoring of the RT unit tests ongoing, along with my work to make nova.virt.hardware use nova.objects framework.15:04
*** absubram__ has quit IRC15:04
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting15:04
n0anojaypipes, should I add a couple of line items to the table about those?15:05
bauzasjaypipes: oh right15:05
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC15:05
jaypipesn0ano: no worries, I can do that15:05
*** absubram__ has joined #openstack-meeting15:05
*** marun has quit IRC15:06
*** SridarK has quit IRC15:06
n0anojaypipes, cool, I want to tweak the table a little, I want to add a column about approval for the specs, that's pretty crucial15:06
bauzasso, about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/detach-service-from-computenode15:06
jaypipesn0ano: k, will wait for you to change.15:06
n0anojaypipes, np15:06
bauzasitem #415:06
n0anobauzas, go ahead15:06
*** naohirot has quit IRC15:06
bauzasI've been told yesterday that data migrations are no longer accepted for Kilo15:07
n0anobefore even K1?  that seems a little harsh15:07
*** jawed has quit IRC15:07
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting15:07
jaypipesschema migrations are fine, just not data migrations I guess.15:08
*** dthakkar has joined #openstack-meeting15:08
bauzasjaypipes: exactly15:08
bauzasI meant *data* migration15:08
bauzasso adding a new col is ok15:08
*** radez_g0n3 is now known as radez15:08
bauzasbut now we have to use the objects backwards compatibility to provide data for it15:08
jaypipesbauzas: right.15:08
bauzasso I'll update the spec15:09
jaypipesk15:09
jaypipesand I will +1 it again :)15:09
jaypipesbauzas: let's get this one approved ASAP, so the sooner you push a fixed spec, the better :)15:09
*** MaxV has quit IRC15:09
jaypipesbauzas: danpb already +2d it15:09
bauzasjaypipes: so that means that the fields won't be changed on upgrade and downgrade, but the compute_node object will do it by itself15:09
bauzasjaypipes: it will require some change in the code, but I don't expect so much things15:10
bauzasthe bad thing is that I'm the first to test the new process so maybe some discussion has to be made :)15:10
jaypipesbauzas: why wouldn't you be able to change the fields on update and downgrade?15:11
bauzasjaypipes: yeah, but johnthetubaguy -1'd it for a good reason15:11
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC15:11
*** sicarie has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
*** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
bauzasjaypipes: because now it's asked to not do that using dbmigrate tool15:11
*** padkrish has quit IRC15:11
bauzasjaypipes: instead, objects have to check the version and update by themselves15:11
*** ChuckC has quit IRC15:11
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
bauzasIIUC of course15:12
jaypipesbauzas: :( I think I need to know more specifics then...15:12
*** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
bauzasjaypipes: I suggest that we discuss about it offline15:12
bauzaswith johnthetubaguy15:13
*** banix has quit IRC15:13
n0anobauzas, are you saying the same column would contain rows with different versions, that seems iffy15:13
*** elo has joined #openstack-meeting15:13
bauzasn0ano: nope, that's simple for us15:13
PaulMurraybauzas, I would like to follow this - or at least find out what is done - maybe I should just read the patches15:13
bauzasn0ano: there is a new col15:13
bauzascalled host15:13
bauzasergh, a new 'field'15:13
*** rbak has joined #openstack-meeting15:13
johnthetubaguybasically objects does data migrations, flavor stuff is the first example of that15:13
johnthetubaguythats the current plan at least15:14
johnthetubaguythe details are… hairy at best15:14
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: thanks for clarifying15:14
*** AlexF has quit IRC15:14
PaulMurrayjohnthetubaguy, all this is a nightmare for rebasing - especially if someone else is working in the same code15:14
johnthetubaguythere will have to be a spec I recon, for the data migration pattern,15:14
johnthetubaguyPaulMurray: the other stuff is already hell for that same reason15:14
n0anoand we're the first guinea pig - fun :-(15:14
bauzasindeed :)15:15
PaulMurrayjohnthetubaguy, I really want to make that kind of thing easier15:15
johnthetubaguyn0ano: yeah, thats the sucky bit15:15
bauzasI like to be a guinea pig :)15:15
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting15:15
johnthetubaguyPaulMurray: yeah, ideas welcome, I think the version is now per object, rather than global, which helps a bit15:15
PaulMurraybauzas, you said that out loud15:15
* johnthetubaguy fills out medical testing application for bauzas15:15
bauzas:)15:15
PaulMurrayjohnthetubaguy, yes, but if it is referred to by another object that one has to change too15:16
PaulMurrayjohnthetubaguy, etc.15:16
*** bknudson has quit IRC15:16
johnthetubaguyPaulMurray: right, this is the data version, not the object version, but yeah15:16
*** nikhil_k|afk is now known as nikhil_k15:16
johnthetubaguywe might make them the same thing, but we need to hash all that out yet15:16
n0anojohnthetubaguy, is there a BP about all this, I need to sit back and think on it.15:16
bauzasPaulMurray: yeah, the nested object thing is quite a pain to maintain, but I think the idea is pretty good15:16
* PaulMurray end of side-track15:17
bauzasPaulMurray: johnthetubaguy: maybe we should free up what's possible with nested objects15:17
johnthetubaguyn0ano: not quite, is the simple answer, I am owning that priority thing, so I need to pull my finger out an make something more formal happen15:17
*** jmontemayor has joined #openstack-meeting15:17
n0anojohnthetubaguy, fer sure, this looks hard and it would be nice to have something concrete to read on it15:17
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: I would apprieciate if you could review my patch series when it will be updated :)15:17
*** doron is now known as doron_afk15:18
johnthetubaguyright now, I would plan on doing expand and not contract, and leave the contract for the upgrade folks to fix15:18
lxslidid someone say they'd create a hacking check to alert if a dependent object version was updated without the depending object version being updated?15:18
johnthetubaguyand follow the pattern dansmith is doing for flavor for the expand bit15:18
PaulMurraylxsli, there is a test for that15:18
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting15:18
lxsliAh great, ty15:19
PaulMurraylxsli, but any new objects have to be added to the test15:19
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: well, I was not expecting data migrations to the flavor BP15:19
*** ebalduf has joined #openstack-meeting15:19
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: because it's purely additive nope ?15:19
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: oh15:19
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: nope, my bad, metadata has to be populated to the new table15:19
johnthetubaguybauzas: its a move, it doesn't really need the contract part, becuase we are not killing system metadata (yet)15:19
johnthetubaguyright15:20
johnthetubaguyanyways, sorry, end of side track, hopefully!15:20
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: I then exactly have the same pattern15:20
* johnthetubaguy goes back to lurking15:20
*** esheffield has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: thanks15:20
johnthetubaguybauzas: yeah, I would copy it, add the thing, and use it, leave the old15:20
*** andymaier has joined #openstack-meeting15:20
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: that's barely already done15:21
johnthetubaguyperfect15:21
*** MaxV has quit IRC15:21
*** Swami has quit IRC15:21
bauzasjohnthetubaguy: except the thing that I was updating the existing fields15:21
*** ChuckC_ has quit IRC15:21
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting15:21
*** AlexF has joined #openstack-meeting15:22
*** jecarey_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:22
bauzask, I think we're done with this bp15:22
bauzasI also have another one to mention15:22
n0anowell, seems like we know what we're doing on this one15:22
n0anobauzas, go ahead15:22
bauzashttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/request-spec-object15:22
bauzasie. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/127610/15:22
bauzasat the moment, it's a pure mess15:23
bauzasso, the basic plan is to objectify request_spec15:23
bauzasbut there is also filter_properties dict15:23
bauzasso I discussed with jaypipes about that, but I would like to get the consensus here too15:23
*** sweston_ is now known as sweston15:23
bauzas(because I'll still implementing this next week, albeit for K2)15:24
PaulMurraybauzas, can you get consensus with one other person :)15:24
bauzaswell, from my past experience, I really like to get feedback before doing anything15:24
bauzasbecause this scheduler.client thing merged with +70 iterations15:25
bauzasand I don't talk about ERT ;)15:25
*** rbowen has quit IRC15:25
PaulMurray+70 is a record by me15:25
n0anoanyway, so what specifically do you need concensus on?15:25
bauzasso15:25
bauzasselect_destinations() is admitting 2 args15:26
*** nelsnelson has joined #openstack-meeting15:26
bauzasfilter_properties and request_spec15:26
bauzaslater in the scheduler, request_spec is nested into filter_properties15:26
bauzasso the filters access the spec by doing filter_prop['req_spec']15:26
bauzasmy question is15:27
bauzasshould we consider having 2 objects for that select_dest() interfaces or only one, and so which one ?15:27
*** padkrish has quit IRC15:27
bauzasI was about saying RequestSpec being the object and filter_properties a field of it15:27
bauzasbut in that case, it's just a non-sense to invert that for the filters15:28
n0anoif one param it should be the request (which contains the filter prop) but I don't see a problem with 2 parameters15:28
PaulMurraybauzas, I agree on that way around15:28
*** scollier has quit IRC15:28
*** rrrobbb has joined #openstack-meeting15:28
*** zz_jgrimm is now known as jgrimm15:28
bauzasPaulMurray: which is ?15:28
edleafeIt seems that logically the filter_properties is part of the request15:28
bauzasedleafe: agreed15:28
*** rrrobbb has quit IRC15:28
*** jnrao has quit IRC15:28
bauzasedleafe: so we would need to invert the logic in the scheduler too15:28
bauzasthat's a massive and invasive change15:29
edleafebauzas: yep15:29
lxsli+1 to RequestSpec being the object and filter_properties a field of it15:29
PaulMurraybauzas, what you said: filter props inside request15:29
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting15:29
PaulMurraybauzas, but I wonder if it is early to do that?15:29
n0anobauzas, it's not inverting the logic, it's changing the data access, is that really such a big change15:29
bauzasn0ano: it is15:29
bauzasn0ano: trust me :)15:29
bauzasn0ano: because we need to change all the filters, the tests etc.15:30
PaulMurraybauzas, could remove request spec from filter props but keep both as first step15:30
bauzasPaulMurray: I like having baby steps here15:30
n0anowell, the target is K2, if we start now we should be able to make it, I can get someone else to help on this15:30
PaulMurraybauzas, then make object15:30
PaulMurraybauzas, for request15:30
edleafebauzas: could we change it in steps: first outside the scheduler, and just have one place inside the scheduler that inverts it to match current design?15:30
bauzasedleafe: I was thinking about it15:31
n0anoedleafe, I like that idea15:31
vigneshvaredleafe: good idea15:31
bauzasedleafe: it's quickier to only change the RPC interface of the scheudler15:31
*** doron_afk has quit IRC15:31
edleafebauzas: and then later clean up the references inside the scheduler15:31
bauzasand then keep the actual logic within the scheduler15:31
bauzasso we only have one place to change15:32
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting15:32
bauzask, agreed ?15:32
n0anoremember, the objective for the Kilo release is to clean up interfaces, not necessarily internal implementations15:32
bauzasjaypipes: ?15:32
lxsli+115:32
*** rrrobbb has joined #openstack-meeting15:32
edleafen0ano: precisely15:32
n0anobauzas, +115:32
bauzasn0ano: I know, I know15:32
bauzassounds like we lost jaypipes :)15:32
*** jawed has joined #openstack-meeting15:33
n0anomight want to email/irc him directly and make sure he's on board also15:33
bauzask, will go this way and will notify jaypipes15:33
bauzasanyway, it was the first step15:33
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC15:34
n0anocool, moving on, one other item I'd like to discuss is like 3 of the table15:34
bauzasthe second step was to change anything in the scheduler, we can defer it or ask someone else to handle it for K315:34
bauzasedleafe: interested ?15:34
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:34
n0anoPaulMurray, that's your's, since it's targed for K1 do you have an update on where we stand with it.15:34
edleafebauzas: sure, but that will come later, no?15:34
PaulMurrayn0ano, sorry got distracted15:35
n0anoPaulMurray, NP15:35
bauzasedleafe: yep, but we can do a temptative attempt for K3 nope ?15:35
PaulMurrayn0ano, we could take it on if you like15:35
bauzasedleafe: if you have time of course15:35
edleafebauzas: sure, let's tentatively plan on that15:35
*** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting15:35
n0anoPaulMurray, not sure what you meant15:36
bauzasedleafe: k, will put you as a reviewer of my first drafts then15:36
*** andreykurilin__ has quit IRC15:36
PaulMurrayn0ano, you want an update on rt objects15:36
PaulMurrayyes?15:36
n0anoyes if you can15:36
*** andreykurilin_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:36
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting15:37
PaulMurraylxsli, has started to work on the migrations patch and working with jay on redoing the tests for resource tracker15:37
PaulMurraythere is that one patch up and in  progress15:37
PaulMurraywe will both start getting more on the way15:37
PaulMurraythat's about it for now15:37
*** cburgess has quit IRC15:37
n0anoPaulMurray, cool, good to hear, send me links to the patches and I'll update the table15:38
PaulMurrayn0ano, already in the table - refresh15:38
n0anoPaulMurray, you're too quick, tnx15:38
*** xuhanp has quit IRC15:39
* PaulMurray has to pay attention to something else for now... sorry15:39
n0anowe've talked about the K1 items (except Berrange's ones, I'll deal with those later).15:39
n0anoI think that covers the immediate concerns how about I go to opens for now15:39
n0ano#topic opens15:39
*** openstack changes topic to "opens (Meeting topic: gantt)"15:39
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
n0anoAnything?15:40
vigneshvarwould there be anyhelp i would like to15:40
vigneshvartypo would there be any help required. i would like to15:40
n0anovigneshvar, tnx, one help would be to review things, that is always needed15:41
bauzasvigneshvar: reviewing is the first bit to do15:41
vigneshvarsure will15:41
n0anofrom there we can see what else makes sense15:41
n0anoI don't want to keep everyone so, unless there are any last minute opens15:42
*** mlavalle_ has quit IRC15:42
n0anoI will say thanks and talk to you all again next week (if not earlier)15:42
n0ano#endmeeting15:42
*** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting15:42
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"15:42
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 15:42:56 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)15:42
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/gantt/2014/gantt.2014-11-18-15.00.html15:43
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/gantt/2014/gantt.2014-11-18-15.00.txt15:43
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/gantt/2014/gantt.2014-11-18-15.00.log.html15:43
vigneshvarsee you all next week :)15:43
*** absubram__ has quit IRC15:43
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting15:44
*** PaulMurray has left #openstack-meeting15:44
*** bdpayne has quit IRC15:44
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
*** gholler has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
*** blogan__mobile has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
*** vigneshvar has quit IRC15:48
*** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting15:49
*** afazekas has quit IRC15:49
*** blogan_mobile has quit IRC15:50
*** cburgess has quit IRC15:50
*** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** markmcclain has quit IRC15:52
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting15:53
*** chandankumar has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** AlexF has quit IRC15:54
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** mrmartin has quit IRC15:54
*** johnbelamaric has joined #openstack-meeting15:55
*** nadya_ has quit IRC15:55
*** erikmoe has quit IRC15:55
*** jorge_munoz has quit IRC15:56
*** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting15:56
*** kobis has left #openstack-meeting15:57
*** dave-mccowan has quit IRC15:57
*** ddecapit has joined #openstack-meeting15:57
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
*** padkrish has quit IRC15:58
*** glebo has quit IRC15:58
*** sergef has quit IRC15:58
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
*** tsekiyama has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
*** johnbelamaric has quit IRC16:00
*** baoli has quit IRC16:00
*** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** Riddhi has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** jorge_munoz has joined #openstack-meeting16:00
*** sridhar has quit IRC16:01
*** SridharG has left #openstack-meeting16:01
*** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:01
*** balajiiyer1 has joined #openstack-meeting16:01
*** glebo has quit IRC16:01
*** balajiiyer has quit IRC16:01
*** comay has quit IRC16:01
*** johnbelamaric has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
*** comay has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
*** mkam has joined #openstack-meeting16:04
*** matrohon has quit IRC16:04
*** shashankhegde has joined #openstack-meeting16:04
*** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting16:04
*** dboik has quit IRC16:04
*** dthakkar has quit IRC16:04
*** blogan_mobile has quit IRC16:05
*** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting16:05
*** yamahata has quit IRC16:05
*** KanagarajM has joined #openstack-meeting16:05
*** balajiiyer1 has left #openstack-meeting16:05
*** jackmccann has quit IRC16:05
*** mkam has left #openstack-meeting16:06
*** blogan_mobile has quit IRC16:07
*** mpaolino has quit IRC16:07
*** ddecapit has quit IRC16:07
*** Mandell has quit IRC16:07
*** DaSchab has quit IRC16:07
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** ddecapit has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** blogan__mobile has quit IRC16:08
*** dave-mccowan has joined #openstack-meeting16:08
*** jjmb has quit IRC16:10
*** js1123 has quit IRC16:10
*** aysyd has quit IRC16:10
*** dane_leblanc_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:10
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting16:11
*** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting16:11
*** KanagarajM has quit IRC16:12
*** ddecapit has quit IRC16:12
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting16:12
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting16:13
*** dane_leblanc has quit IRC16:13
*** lhcheng_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:13
*** marun has quit IRC16:13
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting16:14
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting16:14
*** esmute has quit IRC16:14
*** pnavarro has quit IRC16:15
*** imsurit has joined #openstack-meeting16:15
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting16:16
*** ddecapit has joined #openstack-meeting16:16
*** lhcheng has quit IRC16:16
*** DaSchab has quit IRC16:16
*** amaretskiy has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
*** esmute has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
*** ZiGMaX has joined #openstack-meeting16:18
*** MeganR has joined #openstack-meeting16:19
*** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting16:20
*** kebray has quit IRC16:21
*** mudassirlatif has joined #openstack-meeting16:22
*** matiu has quit IRC16:22
*** glebo has left #openstack-meeting16:23
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
*** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
*** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC16:26
*** nadya__ has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** mpaolino has quit IRC16:26
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting16:28
*** aepifanov has quit IRC16:28
*** kobis has quit IRC16:30
*** BrianB_ has quit IRC16:30
*** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting16:30
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC16:30
*** ddecapit has quit IRC16:31
*** kebray has quit IRC16:31
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC16:31
*** jawed has quit IRC16:33
*** gokrokve_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
*** sergsh is now known as sergsh_away16:34
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
*** ddecapit has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
*** nadya__ has quit IRC16:34
*** KanagarajM has joined #openstack-meeting16:35
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting16:36
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting16:36
*** aysyd has quit IRC16:37
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC16:37
*** gokrokve has quit IRC16:37
*** alop has joined #openstack-meeting16:37
*** ddecapit is now known as Duane16:37
*** yatin has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** thedodd has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** ildikov has quit IRC16:38
*** gokrokve_ has quit IRC16:38
*** yamamoto has quit IRC16:39
*** hemna has quit IRC16:39
*** zul has quit IRC16:39
*** changbl has joined #openstack-meeting16:39
*** Duane is now known as DuaneDeC716:39
*** jlanoux has quit IRC16:41
*** jlanoux has joined #openstack-meeting16:42
*** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
*** ChuckC_ is now known as ChuckC16:44
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC16:45
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting16:45
*** padkrish has quit IRC16:45
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting16:45
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting16:46
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting16:48
*** devlaps has joined #openstack-meeting16:48
*** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting16:49
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting16:50
*** mlavalle has quit IRC16:51
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC16:52
*** noelbk has joined #openstack-meeting16:52
*** jhenner has quit IRC16:53
*** aysyd has quit IRC16:54
*** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting16:54
*** Longgeek has quit IRC16:55
*** rbowen has quit IRC16:56
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting16:56
*** paragan has quit IRC16:57
*** eglynn has quit IRC16:57
*** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting16:57
*** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting16:58
*** msdubov_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** khaldrogox has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** emagana has quit IRC17:00
boris-42msdubov_: hi17:00
boris-42andreykurilin_: hi17:00
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting17:00
*** pboros has joined #openstack-meeting17:00
msdubov_boris-42 hi17:00
boris-42pboros: hi17:00
*** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting17:00
amaretskiyboris-42 hi17:01
pboroshi boris-4217:01
boris-42amaretskiy: hi17:01
*** hashar has quit IRC17:01
zhiyanhi boris-4217:01
*** rmoe has quit IRC17:01
*** lhcheng_ has left #openstack-meeting17:01
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:01
boris-42zhiyan: hi17:02
boris-42#startmeeting Rally17:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 17:02:25 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is boris-42. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.17:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'rally'17:02
boris-42#topic OpenStack summit17:02
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack summit (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:02
*** frobware has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
*** bdpayne has quit IRC17:03
boris-42Okay OpenStack summit was quite productive as usually17:03
*** andymaier has quit IRC17:03
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC17:03
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
*** kobis has quit IRC17:03
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
boris-42and I would like just to share with some interesting documents17:03
boris-42#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-rally-osprofiler17:03
boris-42result of Rally design session17:03
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting17:04
boris-42#link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77B9Un4xtK0 (one talk)17:04
*** oanufriev has joined #openstack-meeting17:04
*** xingchao has quit IRC17:04
*** eglynn has quit IRC17:05
boris-42#link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uOnZKu7OSY (another talk)17:05
*** thedodd has quit IRC17:05
*** emagana has quit IRC17:05
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
*** msdubov_ has quit IRC17:05
*** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
*** tkay has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
boris-42#link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNKKvLFhkpE (and one more time a bit about rally)17:05
boris-42As well there were nonofficial discussions17:06
boris-42about benchmarking Network with Rally17:06
boris-42and Rally as a Service17:06
boris-42we decide to do both=)17:06
*** MaxV has quit IRC17:06
boris-42Any questions?)17:07
*** jcoufal has quit IRC17:07
boris-42(so I'll start mailing list threads about this)17:07
zhiyanyes17:07
boris-42zhiyan: ?)17:07
andreykurilin_hi all:)17:07
zhiyanfor osprofiler integration, i would like to take trove and zaqar17:07
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-meeting17:07
boris-42zhiyan: okay17:08
zhiyanactually trove ones are under review already17:08
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC17:08
boris-42zhiyan: let's change topic17:08
boris-42#topic OSprofiler integration17:08
*** openstack changes topic to "OSprofiler integration (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:08
boris-42zhiyan: so could you share links on reviews?17:08
zhiyananother one is about adding a new mongodb based notifier17:09
zhiyanyes, 2 secs pls17:09
zhiyanhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/116653/17:09
zhiyanhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/116654/17:09
boris-42#link  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116653/17:09
boris-42#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116654/17:10
zhiyanhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/116671/17:10
zhiyanoops, thanks17:10
boris-42ya17:10
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting17:10
boris-42So I will try to find time to review those patches17:10
boris-42zhiyan: about mongodb backend we will need to setup dsvm functional job17:10
zhiyanbtw, i have talked them with trove team closely, them all agreed to land osprofiler stuff asap in k17:11
boris-42zhiyan: for osprofiler before doing it..17:11
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting17:11
boris-42zhiyan: nice17:11
boris-42zhiyan: btw what about using trove for backend?)17:11
zhiyanyou are late.. lol17:11
boris-42zhiyan: where where?)17:11
zhiyani'm making it locally, just verifiying it before your ping  :)17:12
zhiyanok, i see your idea17:12
*** samuelms has joined #openstack-meeting17:12
zhiyani mean dsvm one17:12
*** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting17:12
boris-42zhiyan:  I am late with what?)17:12
boris-42zhiyan: adding job?17:13
zhiyanbut probably i need to know more details17:13
*** moha_hunt has joined #openstack-meeting17:13
zhiyanjoke, because i already started doing it17:13
*** jlibosva has quit IRC17:14
boris-42zhiyan: ah okay, so actually before we land your work we need to have functional testing17:14
boris-42zhiyan: cause it's already merged to heat, cinder, glance and I don't won't to break whole world=17:14
zhiyanmake sense17:14
boris-42zhiyan: okay I'll look at your patches when you publish them=)17:15
boris-42so let's move to next topic=)17:15
zhiyanthanks!17:15
boris-42#topic Generic cleanup17:15
*** openstack changes topic to "Generic cleanup (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:15
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
boris-42Okay we finally finished refactoring of generic cleanup mechanism17:15
boris-42so now it's resource oriented and it's really simple to extend by plugins17:15
boris-42all plugins are here https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/context/cleanup/resources.py17:16
boris-42so it's just about making subclasses and overriding probably some functions..17:16
boris-42This new cleanup engine is much safer and it has repeats and speed limiations and better logging of non deleted resources17:16
boris-42so one more nice improvments17:17
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting17:17
*** kebray has quit IRC17:17
boris-42Any questions?)17:17
*** baoli has quit IRC17:17
*** arnaud has joined #openstack-meeting17:17
*** ryu25 has quit IRC17:18
boris-42okay seem no questions lol17:18
boris-42#topic Next steps for generic cleanup17:18
*** openstack changes topic to "Next steps for generic cleanup (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:18
boris-42So there is only one left step, to make disaster cleanup, when another instance of Rally can clean up everthing in case of failure17:18
*** mattgriffin has quit IRC17:18
boris-42msdubov is going to work on this17:19
*** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting17:19
*** msdubov_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:19
boris-42msdubov_: aorund?17:19
boris-42okay seems like he is not around=)17:20
boris-42let's move to next topic17:20
zhiyanlol17:20
boris-42zhiyan: ya=)17:20
*** dkranz has quit IRC17:20
boris-42#topic New better Rally reports and future steps17:20
*** openstack changes topic to "New better Rally reports and future steps (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:20
boris-42amaretskiy: could you share with updates17:20
amaretskiyhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/131844/17:20
*** msdubov_ has quit IRC17:21
amaretskiyhere are a lot of improvements17:21
amaretskiy+ bugfix17:21
amaretskiySLA, Failues, Scenario output17:21
amaretskiyetc...17:21
*** rmoe has joined #openstack-meeting17:21
*** nsaje has joined #openstack-meeting17:21
amaretskiyhttp://logs.openstack.org/44/131844/18/check/gate-rally-dsvm-rally/9872f9c/17:22
amaretskiyhttp://logs.openstack.org/44/131844/18/check/gate-rally-dsvm-rally/9872f9c/rally-plot/results.html.gz#/VMTasks.boot_runcommand_delete17:22
amaretskiyhttp://logs.openstack.org/44/131844/18/check/gate-rally-dsvm-rally/9872f9c/rally-plot/results.html.gz#/Dummy.dummy_exception_probability#failures17:22
boris-42amaretskiy: --verbose plese tell us what are you doing17:22
boris-42lol17:22
amaretskiythere are links above17:23
*** DaSchab has quit IRC17:23
amaretskiytake a look at tabs17:23
amaretskiyFailures - we see there an exceptions17:23
*** shohel02 has quit IRC17:23
amaretskiythat happened during the scenario run17:23
*** eglynn has quit IRC17:23
amaretskiyanother Tab - Output17:23
amaretskiythis is where we see scenario output (if any)17:24
*** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
amaretskiyAlso there is a SLA data at the top of Overview tab17:24
*** dtalton has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
amaretskiythere are also another improvements, like re-styling of page http://logs.openstack.org/44/131844/18/check/gate-rally-dsvm-rally/9872f9c/17:25
amaretskiyThat is what is going to be merged soon (I hope :) )17:25
amaretskiyAnd there ar esome plans for next patch17:25
boris-42amaretskiy: so what about future stuff that you are going to do?)17:25
amaretskiyI'm going to introduce "overview page"17:26
amaretskiywhere we can observe all scenarion within the benchmark in condensed view17:26
amaretskiyso there will be more easy to compare the results17:26
*** ZiGMaX has quit IRC17:26
boris-42amaretskiy: nice17:27
*** jdurgin1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:27
amaretskiyand I'm going to aggregare Failures - do not repeat similar17:27
amaretskiyjust show differebt failures and their count17:28
*** rediskin has joined #openstack-meeting17:28
*** mattgriffin has joined #openstack-meeting17:28
amaretskiy+ fix browser back-forward buttons behavoir17:28
*** jlanoux has quit IRC17:28
amaretskiynow there is no effect - that is an issue17:28
*** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting17:29
*** shashankhegde has quit IRC17:29
*** amotoki_ has quit IRC17:29
amaretskiyboris-42, that's all from my side :)17:30
*** vigneshvar has joined #openstack-meeting17:30
*** arcimboldo has joined #openstack-meeting17:30
boris-42amaretskiy: great work on reports17:31
boris-42amaretskiy: now our bosses are happy=)17:31
amaretskiy:)17:31
boris-42arcimboldo: hi hi17:31
arcimboldohi all17:31
arcimboldohappy to join you17:31
amaretskiyarcimboldo hi17:32
*** noslzzp has quit IRC17:32
boris-42arcimboldo:  so we have here some kind of weekly meeting17:32
*** msdubov_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:32
msdubov_Sorry seems like I've had some connection issues17:32
boris-42arcimboldo: where we are trying to share updates and dicuss different stuff17:32
*** yatin has quit IRC17:32
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting17:32
boris-42#topic Dropping root requirements for rally setup.py17:33
*** openstack changes topic to "Dropping root requirements for rally setup.py (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:33
arcimboldook I think I can start17:33
boris-42arcimboldo: so your idea is to use better locations for files *17:33
*** vigneshvar_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:33
arcimboldoyes, right now, there are two issues:17:33
arcimboldo1) the install script fails if you are not root17:33
arcimboldo2) setup.cfg tries to install the completion file in /etc/bash_completion.d17:33
arcimboldohowever, rally does not need to run as root, so I would suggest the following:17:34
arcimboldo1) replace /etc/bash_completion with etc/bash_completion in setup.cfg.17:34
arcimboldothis will install in either VIRTUALENV_PATH/etc/bash_completion, if you are running inside a virtualenv, or in /usr/local/etc/bash_completion otherwise17:34
arcimboldo2) the install script will check if you are root or not, and if you are installing in a virtualenv17:35
boris-42hm maybe ~/etc/bash_completion ?17:35
boris-42otherwise it may produce some issues?17:35
arcimboldoit's not standard17:35
*** dboik_ has quit IRC17:35
boris-42ah17:35
boris-42aahhh I see17:35
arcimboldoif you are running as root, _and_ not installing in a virtualenv, it makes sense to copy the file in /etc/bash_completion17:35
*** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting17:35
arcimboldothis could be done by teh script17:35
boris-42arcimboldo: yep17:35
boris-42amaretskiy: one more question, what about rally.conf17:36
arcimboldoif you are running as a user, a line can be added to the .bashrc17:36
boris-42arcimboldo:  ^17:36
arcimboldowell, rally.conf is not automatically copied in /etc/ as far as I understand, right?17:36
*** vigneshvar has quit IRC17:37
*** sarob has quit IRC17:37
arcimboldoit's copied by the script17:37
amaretskiyrally.conf can be installed into user $HOME dir. I think17:37
*** dboik has quit IRC17:37
arcimboldoso again, if the script is run as normal user can be copied in ~/.rally/rally.conf17:37
arcimboldo(which is where rally is looking for the configuration file)17:37
*** ioram has joined #openstack-meeting17:37
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting17:37
*** ioram is now known as Ioram17:37
*** Ioram is now known as Ioram717:37
boris-42arcimboldo: okay I think this totally makes sense17:38
amaretskiymaybe it is reasonable to store rally.conf in virtualenv root dir?17:38
*** dane_leblanc_ has quit IRC17:38
rediskinimo nothing to discuss here. it is enough to file a bug, and assign it to amaretskiy or me17:38
boris-42amaretskiy: good point=)17:38
boris-42rediskin: arcimboldo is going to try to do it=)17:38
boris-42arcimboldo: are you?)17:38
arcimboldoamaretskiy, well, data files are usually installed in the virtualenv, but configuration files arent, as far as I know17:38
*** zul has quit IRC17:38
arcimboldoboris-42, yes I can do it17:39
boris-42arcimboldo: great so you can actually file a bug it's quite simple to do17:39
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting17:39
boris-42arcimboldo:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/rally17:39
boris-42arcimboldo:  and then try to fix it17:39
arcimboldook17:39
boris-42arcimboldo: as far as I remember I shared with you HowTo?17:40
arcimboldoyes17:40
*** Fdot has quit IRC17:40
*** ZiGMaX has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
*** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
arcimboldoreading it it's in my todo list :)17:40
boris-42arcimboldo: first time it's a bit painfull=)17:40
*** padkrish has quit IRC17:40
oanufrievhttps://github.com/openstack/oslo.config/blob/master/oslo/config/cfg.py#L47617:40
oanufrievolso.config looks for configs not only at /etc17:41
boris-42oanufriev: yep17:42
arcimboldooanufriev, I've already installed rally as standard user, and put my configuration in ~/.rally/rally.conf, so it works already17:42
arcimboldothe only issue is with the installation17:42
*** esker has joined #openstack-meeting17:42
*** dsetia has joined #openstack-meeting17:42
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting17:42
*** esker has quit IRC17:43
boris-42arcimboldo: so okay I think we discussed this well=17:43
*** s0nea has quit IRC17:43
*** esker has joined #openstack-meeting17:43
boris-42arcimboldo: btw did you run sucessfully against Folsom?)17:43
*** suro_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC17:44
arcimboldoboris-42, yes!17:44
boris-42arcimboldo: WTF17:44
boris-42=)17:44
*** MeganR has left #openstack-meeting17:44
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
arcimboldoI've put a try/execpt around call that was raising an exception17:44
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC17:44
boris-42arcimboldo:  http://m.memegen.com/6vu5mf.jpg =)17:44
*** yamamoto has quit IRC17:44
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
*** KLevenstein has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
boris-42arcimboldo:  I think we should do that in upstream17:44
arcimboldoinside _remove_associated_networks, around the  to utils.check_service_status17:45
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting17:45
*** ygbo has quit IRC17:45
boris-42arcimboldo: yep17:45
arcimboldobut I only tested creation of virtual machines17:45
boris-42arcimboldo: another good patch to do17:45
boris-42arcimboldo: at least something works!17:45
arcimboldoI don't know what else could fail17:45
boris-42arcimboldo: but at least something works that is great=)17:45
*** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja17:45
*** safchain has quit IRC17:45
boris-42arcimboldo: so it makes sense to put try/except there17:46
boris-42arcimboldo: one more patch for u=)17:46
arcimboldobut the try/except should probably stay in benchmarks.utils, inside function check_service_status17:46
arcimboldoif anything throws an exception, it should returns false.17:46
*** marekd has joined #openstack-meeting17:46
*** leeantho has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC17:47
boris-42arcimboldo: not sure about that, cause it can hide evil bugs17:47
*** hemna has quit IRC17:47
*** s0nea has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** KanagarajM has quit IRC17:47
*** afaranha has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** derekh has quit IRC17:47
boris-42arcimboldo: maybe just put in user context on removing networks..17:47
arcimboldowhat about logging the exception raised?17:48
boris-42arcimboldo: ya something like that17:48
arcimboldoraising an exception there is quite nasty, because you cannot cleanup17:48
arcimboldoI had to delete the tenant by hand17:48
boris-42arcimboldo: hm17:49
boris-42arcimboldo: that shouldn't happend17:49
*** kebray has quit IRC17:49
arcimboldoso either you run it *before* creating anything, or you try to continue and then decide if perform the tests or just exit17:49
arcimboldo(after proper cleanup)17:49
*** andreykurilin_ has quit IRC17:49
boris-42arcimboldo: ah yep17:50
boris-42arcimboldo:  https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/context/users.py#L19917:50
boris-42arcimboldo: msdubov_ ^ you forgot to put there try/excpet17:50
boris-42arcimboldo: so the idea is to log failures *17:50
boris-42arcimboldo: or at least warning there and put there try/except17:50
arcimboldoIt seems to me that this failure is not critical, since you can proceed even if you don't get the list of the services.17:51
arcimboldoso you should continue17:51
arcimboldoat least, in this very specific case: Folsom with nova-network17:51
*** shohel02 has joined #openstack-meeting17:51
*** thedodd has joined #openstack-meeting17:51
boris-42arcimboldo:  so this code _remove_associated stuff is realted only to nova-network17:51
msdubov_boris-42 As far as I remember it wasn't there before this patch? I tried not to change anything related to this17:51
boris-42arcimboldo: and shouldn't be run agiant nova + neutron17:52
boris-42msdubov_: hm you were last person who touched that piece of code17:52
boris-42msdubov_: so=)17:52
msdubov_https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/9089ea4e56a8426538303a7c4abaa4884576a90d/rally/benchmark/context/users.py that's the previos version17:53
*** dane_leblanc has joined #openstack-meeting17:53
msdubov_https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/9089ea4e56a8426538303a7c4abaa4884576a90d/rally/benchmark/context/users.py#L17317:53
boris-42msdubov_: doesn't matter =)17:53
msdubov_There is try..except in the look17:53
msdubov_*loop17:53
boris-42msdubov_:  it doesn't delete anything17:53
boris-42msdubov_: if it raises exception17:53
msdubov_boris-42 hm it just logs a warning, doesn't it?17:54
boris-42arcimboldo: so as you found that bug, could you add some try/excpet good patch for beggign17:54
msdubov_https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/context/users.py#L13017:54
*** mpaolino has quit IRC17:54
*** elo has quit IRC17:54
msdubov_boris-42 Exception is in the nova client initialization?17:54
boris-42msdubov_:  https://github.com/stackforge/rally/blob/master/rally/benchmark/context/users.py#L120 and what if this raises exception17:54
boris-42msdubov_: ^ that line17:55
msdubov_boris-42 Okay17:55
boris-42Okay so meeting is quite close to end17:56
boris-42#topic Free discussion17:56
*** openstack changes topic to "Free discussion (Meeting topic: Rally)"17:56
boris-42any questions? ideas? proposals?)17:56
msdubov_Well since I missed some part of the meeting, I don't know whether you discussed rally info17:56
*** vsilva_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:56
msdubov_There is going to be an update: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/134666/17:56
*** htruta has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
msdubov_It introduces some explanatory texts about main entities in Rally17:57
*** scotm has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
msdubov_and improves the overall user experience with this command17:57
msdubov_Just to share17:57
*** abrito has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
msdubov_As well as I'm hoping to finish soon covering Rally with docstrings, so that "rally info find ..." will return info for any query17:57
boris-42msdubov_: nice17:58
boris-42okay we have to end meeting17:58
boris-42#endmeeting17:58
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"17:58
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 17:58:29 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)17:58
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/rally/2014/rally.2014-11-18-17.02.html17:58
arcimboldosorry I was afk, boris-42 do I need to open a bug report for the folsom/compatibility issue too? (I guess so)17:58
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/rally/2014/rally.2014-11-18-17.02.txt17:58
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/rally/2014/rally.2014-11-18-17.02.log.html17:58
*** oanufriev has quit IRC17:58
boris-42Keystone guys HI!17:58
boris-42=)17:58
morganfainbergboris-42 hiya17:58
*** amaretskiy has left #openstack-meeting17:58
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting17:59
morganfainbergdolphm, ayoung, bknudson, dstanek, jamielennox, morganfainberg, stevemar, gyee, henrynash, topol, marekd, lbragstad, joesavak, shardy, fabiog, nkinder, lloydm, shrekuma, ksavich, hrybacki, rharwood, grantbow, vdreamarkitex, raildo, rodrigods, amakarov, ajayaa, hogepodge, breton, lhcheng, nonameentername https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting17:59
dstaneko/17:59
rharwoodo/17:59
morganfainbergthat list is getting mighty long17:59
rodrigods\o17:59
hogepodgeo/17:59
topoloh its change of time again?17:59
rharwood\o the more the merrier or something, right?17:59
*** cdub has quit IRC17:59
stevemaro/17:59
morganfainbergtopol, happend while we were in Paris17:59
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
raildoo/18:00
dolphmtopol: we're just here for the daylight savings party18:00
marekd\o/18:00
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC18:00
*** msdubov_ has left #openstack-meeting18:00
*** lhcheng_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
boris-42morganfainberg: btw small offtopic18:00
ayoungLunch today is the "Aloha Burger" and all I can say is "That is a tasty burger!"18:00
Ioram7o/18:00
lbragstado/18:00
bknudsondaylight savings ended18:00
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC18:00
boris-42morganfainberg:  about osprofiler spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/134839/18:01
henrynashhi18:01
*** shashankhegde has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
htrutao/18:01
boris-42ayoung: hi there=)18:01
*** vishwanathj has quit IRC18:01
morganfainbergok18:01
morganfainbergwell18:01
morganfainbergmissing some folks (betcha they didn't remember DST)18:01
*** joesavak has quit IRC18:01
morganfainberg#startmeeting Keystone18:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 18:02:07 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is morganfainberg. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.18:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.18:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'keystone'18:02
bknudsonhi18:02
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
lbragstadI was guilty of that last year...18:02
ayoungpoor jamielennox probably will get an alarm clock wake up in 1 hour18:02
morganfainbergWelcome back! Hope people had a good summit and a nice week since the summit18:02
lbragstadI feel accomplished that I remember18:02
*** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
marekddolphm reminded of that yesterday18:02
morganfainberg#topic Stable Maintenance Liaison18:03
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Stable Maintenance Liaison (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:03
morganfainberg#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Stable_Branch18:03
bknudsonI'd be willing to sign up for this since we kind of need it18:03
morganfainbergWhile I can do this, I would prefer to have someone else to also rely on.18:03
*** gokrokve has quit IRC18:03
*** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
ayoung#startvote Nominate bknudson18:03
openstackOnly the meeting chair may start a vote.18:03
*** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
*** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting18:03
dolphmi'm on board as well18:03
lbragstadbknudson: is the liaison of liaisons18:04
*** vipul has quit IRC18:04
*** mattgriffin has quit IRC18:04
bknudsondolphm's got 2 already18:04
morganfainberghaha18:04
*** balajiiyer has left #openstack-meeting18:04
dolphm#winning18:04
morganfainbergi'll let you guys figure out which one will do it.18:04
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting18:04
* ayoung winning by not having to be stable liason18:04
morganfainberg#action dolphm or bknudson as stable liason. They'll battle it out - mad max style to see who gets it.18:04
*** bdpayne_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
dolphmbknudson: fisticuffs in #openstack-keystone later?18:05
ayoung"Two man enter, one man get  extra work!"18:05
morganfainbergjust update the wiki and let me know who it ends up being.18:05
*** vipul has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
dolphmmorganfainberg: ++18:06
bknudsondolphm: you can take it. I'm busy enough.18:06
dolphmbknudson: lol alrighty18:06
bknudsonI'll try to do more reviews in stable18:06
morganfainberg#topic Mapping engine - do we need some enhancements?18:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Mapping engine - do we need some enhancements? (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:06
*** evgenyf has quit IRC18:06
morganfainbergmarekd o/18:06
*** bdpayne has quit IRC18:06
marekdhello18:06
bknudsonplus I can never figure out the test failures.18:06
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting18:06
ayoungmorganfainberg, I think we need, at least the ability to split the REMOTE_USER value into userid and domain18:06
dolphmbknudson: that's the hard part18:06
*** jamielennox has joined #openstack-meeting18:06
* morganfainberg needs to also do more stable reviews.18:06
ayoungjamielennox, good morning!18:07
marekdsorry18:07
marekdemergency18:07
morganfainbergno worries18:07
*** mpaolino has quit IRC18:07
jamielennoxayoung: mmm18:07
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting18:07
stevemari think marekd is running away?18:07
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting18:07
morganfainbergi can answer the question - we do need enhancements.18:07
marekdso, during the summit i heard some plans and opinions about18:07
marekdmapping engine18:07
marekdstevemar: i am not running away18:07
bknudsonhere comes that singularity18:07
marekde.g. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting there was a thread here18:08
marekdi remember nkinder was mentioning something about dynamic group creation18:08
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting18:08
rodrigodsmarekd, ++18:08
marekdi see everybody have some plans and opinions and i'd like to gather them and try to work something out.18:08
*** bvandenh has joined #openstack-meeting18:08
morganfainbergmarekd, more specifically group-passthrough, so it was possible to just pass group info across not need a keystone group every time18:08
bknudsonetherpad?18:08
*** ignacio-scopetta has quit IRC18:08
ayoung++18:08
ayoungthat too18:08
morganfainbergetherpad would be good.18:09
marekd<wip>18:09
marekdhttps://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mapping-engine-enhancements18:09
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
morganfainberg#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mapping-engine-enhancements18:09
*** mattgriffin has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
*** luqas has quit IRC18:09
marekdmorganfainberg: thanks.18:10
*** ignacio-scopetta has joined #openstack-meeting18:10
rodrigodswe want to help with that as well18:10
dstanekI just worry about going too far here. like the dev thread suggested18:10
rodrigodscc vsilva_18:10
*** nkinder has joined #openstack-meeting18:10
marekdrodrigods: fine, thanks, but we still don't have a clear roadmap :-)18:10
rodrigodsmarekd, we can also help with the roadmap =p18:11
morganfainberg#action please contribute information to the etherpad, we can distill out the requirements and what is really needed and what would be too much.18:11
*** thedodd has quit IRC18:11
ayoung#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Summit/Kilo/Etherpads#Keystone18:11
topolconcrete use cases would be nice18:11
*** johnthetubaguy is now known as zz_johnthetubagu18:11
marekdtopol: ++18:11
morganfainbergmarekd, i have some use-cases for enhancements that "make sense" afaict, but they should be easy sells compared to some of the other things.18:11
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting18:11
ayoungtopol, See the complexit y from gyee's X509 spec he pulled:  bascially, the subject of a cert18:11
morganfainbergbut yes, include the use-case in the etherpad18:11
marekdmorganfainberg: ok, thanks.18:12
ayoungtopol, also, REMOTE_USER as set by mod_auth_kerb18:12
ayoungand the REMOTE_UISER value from SAML18:12
morganfainbergayoung, I vote we make the variable REMOTE_UISER in all cases now18:12
stevemarayoung that should work now.. with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133037/ merged18:12
ayoungmorganfainberg, can't18:12
morganfainbergayoung, darn18:12
morganfainberganyway18:12
marekdmorganfainberg: and to be honest i don't know much about nkinder's proposition18:12
ayoungfor example, REMOTE_USER might not be the right value from mod_ssl18:12
marekdregarding groups18:12
morganfainbergmarekd, we'll get details outlined in the etherpad18:13
marekdi was hoping he would explain it here pro publico bono :-)18:13
ayoung#link http://www.freeipa.org/page/Environment_Variables18:13
marekdmorganfainberg: allrighty.18:13
ayoungAnd SAML is pretty much An LDAP query18:13
marekddoes it all deserve a spec for the kilo release?18:13
morganfainbergmarekd, it should be straight forward once it's laid out like that.18:13
morganfainbergmarekd, likely we will want a spec to encompass the changes.18:13
morganfainbergbut lets see what comes from the ehterpad first18:14
stevemaryeah, especially if it's new functionality/feature18:14
morganfainbergmight be that we say "nope not going to happen"18:14
stevemarand not just a bug fix18:14
morganfainbergfor $REASONS$18:14
ayoungprobably the most common case is split an env var into two pieces, one is username or userid, the other is domain info18:14
marekdengine is not broken as is...18:14
marekdit simply may lack some features18:14
marekdayoung: i'd still concatenate it18:14
morganfainbergmarekd, correct. thats why i think we need to see the details and then write a spec to encompass the enhancements - clearly detailing the SoW/scope18:14
marekdmorganfainberg: great18:15
*** sergef has quit IRC18:15
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
marekdi can take care of the specs if we need it.18:15
ayoung#link https://jdennis.fedorapeople.org/doc/mapping.pdf  John Dennis' proposal18:15
morganfainbergit will help us prevent things sneaking in that are "bad ideas"™18:15
*** arcimboldo has left #openstack-meeting18:15
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
*** pballand has quit IRC18:15
marekdayoung: they made more powerful engine18:15
marekdok, if anybody else has some usecases please add it to the etherpad18:16
ayoungmarekd, "They?"  he's on my team.  He did this all by himself.  jdennis kindof been through this once or twice before18:16
morganfainbergI am going to say right now we will for this cycle at least *not* be making the mapping engine configurable - we will maintain 1 mapping engine, even if it means swapping out what we have whole-sale. I don't want to fight with pluggable mapping engines at this point. too many ways for things to be exposed in bad ways18:16
topolmorganfainberg +++18:16
marekdayoung: ok, great, jdennis, *himself*, from ayoung's team has made a much powerful engine.18:16
ayoungI think that is fine18:17
dstanekmorganfainberg: ++ seems dangerous if done wrong18:17
ayounghe was doing it for opendaylight.  So one benefit to his approach is it would work with another open source project18:17
lbragstadI'm on board with that18:17
marekdayoung: i know. I really appreciated his e-mails18:17
marekdand it was *really* meritorical stuff.18:18
bknudsonseems like if there's an existing mapping tool we should use it rather than try to develop our own18:18
marekdthat's why i want to  drag your attention18:18
ayoungI would say, though, that he lacks the APIs we need for management.  Those are really part of the Federation spec today, and assume the existing mapping language18:18
morganfainbergayoung, and it might make sense to be compatible - my only hard line is i don't want pluggable engines for many many reasons, mostly around security and making the features solid before we open it up to massive headaches.18:18
ayoungbknudson, technically, ours existed first18:18
marekdand answer the questions: do we need something new? some small fixups, or maybe we should take John's engine?18:18
*** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:18
morganfainbergalso, his iirc is java and would need to be ported to python if we used it.18:18
ayounghe wrote his this year as part of his work on Open Daylight.18:19
morganfainbergmarekd, ++ those are exactly the questions we should answer.18:19
jamielennoxif nothing else that doc is awesome18:19
topoljava ugghh18:19
ayounggit clone git://fedorapeople.org/~jdennis/federated-mapping.git18:19
morganfainbergand would john's engine "fix" the other needs or would we need to expand it as well.18:19
morganfainbergs/"fix"/"meet"18:19
ayounglooking to see if he did the python yet18:19
bknudsonmaybe we can make the python version an openstack project18:19
*** Haneef has joined #openstack-meeting18:19
morganfainbergbknudson, I'd support that.18:20
*** dane_leblanc has quit IRC18:20
marekdbknudson: really?18:20
morganfainbergif we go down that path18:20
stevemarwe're just dealing with arrays and dicts, it shouldn't be hard to port it over18:20
marekdbknudson: morganfainberg  like a standalone project?18:20
rodrigodsmarekd, makes sense, since it's goiing to be pluggable18:20
bknudsonit's pretty common... I think this was done with some other python projs that openstack uses.18:20
morganfainbergmarekd, it would be a lib like policy18:20
bknudsonsqlalchemy-migrate for example18:20
marekdmorganfainberg: ok18:20
marekdi could probably give a helping hand with that.18:21
morganfainbergmarekd, not a "stand alone service"18:21
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:21
dstaneklet's just start simple on the etherpad with requirements and gaps - then this discussion will be more valuable18:21
joesavak +1 dstanek18:21
marekddstanek: ++18:21
morganfainbergbut yes, lets get requirements in the etherpad18:21
ayoungthere is python code there18:21
joesavakor a spec to detail why this approach is needed and what problems it solves18:21
*** dkranz has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
morganfainbergayoung, if you could poke john to look at the etherpad as well and comment re his mapping engine once we have the use-cases18:21
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
ayoungwill do18:22
morganfainbergsee where we land.18:22
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting18:22
morganfainberg#action ayoung to talk to john dennis about mapping engine and use-cases from etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mapping-engine-enhancements once populated with requested enhancements18:22
*** rushiagr is now known as rushiagr_away18:22
rodrigodsmorganfainberg, me and vsilva_ will be on top of that as well18:23
morganfainbergjoesavak, thats the point of the etherpad.18:23
joesavakwoot18:23
morganfainbergjoesavak, post meeting need to bug you fyi.18:23
*** leonchio_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:23
morganfainbergok moving on.18:23
morganfainberg#topic K2K federation - status18:23
*** openstack changes topic to "K2K federation - status (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:23
morganfainbergmarekd, all you again! :)18:23
marekdallrighty, was hoping to see gyee here18:23
gyeehere18:23
marekdgyee: oh, sorry!18:23
gyeesorry I got stuck in traffic18:23
joesavakmagic.18:23
* morganfainberg waves hands "magic"18:23
marekdso, K2K18:24
*** lzachery has quit IRC18:24
*** amcrn has joined #openstack-meeting18:24
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting18:24
joesavakhoping to see megan fox here18:24
morganfainbergjoesavak, shh18:24
marekdhere!18:24
gyee++ :)18:24
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting18:25
marekdso, K2K I wanted to ask if any of you had some experience or tried it out. It was marked as experimental in Juno and I feel there should be some fixes.18:25
marekdi know rodrigods make a setup without security18:25
gyeemarekd, we did and it works!18:25
morganfainbergmarekd, i am planning on setting up a multi-way federated cloud test env this week.18:25
marekdi know gyee and Sam were playing with that18:25
marekdgyee: did you turn off crypto?18:25
morganfainbergso i expect i'll also have feedback on it.18:25
bknudsonIs K2K still marked as experimental?18:25
gyeeno18:25
morganfainbergbknudson, yes.18:26
*** rajeshr has joined #openstack-meeting18:26
rodrigodsgyee, marekd, AFAIK, Sam disabled security as well18:26
*** nelsnelson has quit IRC18:26
morganfainbergbknudson, i hope it will move to "stable" this cycle.18:26
rodrigodsat least was the last update he sent to me18:26
marekdgyee: so it worked with a proper assertion signature validation?18:26
gyeeI do have a question on federation though, with the way it works, we have to use different URL for different providers18:26
morganfainbergbknudson, but we're just starting to get drive-time on it now.18:26
*** rajeshr has quit IRC18:26
marekdrodrigods: that's what he told me .18:26
bknudsonwe need tempest tests!18:26
gyeeyes18:26
*** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting18:26
morganfainbergbknudson, ++ that is part of why i'm setting up the test env18:26
leonchio_rodrigods, marekd, yes, that's right, I have the signature validation disabled18:26
marekdleonchio_: :/18:26
rodrigods=(18:27
gyeebecause of the way redirect works18:27
lbragstadmorganfainberg: which test env specifically?18:27
rodrigodsleeantho, did you try using the same issuer for both IdP and SP?18:27
marekdalso18:27
morganfainberglbragstad, i'm going to be standing up a multi-node / cloud env with k2k + other federation. specifically so we can outline how we're testing it18:27
rodrigodsleonchio_, *18:27
*** nelsnelson has joined #openstack-meeting18:27
gyeeoh, it was disabled?18:27
marekdAFAIR there were some plans of different regions list depending on who is having a local token18:27
lbragstadmorganfainberg: ah, that's right...18:27
marekdstevemar: recall anything like that?18:27
morganfainberglbragstad, infra can do multi-node environments now. (but it might be expirimental still)18:27
rodrigodswe are missing the region in the catalog as well18:27
marekdrodrigods: hmmmmm, are we?18:28
rodrigodsyep18:28
marekdlast time i tried it I think i had it18:28
*** cbouch has quit IRC18:28
rodrigodsnot for me, here18:28
marekdjoesavak: we don't want *any user* to see all the clouds that one can burst into, do we?18:28
marekdstevemar: ^^18:28
marekdthis should also be fixed, right?18:28
*** jamespage_ has quit IRC18:29
morganfainbergmarekd, i think that can be fixed with the filtering?18:29
morganfainbergleverage endpoint filtering and expand it to region filtering?18:29
joesavakmarekd - they should be able to pull a list of trusted service providers so they know which provider to reference when getting the saml assertion from the local cloud to pass to other (service provider) clouds18:29
stevemarmarekd, i don't think we put any regions in the catalog right now18:29
rodrigodsstevemar, ++18:29
marekdjoesavak: but all the SPs ?18:30
gyeebut we can group endpoints based on regions18:30
jamielennoxstevemar: i thought we do18:30
*** sergef has quit IRC18:30
marekdstevemar: rodrigods i will check it, maybe i messed sth up.18:30
gyeeits an attribute of endpoint isn't it?18:30
joesavakmarekd - perhaps rbac, or relating which domains can access which SPs is needed...18:30
stevemaroh i didn't think about filtering at all18:31
joesavaki can see that some restriction would be good - but I think it's supposed to be a list-all right now18:31
jamielennoxalso regarding having SPs still feel that it's a bad idea to put anything in the catalog that can't be accessed with the current token18:31
marekdstevemar: morganfainberg but isn't filtering a client-initiated action?18:31
morganfainbergmarekd, no endpoint filtering is server side18:31
gyeehttps://github.com/openstack/keystone/blob/master/keystone/catalog/schema.py#L7318:31
marekdmorganfainberg: on what basis?18:31
morganfainbergit doesn't prevent use of a target18:31
marekdjoesavak: aha, ok18:31
marekdjoesavak: i thought you would be concerned.18:31
morganfainbergmarekd, but it's a cloud provider can filter endpoints per project etc18:31
morganfainbergfor now i think filtering out targets is an enhancement18:32
morganfainbergnot a design of the current system18:32
morganfainbergaha, joesavak ++18:32
marekdone last thing.18:32
marekdcurrently we add only one url to a region18:32
marekdwhich is a SP URL where the assertion should be send.18:33
joesavaka little concerned - but should be manageable - via RBAC or even endpoint assignment to identity18:33
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC18:33
gyeejoesavak, security is a manageable condition :D18:33
morganfainberggyee, hah18:33
joesavakimplementors choice. ; )18:33
marekdbut this means, a client needs to know another URL apriori, an endpoint where he should go once authenticated.18:34
*** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting18:34
rodrigodsmarekd, ++18:34
marekdand it put a lot of concern on people.18:34
rodrigodsyeah, that's a tricky point18:34
marekdyes18:34
marekdso I suggest we add two url to the bursting regions18:34
rodrigodssince we do not have a real relay_state =P18:34
morganfainbergmarekd, fallback url?18:34
marekdyou mean?18:35
joesavakone being the foreign keystone URL and the other being what?18:35
rodrigodsjoesavak, the auth URL18:35
marekdjoesavak: let's say the protected url is sp-keystone.com/secure18:35
morganfainbergrodrigods, but that should be discoverable?18:35
marekdjoesavak: but the assertion is gonna be sent to sp-keystone.com/shibboleth.sso/ecp18:35
rodrigodsmorganfainberg, I need to know how the SP called my IdP18:36
rodrigodswhich should be a out-of-band operation18:36
marekdand today we configure the latter only18:36
rodrigodsI think18:36
*** khaldrogox has quit IRC18:36
joesavakresponse from assertion call is a scoped token, right? So can I get the auth URL from that scope?18:36
joesavakGET v3/endpoints -H X-Auth-Token: $scopedToken18:36
*** zul has quit IRC18:37
joesavakor unscoped even18:37
rodrigodsjoesavak, that's exactly the URL we need to go to get the scoped token18:37
marekdjoesavak: is this GET to IdP or SP ?18:37
joesavakGET to SP18:37
*** mdenny has quit IRC18:37
rodrigodsv3/identity_providers/<idp_id>/protocols/<protocol>/auth18:37
marekdhow do you know this url18:37
*** mdenny has joined #openstack-meeting18:37
marekdno, wait.18:38
morganfainbergmarekd, isn't that the URL in the region?18:38
rodrigodsmorganfainberg, the one in the region is the SP url18:38
marekdmorganfainberg: no, the one in the region is for POST /Shibboleth.sso/ADFS (e.g) where you send your assertion18:38
rodrigodslike Shibboleth.sso/ECP18:38
rodrigodsso marekd wants another field to store v3/identity_providers/<idp_id>/protocols/<protocol>/auth18:39
rodrigodsright?18:39
marekdand then, usually SP responds with HTTP 302 and location set to keystone.example.com instead of keystone.example.com/v3/OS-FEDERATION/identity_providers/<idp>protoc/.../auth18:39
marekdrodrigods: yes18:39
*** jgallard has quit IRC18:39
marekdit's all because the workflow is so called IdP initiated authentication18:39
joesavakGotcha - because we made the protocols extensible - the URL may differ outside of the known keysotne contract for assertion processing - so 2 URLs are needed18:39
morganfainbergah18:40
marekdjoesavak: exacly!18:40
rodrigodsjoesavak, ++18:40
ayoung20 minutes left18:40
gyeejamielennox, how's that going to work with keystoneclient?18:40
morganfainbergthat seems reasonable18:40
morganfainbergbut it will need client side work i think18:40
gyeeI don't think that auth url is discoverable18:40
joesavakOk , I'm ok with that - federationURL and keystoneURL (optional)18:40
marekdjoesavak: yeah.18:40
*** achanda has quit IRC18:41
rodrigodsjoesavak, would easy a lot to automate the clients18:41
ayoungis this for the Horizon use case?18:41
*** annegent_ has quit IRC18:41
jamielennoxgyee: i think it's specific to the federation auth plugin18:41
*** khaldrogox has joined #openstack-meeting18:41
joesavakrod - didn't understand your comment18:42
gyeejamielennox, I mean it doesn't seem to follow the usual client workflow18:42
*** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:42
jamielennoxgyee: having all of this stuck in a region doesn't follow the regular workflow18:42
marekdjoesavak: he meant that clients would need to figure out one extra utl18:42
bknudsonwe could put the auth urls in the json-home document somehow18:42
marekdurl18:42
joesavakyup18:42
marekdjoesavak: they could work fully automated.18:42
rodrigodsmarekd, joearnold exactly18:42
jamielennoxi tried to break the region == SP think prior to kilo but didn't get there in time18:42
rodrigodsjoesavak, *18:42
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting18:43
morganfainbergjamielennox, why is it wrong to assume a region == SP ?18:43
morganfainbergin this case?18:43
jamielennox1. makes it confusing with how people currently use regions 2. breaks the concept that everything in the service catalog can be accessed with the current token18:44
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting18:44
jamielennox(from memory #2 still applies - maybe changed since then)18:44
gyeemorganfainberg, the client discovery code won't work as is18:44
morganfainbergexcept the region *only* has a url.18:44
morganfainbergnot endpoints in this case.18:44
marekdmorganfainberg: joesavak one thing, just remembered.18:44
*** Tross has joined #openstack-meeting18:45
marekdshouldn't we also add some *another* parameterer to the region?18:45
marekdlike the federated protocol?18:45
morganfainbergok this needs more discussion - we can enhance/change this but we have other topics to get to in this meeting.18:45
jamielennoxmorganfainberg: which seems like we shoehorned something into a current resource with edge cases rather than just make a new resource18:45
morganfainbergwe can make this better since k2k is expirimental if it's really warranted18:45
marekdtoday we have only saml2, but tommorow regions/SP A,B,C will be saml2 only, but M,N OIDC18:45
morganfainbergthis is the point of experimental18:45
*** khaldrogox has quit IRC18:45
jamielennoxmorganfainberg: we could have made an SP resource and put that into the catalog18:45
morganfainbergbut the case needs to be really strong.18:45
marekdhow am i going to be able to distinguish?18:45
morganfainbergmarekd, so i think we should evaluate shifting to an SP resource or similar18:46
*** khaldrogox has joined #openstack-meeting18:46
marekdjamielennox: that would be not a bad idea18:46
jamielennoxmarekd: at this point you're taking over the region concept and i would vote to making a new SP resource in which all of this makes sense18:46
marekdmorganfainberg: ++18:46
gyeemarekd, if SP is a resource in SC, we could filter it18:46
morganfainbergor at least a clear way to identify a "Region" is a resource18:46
joesavakyeah - we should have the protocol the SP uses to be discoverable.18:46
morganfainbergor whatever18:46
morganfainbergbut yes.18:46
morganfainberglets evaluating making that shift before we stabilize k2k18:47
marekdmorganfainberg: so, whole new api for adding service providers, just like we have IdP now?18:47
marekdstevemar: joesavak ^^ ?18:47
morganfainberg#action Evaluate Service Provider as part of the Catalog18:47
*** mtanino has joined #openstack-meeting18:47
joesavak+118:47
ayoungHeh...that was inthe origianl Kent proposal18:47
morganfainbergayoung, funny how things come full circle18:47
morganfainbergok #topic HM releases planning18:47
morganfainbergerm18:47
morganfainberg#topic HM releases planning18:47
*** openstack changes topic to "HM releases planning (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:47
raildo\o18:48
morganfainbergraildo, rodrigods o/18:48
rodrigodso/18:48
raildoSo, this is our planning for HM in Kilo:18:48
ayoungrelease early release often18:48
raildoKilo-1 the base implementation about HM merged and the new specs about HM improvements https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135309/ and the Reseller Use case (I'm writing it) merged too.18:48
gyeeayoung ++18:48
morganfainbergraildo, thats a good target18:48
*** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting18:48
raildoKilo-2 the entire code about HM and Reseller use case committed.18:48
ayoung++18:48
rodrigodsso, for Kilo-118:48
rodrigodsplease review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117786/ and the following patches18:49
rodrigods=)18:49
*** sergef has quit IRC18:49
raildorodrigods, ++18:49
morganfainbergraildo, once the base code is merged we will need to resolve the rebase against master to topic branch18:49
morganfainbergthen we do a simple topic branch -> master merge18:49
*** jlibosva has quit IRC18:49
raildomorganfainberg, yes, i believe that we can do that in kilo-1 too18:49
morganfainbergshould be straight forward.18:49
morganfainbergyes18:49
rodrigodsreally wanted it to land before henrynash refactoring18:49
rodrigodshehe18:49
*** otter768 has joined #openstack-meeting18:49
henrynashrodigods: eek18:49
morganfainbergrodrigods, race to rebase.18:50
raildohah18:50
raildoand for  Kilo-3 just reviews and resolve some bugs related to HM (if it appears :) )18:50
morganfainbergmakes sense18:50
raildoSo, We have this Wiki about HM Meeting:18:50
henrynashrodigods: we should just talk about which way makes the most sense18:50
raildo#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/HierarchicalMultitenancyMeeting18:50
raildo(just follow the Keystone pattern)18:50
rodrigodsthe idea is that Kilo-2 code won't be a feature branch anymore18:51
morganfainbergrodrigods, that is my hope18:51
raildothe HM meetings on Friday at 16:00 UTC here in #openstack-meeting I invite everyone to participate18:51
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting18:51
raildo:)18:51
*** markmcclain has quit IRC18:51
ayoungraildo, do what we do at the start of this meeting:18:51
henrynashrodigods: my go18:51
ayoungpaste in the names of the keystone contributors that you want there18:52
morganfainbergok so we can quickly get to the last couple topics we have.18:52
rodrigodsayoung, ++18:52
morganfainbergwe need to keep moving.18:52
raildoayoung, sure18:52
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting18:52
raildomorganfainberg, ok18:52
morganfainberg#topic Oslo-Incubator Policy Graduation to Keystone Program18:52
*** openstack changes topic to "Oslo-Incubator Policy Graduation to Keystone Program (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:52
morganfainbergWe are adopting the policy lib18:52
gyeew00t!18:52
ayoungw00t18:52
morganfainbergit'll be run like pycadf (separate core team), if you're not interested as keystoen-core you wont need to be on core18:52
ayoungand we are waiting on fileutils to move to oslo.utils,18:52
morganfainbergthough i hope everyone will want to be core on it18:53
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting18:53
morganfainbergayoung, we decided to wait?18:53
morganfainberganyway rodrigods is writing the spec18:53
rodrigodsayoung, morganfainberg not that I'm aware of18:53
*** KLevenstein has left #openstack-meeting18:53
rodrigodsyep18:53
morganfainbergthe proposed name is pycpre18:53
ayoungmorganfainberg, ah...we can go ahead without that?  Good!18:53
morganfainbergsince it can't be in the oslo namespace18:53
morganfainbergayoung, we can.18:53
rodrigodshmm missed the name choice part18:53
ayoungpycpre  was a joke18:53
morganfainbergayoung, lol ;)18:53
ayoungbut someone took it seriously18:53
morganfainbergsorry skipped the :)18:53
ayoungcloud policy rules engine18:54
gyee:|18:54
* topol The Keystone empire grows.....18:54
ayoungsrsly we need a name18:54
dolphmrodrigods: is that spec already published somewhere?18:54
morganfainbergin all seriousness i want a name that isn't "keystone" namespaced18:54
rodrigodswould be nice a name to pronounce without being an acronym18:54
dolphmtopol: AAA18:54
ayoungpython-policy might be too over-reaching18:54
rodrigodsdolphm, not yet, will publish in keystone-specs18:54
topoldolphm, indeed18:54
morganfainbergand it can't be oslo namespaced18:54
gyeecongress?18:54
morganfainbergtopol, i swear dolph and I didn't discuss this18:55
gyeejust kidding!18:55
ayoungcyprus?18:55
morganfainberganyway18:55
morganfainbergthink of names18:55
morganfainbergdiscuss w/ rodrigods  and in the spec18:55
topolgyee..... really???18:55
gyeehey now18:55
morganfainbergwe'll continue this convo elsewhere18:55
morganfainberg#topic Policy Specifications18:55
*** openstack changes topic to "Policy Specifications (Meeting topic: Keystone)"18:55
morganfainbergayoung, o/18:55
ayoungYay!18:55
morganfainberg5 mins18:55
pballandgyee: good one ;)18:55
topolI for one welcome my new Keystone overlords :-)18:55
ayoungOK...so henrynash and I have been hashin a few things out18:55
henrynashayoung: :-)18:56
dolphmpypolice18:56
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC18:56
morganfainbergdolphm, hehe18:56
*** riwinters has joined #openstack-meeting18:56
dolphmpylice?18:56
rodrigodspypo18:56
ayoungprobably the most contentious thing was the distinction between hierarchical roles (not the role assignments) and role groups18:56
rodrigodshaha18:56
topolyuck18:56
*** harlowja is now known as harlowja_away18:56
joesavakkeystone cops and the pylice18:56
dolphmrodrigods: ++18:56
joesavaklol18:56
dstanekcall it customs; they are strict and almost didn't let me back into the US18:56
dstanekcustoms.policy18:56
henrynashayoung: are we on to a lost casue here?18:56
morganfainberghey18:57
morganfainbergwe need to cover this18:57
morganfainbergit's important18:57
ayoungnah, we are, aI thinkm, talking about two aspects of related but different things18:57
topolthey demanded dstanek shave his beard or stop rotting for the browns18:57
morganfainbergjokes can go #openstack-keystone18:57
morganfainbergpost meeting.18:57
morganfainbergayoung, please continue18:57
dolphmayoung: can you reset the conversation back to the problem being solved? it's hard to follow along as the discussion seems to jump straight into the solutions and the steps required to implement those solutions18:57
ayoungso we need a shorthand for identifying that one role (or someting)  means multiple roles18:57
ayoungok...problems to be solved:18:57
*** rthyne has joined #openstack-meeting18:58
ayoungwell, henrynash 's solving the problem of "domain specific roles"18:58
dstanektopol: rotting is probably correct18:58
*** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:58
morganfainbergthey are closely related18:58
morganfainbergand can/should co-exist18:58
henrynash#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133855/18:58
dolphmayoung: that's already a solution, not a use case18:59
samuelmsmorganfainberg, ++18:59
ayoungdolphm, take that up with henry, not my problem to solve.  I was starting with "how do we unify delegations into one mechanism"18:59
morganfainbergdolphm, the #1 usecase is for a domain admin to be able to redelegate groupings of permissions to users on projects under the domain18:59
henrynashdolphm: Problem 2: Different domains want to be able to create their own "roles" which are more meaningful to their users...but our "roles" are global and are directly linked to the rules in the policy file - something only a cloud operator is going to want to own.19:00
morganfainberghenrynash, ++19:00
henrynashdolphm: Solution: Have some kind of domain-scoped role-group (or meta-role) that a domain owner can define, that maps to a set of underlying roles that a policy file understands. [As has been pointed out, what we are really doing with this is finally doing real RBAC, where what we call roles today are really capabilities and role-groups are really roles]19:00
ayoungand delegate something more fine-grained than just the role I've been assigned19:00
*** mpaolino has quit IRC19:00
dolphmperfect, thanks19:00
morganfainbergayoung, thats the next piece you're advocating.19:00
ayoungmorganfainberg, it grew out of the constraints discussion19:00
morganfainbergayoung, we decided at the summit that first pass was coarse groupings to ensure we could solve the immidiate need19:00
morganfainberganyway19:00
morganfainbergthat is time19:00
*** kmartin has quit IRC19:01
morganfainbergcontinue the topic in #openstack-keystone19:01
ayoungI want to be able to say "this token can only do operation O"19:01
morganfainbergand jokes.19:01
morganfainberg#endmeeting19:01
ayoungread up19:01
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"19:01
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 19:01:13 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)19:01
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2014/keystone.2014-11-18-18.02.html19:01
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2014/keystone.2014-11-18-18.02.txt19:01
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2014/keystone.2014-11-18-18.02.log.html19:01
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC19:01
fungiinfra peoples unite!19:01
morganfainbergfungi, /me runs and hides.19:01
*** dboik has quit IRC19:01
clarkbo/19:01
morganfainberg:)19:01
anteayao/19:01
clarkbmorganfainberg: careful running on that knee19:01
mmedvedeo/19:01
morganfainbergclarkb, fair point19:01
asselin0/19:01
*** Ark has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC19:01
*** afaranha has left #openstack-meeting19:01
*** emagana has quit IRC19:01
fungi#startmeeting infra19:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 19:02:03 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is fungi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.19:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.19:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: infra)"19:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'infra'19:02
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting19:02
*** Ark is now known as Guest7783019:02
*** rthyne has quit IRC19:02
fungi#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting19:02
ianwo/19:02
*** FJB has quit IRC19:02
jesusauruso/19:02
fungiwe've got what looks like a very long and detailed agenda19:02
hogepodgeo/19:02
*** amakarov has joined #openstack-meeting19:02
fungii'm going to be cruel and drop the "moar reviews please" entries for the sake of getting issues/progress discussed19:03
*** abrito has quit IRC19:03
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting19:03
* sdague can lurk again, now that CSA season is over19:03
fungiapologies to those who are not getting enough reviews on their patches though, let's cover that in #openstack-infra later19:03
fungi#topic Actions from last meeting19:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Actions from last meeting (Meeting topic: infra)"19:03
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting19:04
fungithere wer ejust the two for me and clark carried over from two meetings prior, and i'll repost those in hopes we get to them19:04
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting19:04
*** pboros has left #openstack-meeting19:04
fungi#action clarkb figure out gerrit per project third party voting ACLs and third party accounts via openid19:04
*** Ioram7 has left #openstack-meeting19:04
clarkbI have not gotten to that yet19:04
fungi#action fungi draft initial third-party liaisons description, to later be amended as needed before publication19:04
funginor have i that one19:04
clarkbbut now that I am back from summiting I should definitely have much more time to do that thing19:05
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Swift logs)19:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Swift logs) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:05
funginothing new on this front i'm aware of19:05
anteayawhat do we need from a third party liaisons description?19:05
*** leonchio_ has quit IRC19:05
anteayathey all do something different19:05
fungianteaya: yep, we can talk about it after the meeting19:05
anteayakk19:05
fungijhesketh: around?19:05
*** arnaud has quit IRC19:06
clarkbiirc jhesketh is on vacation in europe for a couple more weeks19:06
fungiahh, righth-o19:06
fungimoving on then19:06
clarkbsorry "holiday"19:06
nibalizero/19:06
*** jjmb has quit IRC19:06
krtayloro/19:06
fungiyep, last i recall we still needed some performance profiling19:06
fungipresumably that's where we still are19:06
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Puppet module split)19:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Puppet module split) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:07
fungiasselin: great work on the jenkins module split19:07
asselinthanks :)19:07
anteayayay asselin19:07
mordredo/19:07
fungilessons learned there and in the previous module translated into some more improvements to the instructions in the spec19:07
asselinprocess is getting ironed out.19:07
*** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting19:08
fungibut all in all that one was not terribly painful except that the project creation change got approved after changes were approved to the same module in system-config19:08
asselin'last' question is regarding module file. project page and issues_url19:08
fungiso i ended up needing to force-push a new repo state into it once asselin prepared it19:08
*** jecarey_ has quit IRC19:08
anteayahow are we avoiding that in future?19:08
fungianteaya: clearer commit messages19:09
asselinand I had to re-subtree and push to my temp repo. not too difficult19:09
anteayaawesome19:09
asselinanteaya, I added a not in the spec about it19:09
asselinnote*19:09
anteayagreat19:09
fungiasselin: i was good with your proposed metadata, but still need a second core vote on https://review.openstack.org/134373 and https://review.openstack.org/13439319:09
nibalizergit merge is also terrible at figuring out how to merge yaml i guess, so after every module split lands we have to rebase the rest19:10
nibalizernot a big deal tho19:10
fungiasselin: anything else on teh jenkins module or lessons we learned there?19:10
clarkbI can review those today19:10
asselinno, just review and look at the comments. not 100% clear what the issues url should be19:10
funginibalizer: you have some items for the github and pip modules yeah?19:11
nibalizerya thats a question19:11
nibalizerjust notes that they're ready if corse want to do them19:11
asselindo we have a storyboard for each puppet module?19:11
fungiasselin: we automatically get that with sb19:11
nibalizerbut asselin's question should be discussed19:11
*** Haneef has quit IRC19:11
*** Guest77830 has quit IRC19:12
*** mdenny has quit IRC19:12
*** mdenny has joined #openstack-meeting19:12
fungioh, though i guess no storyboard project has appeared yet for openstack-infra/puppet-jenkins19:12
nibalizerso there isn't a storyboard for every module right now19:12
clarkbdo you need a uses storyboard flag to be set on the new projects?19:13
fungiahh, yeah we flag them in projects.yaml19:13
fungiso there's a to-do item19:13
nibalizerokay19:13
nibalizerwfm19:13
fungibut i agree we should have a sb project for each of them (for every one of our git repos ideally?)19:13
clarkbya and ensure they are part of the correct storyboard group(s)19:14
fungiokay, sounds good19:14
mtreinishfungi: does that include subunit2sql? That's under openstack-infra too...19:14
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
fungi#agreed each puppet module needs a storyboard project19:15
asselinok I will update docs and jenkins to use-storyboard: true19:15
fungi#agreed each puppet module needs to be associated with the infra project group19:15
nibalizerand that will be the bug reporting url for the metadata.json19:15
fungimtreinish: yeah, in my opinion it's the same for any infra project19:15
*** thedodd has joined #openstack-meeting19:15
clarkb++19:15
*** nshaikh has joined #openstack-meeting19:16
*** igordcard has quit IRC19:16
asselinwhen do we delete the upstream git repo?19:16
*** scotm has quit IRC19:16
fungiwhenever now19:16
mtreinishfungi: hmm, ok I guess I can get my feet wet using it for that then19:17
*** photocyte has joined #openstack-meeting19:17
fungias soon as it's safely imported, you can delete the original19:17
clarkbthough there really isn't much reason too (so doesn't need to be a priority)19:17
fungiokay, also nibalizer has a proposed change to improve the module inclusion list for our puppet apply integration test19:17
nibalizeryep19:17
fungii'll link the related reviews for this topic before i forget19:18
nibalizerbasically just sources modules.env so we we dont have to keep two lists19:18
*** tsekiyama has quit IRC19:18
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/13437319:18
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/13439319:18
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/13472319:18
*** alop has quit IRC19:18
fungisounds fine to me19:18
fungianything else on the puppet module split-out spec?19:19
*** che-arne has quit IRC19:19
fungiwe need shepherds for the pip and github modules i guess19:19
*** baoli has quit IRC19:19
*** aepifanov has joined #openstack-meeting19:19
fungii'm happy to work with you on those this week unless someone else wants a turn19:19
asselinI can start the 'next' module. not sure which19:19
nibalizerfungi: awesome19:20
nibalizernothing else for module split for me19:20
asselinthanks fungi for shepharding this one19:20
*** jecarey has joined #openstack-meeting19:20
*** dtalton has quit IRC19:20
fungi#action fungi nibalizer get pip and github modules split out19:21
*** nellysmitt has quit IRC19:21
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Nodepool DIB)19:21
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Nodepool DIB) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:21
*** elo has joined #openstack-meeting19:21
fungino news on this front, right?19:21
*** zz_avozza is now known as avozza19:21
clarkbnope, but I intend on reloading nodepool as trusty real soon now19:21
fungiokay cool19:22
clarkbprobably after jeblair gets back just in case anything goes really sideways19:22
nibalizertrusty++19:22
fungisounds good to me19:22
clarkband once I have done that we can really start moving on dib again as we will have the things we need to do that19:22
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Docs publishing)19:22
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Docs publishing) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:22
annegent_woowoo19:22
fungii believe this is also waiting on people to be done travelling and get back into the swing of things19:22
anteayaand swift logs19:22
* annegent_ is just happy it's a priority effort19:22
*** scotm has joined #openstack-meeting19:23
clarkbya there is a spec up. I know I reviewed one version of it at least19:23
fungiright, well at least it's tied in with any adjustments we end up making to the swift log publication process19:23
fungi#link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/doc-publishing.html19:23
*** photocyte is now known as dtalton19:23
fungiclarkb: that one, or something new?19:23
*** tsekiyama has joined #openstack-meeting19:23
*** wuhg has quit IRC19:23
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC19:23
clarkbthats the one19:24
*** padkrish has quit IRC19:24
clarkb(which includes the proposed change if anyone is interested in implementing it)19:24
fungiokay, cool. so real soon now i guess, for some definition of real, soon and now19:24
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Jobs on trusty)19:24
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Jobs on trusty) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:24
fungi#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/py34-transition19:25
*** nkinder has left #openstack-meeting19:25
*** annegent_ has quit IRC19:25
fungithe good news is now we're really just down to the ubuntu backports we need19:25
fungithe bad news is there's been no visible movement on those bug reports for a month or more19:25
*** ignacio-scopett1 has joined #openstack-meeting19:25
anteaya:(19:25
*** ignacio-scopetta has quit IRC19:26
fungizul suggested i should pester barry about it, so i guess that's the next step19:26
*** avozza is now known as zz_avozza19:26
fungii think we really just need bug 1348954 worked, which would backport the most python recent 3.4.x to trusty19:26
uvirtbotLaunchpad bug 1348954 in python3.4 "update Python3 for trusty" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/134895419:26
fungi#topic puppet-httpd (ianw 11/18)19:27
*** openstack changes topic to "puppet-httpd (ianw 11/18) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:27
fungiso looks like the project was created as an empty project/imported an empty repo?19:27
nibalizerya19:28
nibalizerwe didn't import19:28
fungiand there's some desire to get an initial puppet-apache module codebase imported as of the 1.0 tag?19:28
nibalizerwhich after it landed i was like *facepalm*19:28
nibalizeri've submitted a review to add the 0.0.4 code19:28
fungioh, 0.0.419:28
nibalizeroh wow it fails lint19:28
nibalizerhaha19:28
nibalizerhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/135369/19:28
fungii _can_ just git push --force that and preserve the upstream commit history, which would be nicer19:28
nibalizerthats amazing19:28
nibalizerfungi: ++ to that19:29
nibalizerthen we can add a first commit to fix all the linting problems19:29
fungiand then your first change can be limited to whatever refactoring and cleanup is necessary to get jobs passing on it19:29
fungiyeah, that19:29
fungiokay19:29
fungi#action fungi push puppet-apache 0.0.4 into puppet-httpd master19:30
nibalizerwoot19:30
ianwi can look at the issues after that's in19:30
fungiianw: if you're around, anything else on this?19:30
fungiaha, awesome19:30
ianwno, that's all19:31
fungiianw: so does that solve your concerns with the initial repo state?19:31
*** bswartz has joined #openstack-meeting19:31
nibalizerthen later (next week maybe) we can replace plabs apache with openstackci-httpd in modules.env19:31
*** imsurit has quit IRC19:31
ianwfungi: yep19:31
fungiperfect19:31
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC19:31
fungioh, i skipped a very important priority effort, so rewinding to that topic group for a sec19:31
fungiapologies19:31
*** emagana has quit IRC19:32
*** arnaud has joined #openstack-meeting19:32
fungi#topic Priority Efforts (Storyboard migration)19:32
*** openstack changes topic to "Priority Efforts (Storyboard migration) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:32
clarkbits happening! \o/19:32
fungii meant to hit this right after the module split-outs19:32
krotscheckYes!19:32
fungi#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/infra-storyboard-migration19:32
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting19:32
fungi#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/storyboard-migration-email19:32
clarkbthe last two docs update changes related to this are slowly getting in. pypi-mirror is part of the integrated gate19:33
fungiso next steps there are to get the remaining documentation updates approved/merged (are there any left?)19:33
clarkb(it shouldn't be, but is)19:33
fungiyeah, that19:33
krotscheckThere’s a couple.19:33
clarkband git-review change had a -1 for that test bug so it is making its way through rechecks19:33
fungiand then i need to do one last catch-up pass of imports, locking down lp bugs for each corresponding project as i go19:33
fungiand then krotscheck can send the notice to our community19:34
krotscheckWooooO!19:34
krotscheckAnd then the firestorm starts.19:34
*** emagana has quit IRC19:34
fungiand then we get to fix all the new problems we're going to encounter, yes ;)19:34
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting19:34
clarkbbut it really is happening. super excited19:34
fungiitems worth noting...19:34
*** ebalduf has quit IRC19:34
clarkbI have storyboard in a pinned tab already19:34
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting19:34
*** achanda has quit IRC19:34
fungifirst off, elastic-recheck needs to continue using the lp openstack-ci project for bugs for some indeterminate period19:35
fungiso i won't lock that down, and will probably need to periodically refresh the storyboard openstack-infra/system-config bug import19:35
*** vsilva_ has left #openstack-meeting19:35
*** emagana has quit IRC19:36
*** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja19:36
*** xingchao has quit IRC19:36
fungiwe _think_ the import script will handle that gracefully, based on incremental use of it so far19:36
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC19:36
fungiat least we have evidence that it works like we'll want19:36
krotscheckYep. It just won’t eb fast.19:36
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting19:36
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting19:36
fungii don't care about fast. i have computers19:36
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC19:36
anteayaI like things that eb slow19:36
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting19:37
fungiother issue, as was mentioned in the summit session, is that e-mail notification isn't implemented yet. i know there has been some concern expressed that end users opening bugs may miss noticing updates19:37
fungiprojects which are especially concerned by this should consider helping to get that storyboard spec implemented19:38
fungi#action fungi refresh storyboard imports and lock lp bugs19:39
krotscheckThat’d be nice.19:39
fungi#action krotscheck announce infra projects migration to storyboard19:39
*** cbaesema has quit IRC19:39
fungianybody have anything else on the sb migration front?19:40
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC19:40
*** amakarov has left #openstack-meeting19:40
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting19:40
fungi#topic Puppet module maturity (nibalizer)19:40
*** openstack changes topic to "Puppet module maturity (nibalizer) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:40
fungi'sup nibalizer?19:40
*** kmartin has joined #openstack-meeting19:40
nibalizerso id like to take a few steps to up our puppet module maintainer game19:40
nibalizerfirst is adding forge uploads into the same kindof workflow we do for other things19:41
*** jecarey has quit IRC19:41
nibalizerso tag, sign, push, then boom forge reease19:41
nibalizeri think i've got the engineering part of that figure out19:41
nibalizerhttps://review.openstack.org/134835 and https://review.openstack.org/13483419:41
nibalizerim looking to this group to say 'yea thats a good idea lets do it!'19:42
fungialso there was a credential issue raised, from what i saw with your discussion with crinkle yesterday19:42
*** pelix has quit IRC19:42
nibalizerwell so yes kindof19:42
nibalizerim speaking in this context only about openstackci modules19:42
*** reed has quit IRC19:42
fungi(around stackforge namespace and the current openstack puppet module community)19:42
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting19:42
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting19:43
nibalizeryea they have a different namespace19:43
nibalizerand im comfortable dealing with that down the road19:43
*** dtalton has quit IRC19:43
fungiokay, so not relevant for stackforge puppet modules, but openstack-infra yes19:43
nibalizernow historically we've submitted infra puppet modules to the openstackci namespace on the forge19:43
fungiand we translate openstack-infra/puppet-(.*) to openstackci/\1?19:43
nibalizerbut i've got the impression we want to be openstack-infra not openstaci? can someone explain the context there?19:44
nibalizerwhat name should we use on the forge?19:44
*** doron_afk has quit IRC19:44
*** khaldrogox has quit IRC19:44
fungii'm not one for bikeshed arguments, if the current name is entrenched and not entirely confusing, then i'm in favor of continuing to use it19:44
nibalizerworks for me19:44
nibalizerwho has the password for that?19:44
*** scotm has quit IRC19:45
nibalizerand can those keys get added to hiera?19:45
fungii think all our root admins do, but i'll double check19:45
*** doron_afk has joined #openstack-meeting19:45
nibalizerokay19:45
fungiand yeah we would copy that into hiera if needed for upload jobs19:45
clarkbya we should all have access to it as rooters19:45
*** jjmb has quit IRC19:45
nibalizernext puppet has a tool that can generate pretty documenation, id like to start doing that and uploading it somewhere19:45
*** xingchao has joined #openstack-meeting19:45
nibalizerand after that i'd like to start adding tests to the modules19:46
fungiwfm19:46
nibalizerand after that i'd like to add a section to the infra-manual about these modules19:46
nibalizerso thats my plan, questions? comments? concerns?19:46
fungiall sounds fine to me19:47
nibalizerokay sweet, im done then19:47
anteayado attend the manual sprint and we can find the right way to do that19:47
anteaya#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/VirtualSprints19:47
fungias for the module uploading, a spec might be warranted19:47
nibalizeranteaya: ok19:47
fungithough if it's likely to be a smallish patch, we could probably dispense with the spec formality19:48
clarkbfungi: ya especially since its a thing we do for pypi and maven stuff already19:48
clarkband the method should be similar19:48
fungiwe already have some existing patterns which can be mostly copied to achieve this19:48
nibalizerfungi: the patch is also linked up there, so we can discuss it in the patch19:48
fungiright, that's what i was thinkingh19:48
funginibalizer: okay, should be fine to move forward there then19:49
nibalizerthe thing to note is that puppet forge uploader ( a tool called blacksmith) doesnt run arbitrary code, it just tars and updates, so its all being done on the trusted node19:49
nibalizeranyways we can have that conversation in gerrit and not eat meeting time19:49
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/13483419:49
nibalizerthats it for me19:49
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/13483519:49
fungi#topic Review requests19:49
*** openstack changes topic to "Review requests (Meeting topic: infra)"19:49
*** khaldrogox has joined #openstack-meeting19:50
fungiianw wants you all to know he has some nifty changes to review (see meeting agenda for various links)19:50
fungialso hashar says reviews on openstack-infra/zuul are piling up19:50
clarkbgo checkout the multi node testing devstack gate changes too ;)19:50
ianwi think nothing too controversial, just some stuff that has been sitting there19:50
fungiright. we have lots of stuff that needs reviewing, so, um, let's do all that19:51
fungi#topic Open discussion19:51
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: infra)"19:51
clarkbso I will admit that I am doing my best to focus on the priority related things19:51
fungithe floor is open for any other concerns19:51
clarkbbecause they are priorities and I only have so much time19:51
fungiclarkb: yep, me too19:51
fungiokay, if there's nothing else, we also need to talk about project renames19:53
fungii assume any time before next meeting is not terribly convenient, but maybe next week it needs to come up on our agenda19:53
fungioh, and we have a sizable backlog of third-party ci account requests19:54
clarkbya this week and next are actually pretty bad19:54
clarkbsince we have turkey day and I am still recovering from 2 weeks of afk19:54
fungisome contentious, hence i started a thread on the infra ml19:54
fungi#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2014-November/002126.html19:54
nibalizeri could use hlp with the beaker-rspec stuff, if a rooter has some time to 1:1 and nodepool hold19:55
fungii'd like to go ahead and service the pending requests where possible, but we need to try to achieve some consensus on where our naming rules need to be strictly applied and where we can loosen them19:55
*** rushiagr_away is now known as rushiagr19:55
clarkbnibalizer: I don't have context there, but happy to do that19:55
*** matrohon has quit IRC19:55
*** rromans has quit IRC19:55
nibalizerclarkb: that would be amazing19:55
clarkbfungi: I am with you. I think stackforge should be allowed to wild west within reason19:55
clarkband hving third party tests for stackforge things is reasonable19:56
*** rromans has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
fungiwell, reasonable and something which a number of them already do and have accounts grandfathered in for19:56
*** rromans has quit IRC19:56
*** rromans has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
clarkbya19:56
clarkbI can respond to the list19:56
fungiappreciated19:56
fungiokay, if that's all, i'll wrap the meeting and let ttx have the channel19:57
fungithanks everyone!19:58
fungi#endmeeting19:58
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"19:58
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 19:58:07 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)19:58
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2014/infra.2014-11-18-19.02.html19:58
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2014/infra.2014-11-18-19.02.txt19:58
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2014/infra.2014-11-18-19.02.log.html19:58
nibalizerthanks everyone19:58
*** pcrews has joined #openstack-meeting20:00
*** VijayTripathi has joined #openstack-meeting20:00
ttxo/20:02
markmcclaino/20:02
mikalHi20:02
sdagueo/20:02
russellbo/20:02
dhellmanno/20:02
jaypipeso/20:02
devanandao/20:02
ttxjgriffith, annegentle, mordred, vishy, jeblair : around ?20:02
sdaguejeblair is still traveling today, he won't be here20:02
* fungi lurks for jeblair's sake20:02
sdagueI also think mordred is on a plane right now20:02
*** Ark has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
ttxjgriffith warned me he wouldn't be around20:03
annegentleheyo20:03
clarkbsilly airplanes. they give me jet lag20:03
ttx#startmeeting tc20:03
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 20:03:22 2014 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
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'20:03
ttxOur agenda for today:20:03
*** Ark is now known as Guest2255220:03
*** ociuhandu has left #openstack-meeting20:03
annegentleoh I do have to leave early today20:03
ttx#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/TechnicalCommittee20:03
ttxannegentle: we'll make it quick then :)20:03
ttx#topic Design summit format feedback20:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Design summit format feedback (Meeting topic: tc)"20:03
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
ttxHow do you think it went ?20:03
sdague+1 would summit again20:03
ttxI'm exploring how we could merge pods / meetups / contributors-oriented sessions on one side...20:04
russellbi heard lots of good feedback about the Friday change20:04
ttxand differentiate from larger rooms / honeypot / scheduled sessions / feedback-wanted sessions on the other20:04
russellbso I'd call that a keeper20:04
sdaguehonestly, I really liked the friday free form20:04
dhellmannthe extra focus on cross project sessions was good, and I actually got to attend some of the ops sessions this time and found those useful if under-attended20:04
ttxAnd find a way to limit attendance to the former20:04
zaneb+1 on Friday meetups20:04
mikalI liked Friday20:04
*** rrrobbb has quit IRC20:04
*** wenlock has joined #openstack-meeting20:04
*** achanda has quit IRC20:04
devanandagetting feedback from the ops on monday was helpful20:04
annegentleI should've set up a docs track20:04
mikalI would have liked fewer idle observes in Wed - Thu sessions though20:04
ttxone question is..; should we have Friday every day20:04
fungii thought the infrastructure/quality assurance/release management conflict-free scheduling was awesome. fewest schedule conflicts for me yet20:04
sdaguealso, the dev lounge during tues keynotes was super productive20:04
devanandaand def +1 to the friday meetups20:05
ttxin parallel with large-room discussions/feedback sessions20:05
mikalttx: no, organized sessions work well for my people at least20:05
anteayaannegentle: +120:05
devanandattx: IMO, no.20:05
dhellmannttx: having friday every day would make it challenging for those of us who need to participate in multiple tracks20:05
markmcclainttx: we do need organized time20:05
mikalttx: also, Friday worked because the passive observers had left20:05
russellbwhat dhellmann said20:05
mikalttx: it wouldn't have scaled to 200 people20:05
anteayattx no, to hard to find people20:05
fungithe organizers didn't expect tuesday morning dev lounge to be popular, hence the lack of caffeine until afternoon20:05
sdagueyeh, the nova track I think benefited from some structure before friday20:05
russellbit's not just about # of people, it's schedule conflicts20:05
dhellmannttx: that said, I could see doing it every afternoon instead of just all day one day20:05
annegentle#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-summit-feedback20:05
dhellmannmikal: ++20:06
russellbknowing when to be where to hit specific topics is useful on the super busy days20:06
devanandarussellb: exactly20:06
markmcclainjust not sure we could do a morning/afternoon split20:06
markmcclainonly because of space constraints20:06
sdagueI also think Free form works a lot better on the last day20:06
russellbbut for any day where there's no major overlap, +1 to free form20:06
markmcclainsdague: ++20:06
sdaguebecause lots of lurkers leave20:06
dhellmannmarkmcclain: good point20:06
devanandasdague: ++20:06
anteayafor me it is a brain change, it work best for one whole day20:06
ttxso my idea of running honeypot visible sessions in parallel to more private team workshops is not worthb being pursued ?20:06
ttxyou'd rather keep it the way it is ?20:07
sdaguettx: honestly, I think the balance here was pretty solid20:07
ttxnot sure we can scale "the way it is" in big-tent mode though20:07
dhellmannttx: I'm not sure I like the idea of a honeypot for this. Feels like the wrong attitude.20:07
markmcclainttx: you willing to lead the nfv, lbaas, scheduling session? :)20:07
annegentlewhat did you all think of the cross-project sessions, effective?20:07
sdaguemarkmcclain: also containers20:07
devanandathe # of lurkers on thursday was a bit startling to me. it felt like more than half didn't have ATC badges20:07
ttxdevananda: yes, half by my count too20:08
markmcclainsdague:  good call that should be included too20:08
devanandaannegentle: I thought they were good, but conflicted with a lot of conference tracks20:08
*** pcrews has left #openstack-meeting20:08
devanandatuesday was the most conflicted day for me, but I may be the minority there20:08
zanebttx: in Vancouver will the main conference run for 3 or 4 days? or don't we know yet?20:08
russellbdevananda: same here20:08
sdaguedevananda: I'm surprised that you still try to get to conference talks. I had to give those up entirely a few summits ago.20:08
ttxdon't know yet, I think 420:08
dhellmanndevananda: it was crowded thursday, but otherwise I didn't have any issues with non-atcs. Were there problems?20:08
* jaypipes would have preferred to see half the number of sessions, but longer, more action-oriented sessions...20:09
russellbcustomer meetings were all first half of the week, on the main/full/keynote days20:09
fungii don;t recall attending conference tracks for at least the last several summits, so the cross-project sessions were quite helpful from my perspective20:09
markmcclainsdague: there are some summit sessions that cover interesting ground20:09
dhellmannsdague: I did, except I spoke this time around20:09
sdaguemarkmcclain: I'm not saying they aren't interesting20:09
russellbbut yeah, lots of really good main conf sessions too20:09
devanandasdague: I stopped trying to give main conference talks a while back ...20:09
jaypipesdhellmann: yeah, I made the mistake of doing 4 conference sessions.20:09
*** jecarey_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:09
ttxand we ahve videos up ~ the next day20:09
sdagueI'm just saying there is so much conflict... just had to give up that access20:09
dhellmannjaypipes: wow, you're a glutton :-)20:09
jaypipesyeah.. :(20:09
markmcclainttx: yeah the videos make it easier to defer summit watching time until later20:09
devanandato me, it seems like a failure in our scheduling if the key dev/tc folks can't participate in the conference20:09
annegentleyeah I did 3. Silly me.20:09
ttxdid 1, that's manageable20:10
devanandaon the other hand, I might be failing and trying to do too much ... :)20:10
*** khaldrogox has quit IRC20:10
markmcclaindevananda: that I do agree with.. many conf attendees do want to see/interact with those leading the projects20:10
sdaguedevananda: the offset was supposed to help with that, but with ops on the offset day, it's another conflict20:10
markmcclainI wonder if that led to some of the extra folks we had around on Thursday20:11
ttxok, if you have more feedback, don't hesitate to send me something. I'm in brainstorming mode for the next one.20:11
mordredo/20:11
ttxI take the general feedback as "was good, do it again"20:11
sdaguettx: ++20:11
dhellmannttx: do you already have a note to schedule something on the ski slopes next time?20:11
markmcclainttx: ++20:11
annegentleit really was a great one20:11
*** aysyd has quit IRC20:11
russellbdhellmann: ++20:11
zanebttx: more whiteboards!20:11
ttxeven more whiteboards.20:11
fungii think mondays are proof that any time we expose a hole in the schedule, some part of our community will fill it20:11
*** vhoward has left #openstack-meeting20:11
dhellmannfungi: ++20:11
sdaguefungi: true20:11
ttx#topic TC feedback on proposed bylaws changes20:12
*** openstack changes topic to "TC feedback on proposed bylaws changes (Meeting topic: tc)"20:12
devanandaalso, random personal note -- arriving 5 days ahead of the conference made things sooo much easier20:12
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2014-November/000871.html20:12
ttxThe proposed change is essentially what was described to us during the joint board/TC meeting in Paris20:12
dhellmannttx: serious note, we should try to schedule a tc meeting at the next one. Not just the joint thing with the board.20:12
annegentledhellmann: good idea20:12
ttxdhellmann: noted20:12
russellbdhellmann: as long as it doesn't extend the conf another day ...20:12
ttxsome people suggested a PTL-only best-practice-sharing session too20:12
dhellmannrussellb: no, we could do it at lunch or something20:13
dhellmannttx: ++20:13
ttxbylwas: I still wish it would just remove much more detail to let us be more flexible in the future20:13
mordreddevananda: ++20:13
annegentlehonestly those could be between summits on video chat20:13
annegentlebut yes, PTLs would really benefit20:13
ttxbylaws: But I think we can make it work20:13
ttxAs far as bigtent is concerned, the most annoying part of the proposed change would be the "TC approved release" terminology for designating the superset of projects the board can pick from20:13
russellbttx: i wish the changes were in a proper patch series, instead of one big patch :-p20:13
sdaguettx: which of the 6 dropbox files are we looking at?20:13
ttxI think that if there are multiple trademark programs, we may want to have multiple, distinct TC approved supersets20:13
annegentleI'll definitely say I don't like the substitution wording for "integrated"20:14
ttxthe largest of the redline is probably the most useful20:14
ttxsdague: ^20:14
ttxThat said, the current wording allows us to play with words:20:14
ttx<< The Technical Committee shall designate a subset of the OpenStack Project an “OpenStack TC Approved Release” from time to time >>20:14
ttxNothing says that “OpenStack TC Approved Release” is unique :)20:14
markmcclainI do like the flexibility20:14
jogoI am not keen on codifying the notion of a single release20:15
ttxso I think we can make the proposed wording work20:15
sdaguettx: yeh, seems better than current20:15
*** riwinters has quit IRC20:15
devanandattx: it sounds like that might be the thing that our horizontal teams agree to work on, or something totally different -- and the TC gets to choose.20:15
dhellmannjogo: I didn't read it as a single release as much as a single set of things we would want to apply the trademark to (vs. those we wouldn't)20:15
*** zz_avozza is now known as avozza20:15
jogodhellmann:  perhaps20:15
*** marcoemorais has quit IRC20:15
ttxyes, I think the new wording is fuzzy enough to give us some legroom for future change, while being compatible with current situation20:16
ttxso I'm not sure it's worth us objecting to the proposed wording20:16
sdagueI think the important point is to give it enough flexibility that we feel like we can honestly provide some interpretation as things change20:16
sdaguebecause we're definitely in odd binds with current bylaws being way too specific20:16
devanandathe thing whcih stands out to me: trademark-designated things can only be removed from that grouping with board's consent. Which, honestly, doesn't seem bad to me20:17
ttxsdague: I fought to remove more from it, so that less is written in immutable stone, but wasn't more successful than that20:17
dhellmannI'd like to see a draft of the separate rules for adding/removing projects from the trademark set20:17
annegentlewell it shouldn't use the TC acronym for one. I'd at least prefer that point of clarity20:17
*** marcoemorais has joined #openstack-meeting20:17
sdaguettx: I can live with that20:17
ttxdevananda: actually, that's not exact20:17
annegentlethey could change it to TCup or something. Seems sloppy in a legal doc20:17
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting20:17
dhellmannannegentle: yeah, I thought the use of the abbreviation there was odd, too20:17
ttx"trademark-designated things can only be removed from that grouping by following a procedure"20:17
mordredannegentle: TCup sounds too much like teacup20:17
annegentledhellmann: heh, we're the word nerds :)20:18
ttxdevananda: procedure which remains to be defined and updated, outside the bylaws20:18
annegentlemordred: it's tempest in a teacup20:18
devanandattx: I see20:18
ttxdeva__: this is actually much more flexible20:18
annegentleanyway my point is, no TC, spell out Technical Committee20:18
annegentlethen "approved" -- what does that mean? Voted upon? tested?20:18
sdagueannegentle: yeh, that's valid20:18
dhellmannannegentle: we need t-shirts20:18
annegentleheh20:18
jogothe proposed changes, remove the non commercial trademark clause. so the board can change non commercial usage at will now20:18
ttxAnyway, if you have further feedback, please send it to the -tc list or directly to Mark Radcliffe20:19
jogothat scares me20:19
dhellmannjogo: what section is that?20:19
* dhellmann is having a hard time reading this redline20:19
jogoAppendix 8, 1.120:19
sdagueannegentle: I think approved should be vague on purpose, because the criteria for that has adjusted over time, and may in the future20:19
ttxjogo: I think we retain the definition of "the OpenStack project"20:19
annegentlesdague: ok20:19
*** jesusaurus has quit IRC20:19
ttxwhich is arguably a default trademark use case20:19
annegentleI'll send my input to the openstack-tc ML20:19
mordredsdague: ++20:20
mordredsdague: I like that the criteria is de facto "whatever the TC says"20:20
sdagueannegentle: because we don't really want to build a quorum of people that sign up to the foundation website to vote to about details of what our release process is20:20
ttxjogo: but you're right in saying that by dropping trademark policy from the bylaws (a good change) we throw the baby with the bath water20:20
ttxthe baby being the community usage of the trademark20:20
jogottx: as an individual member I will be voting against these changes as is20:20
jogottx: because don't throw out the baby20:21
sdaguejogo: which means you are voting for OpenStack being defined as Swift and Nova?20:21
ttxthat doesn't "scare" me because I don't see them going against the TC for its usage of the trademark (or rather, I'd like to see them try)20:21
annegentleyeah I think that "determined by Technical Committee" is fair and flexible, both of which we want20:21
ttxbut that's a valid remark20:21
jogosdague: that is not the current definition actually20:21
*** hareeshp has quit IRC20:21
mordredjogo:  it really is20:21
*** wendar_ is now known as wendar20:22
mordredjogo: but I support you in your ability to vote no20:22
mordredbecause democracy!20:22
jogomordred: that is what the existing commercial trademarks are around the ones that are in the bylaws not the ones outside of them20:22
*** rfolco has quit IRC20:22
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:23
ttx#info jogo says it would be better if we could keep the community right to use the trademark in the bylaws20:23
jogottx: I don't imagine the board removing the non commercial usage, but then why remove that clause?20:23
jogottx: and in a place that needs a general vote to change20:23
ttxjogo:  they remogve all the trademark policy from the bylwas, to be able to change it more often ?20:23
jogottx: so remove all but non commercial20:24
dhellmannright, that was my understanding, was they moved the whole thing to a separate document20:24
sdagueI think at the end of the day we have to have bylaws that assume good intent, because if we build bylaws as assuming bad actors we just crustify ourselves into a place where we get stuck by the bylaws from evolving the community the ways the community wants to evolve20:24
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:24
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC20:24
dhellmannsdague: I think I agree with that20:24
jogosdague: is assume good intent a legal concept? because that is what this is about20:24
annegentleso a university or public/govt cloud wants to say they run an OpenStack cloud. Does anything in this revision prevent that?20:24
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting20:25
*** matrohon has quit IRC20:25
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:25
ttxjogo: I'll send that feedback -- maybe it's possible to now throw the baby with the bath water20:25
sdaguejogo: it's assume that the board isn't the enemy of the community, and that we safe guard not through specific protections in the bylaws but by frank communication with the board about what we think is important20:25
dhellmannjogo: he's saying we need to assume the board has good intent20:25
jogottx: thanks, I haven't read the entire change, but when I do I will respond to your thread20:26
sdagueand knowing a bunch of board members, many that are TC members as well, I feel pretty comfortable with that20:26
*** htruta has left #openstack-meeting20:26
dhellmannannegentle: because the univ and govt are non-commercial?20:26
*** sarob has quit IRC20:26
ttxOK, let's move on...20:26
devanandattx: if not there, where are the trademark terms being moved to? this deletion covers more than just the commercial or individual use of the product20:26
ttxif you have further remarks, reply to thread20:26
devanandabah. nvm :)20:26
annegentledhellmann: yes, best examlpe I could think of off the top of my head20:27
*** chandankumar has quit IRC20:27
*** zul has joined #openstack-meeting20:27
devanandajogo: thanks for pointing that out -- i now share your concern20:27
devanandajogo: or at least have a similar one20:27
dhellmannannegentle: good example, but I think they'd be covered by using community code or a commercial distro20:27
jogodevananda: there be dragons in by laws20:27
ttx#topic Housekeeping changes20:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Housekeeping changes (Meeting topic: tc)"20:27
ttxThere are 3 housekeeping changes in the pipe -- I'll approve them post-meeting unless you object to them now20:27
ttx* Trove is using trove-specs for blueprints and specs (https://review.openstack.org/133363)20:27
ttx* Update Zaqar's PTL information (https://review.openstack.org/134073)20:27
ttx* Add oslo.context to the Oslo program (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135094/)20:27
ttxif you object, post a -1 there to block fast-track20:28
ttx#topic Stalled changes20:28
*** openstack changes topic to "Stalled changes (Meeting topic: tc)"20:28
*** matrohon has joined #openstack-meeting20:28
sdagueso, I think I've said this before. But can we assume fast approve on these in the future, and just let people propose a revert if they don't like it?20:28
ttxWe have two stalled changes (both proposed by mordred) in the pipe:20:28
* mordred spews fire20:28
zanebhmm, Zaqar is not the only project with out-od-date PTL information20:28
dhellmannttx: could we get an election official to certify the zaqar ptl change, as a matter of process?20:28
mordredanteaya: ^^20:28
*** Mandell has quit IRC20:28
sdaguezaneb: are there other patches?20:29
*** scotm has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** matrohon has quit IRC20:29
russellbzaneb: care to fix? :)20:29
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
anteayasure20:29
devanandawould it be better to have the election official(s) propose PTL changes to the gov repo, as a matter of course?20:29
*** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC20:29
zanebsdague: I haven't looked, I just know I'm not the Heat PTL any more ;)20:29
russellbdevananda: +120:29
mordreddevananda: that's not a terrible idea20:29
sdaguedevananda: that seems sensible to me20:29
mordreddevananda: ++20:29
ttxI hear sdague arguing for more discretion to the chair, and dhellmann arguing for less20:29
mordredttx: I think the chair should have both more and less discretion20:29
*** ildikov has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** jprovazn has quit IRC20:29
mordredttx: depending on whether I agree with him or not20:30
ttxI'll try to continue doing grey20:30
dhellmannttx: I just don't want to have to go find the election results myself. If anteaya says +1 then I'm OK with you approving it.20:30
sdaguemordred: well it's tracked, and it's revertable, so more discretion seems fine20:30
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
ttxdo we all agree that I should have approved all those without bothering you with them ?20:30
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
ttx#undo20:30
openstackRemoving item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x20af810>20:30
sdaguewe can flog the chair if it turns out he/she becomes a bad actor20:30
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
sdagueit's not like we won't have a public record of it20:30
ttxI'm fine either way :)20:31
dhellmannI don't see any reason for us to rush approvals on things like election results. The others I'm OK with.20:31
ttxdhellmann: ok.20:31
mordredWOAH the meeting bot can undo things20:31
mordredttx: you just removed a topic from the meeting minutes20:31
fungiit's an awesome feature, yes20:31
ttxmordred: you still have a lot to learn!20:31
anteayadhellmann: +1 with link to results20:31
* mordred mind blown20:31
annegentlew20:31
dhellmannanteaya: thank you20:31
annegentlewe're topicless?20:31
ttxok, let'(s move on :)20:31
ttx#topic Stalled changes20:31
*** openstack changes topic to "Stalled changes (Meeting topic: tc)"20:31
*** ZiGMaX has left #openstack-meeting20:31
ttxannegentle: it will all work fine in the end20:32
ttxWe have two stalled changes (both proposed by mordred) in the pipe:20:32
ttx* Remove support for vendor extensions from our code (https://review.openstack.org/122968)20:32
ttx* Add a docs environment to the testing interface (https://review.openstack.org/119875)20:32
vishyo/ sorry guys forgot that dst hit while i was in europe20:32
ttxmordred: what are your plans for those ?20:32
anteayaI'll propose the out of date ptl changes20:32
ttxshould we mark them abandoned until you feel strongly enough about them to revive them20:32
*** andreykurilin_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:32
ttx?20:32
ttxanteaya: thx20:32
*** wenlock has left #openstack-meeting20:33
ttx#action anteaya to propose "official" PTL changes20:33
mordredttx: docs interface was all about jeblair's concern, and I don't remember where we got to on that20:33
dhellmannttx: I thought we agreed we didn't want the docs environment change?20:33
*** SlickNik has joined #openstack-meeting20:33
ttxdhellmann: we did, but mordred wans't around?20:33
dhellmannor maybe to reword it as optional but not the way the CI system would run20:33
mordredah. if we did, I can abondon that one then20:33
*** mfedosin_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:33
dhellmannmordred: no, see my comment from 22 oct -- "we're saying that this specific interface ... is optional"20:34
mordredfor the vendor one, I need to read and respond to comments, sorry I have not done that yet20:34
dhellmannso I think we wanted a reword on that one20:34
mordredk. let me deal with review commends on both20:34
mordredwhich is easier when I'm not drinking in argentina20:34
ttxmordred: so.. abandon the docs one, keep the other open ?20:34
mordredttx: let me deal with both20:34
mordredIll do that this week20:34
ttxfamous last words20:34
* mordred stabs ttx with a wet cat20:34
ttxouch!ouch!20:35
*** padkrish has quit IRC20:35
* ttx distracts mordred by switching topic again20:35
ttx#topic Next steps in project structure reform20:35
*** openstack changes topic to "Next steps in project structure reform (Meeting topic: tc)"20:35
ttxWe need to make progress on this. I invite all members to start smallgroup discussions with their TC peers to seek alignment, as suggested by markmcclain in Paris20:35
ttxWe had a hangout last week with Anne, Sean, Devananda and Mark last week, notes here:20:35
sdaguewasn't it markmc ?20:35
mikalWe don't want to schedule speed dating?20:35
annegentlecan we have another one this week?20:36
mikalYou want people to self organize?20:36
ttxhttps://etherpad.openstack.org/p/project-restructure-hangouts20:36
annegentlemikal, you and me. we're the starting set20:36
dhellmannannegentle: if we do, please post when it will be to the tc ML so I can participate20:36
ttxI'm fine with not attending every single one of them. Will organize a new one for this week though20:36
annegentle26 hours from now perhaps?20:36
ttxSidenote: jeblair doesn't really want us to standardize on Google hangout for those, I guess smallgroups should pick whatever works best for them20:36
*** mrda_away is now known as mrda20:36
anteayaif you use asterisk we can record them20:36
ttxDuring past week discussion there was strong convergence on the idea of a base compute projectgroup20:37
anteayathe sip app has a recording feature20:37
ttxThere was much less convergence on barriers to entry into the big tent (some people want none, some people want a basic "are you one of us" check, some people want a stronger "are you useful" assessment)20:37
*** aepifanov has quit IRC20:37
sdagueanteaya: I'm not sure recording was the goal20:37
ttxPersonally, I now see how horizontal teams can survive the big tent (by resetting expectations of support for all" openstack" projects)20:37
anteayasorry, you don't have to either20:37
sdagueas it was more about letting people think out loud20:37
annegentleyeah please not recorded for these20:37
ttxI still need to work on solutions for the design summit and trademark checks20:37
*** adahms has joined #openstack-meeting20:37
annegentleit's for thinking with words that aren't written down20:37
ttxI reached out to the Foundation staff in charge of those trademark checks, to see what could work for us there20:37
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:38
ttxit's mostly an etherpad with a parallel unrecorded chat20:38
dhellmannttx: I'm a little uncomfortable with us saying it is ok for cross-project groups to only deal with the compute group of projects20:38
ttxbut like I said, we can use whatever works for the people meetings20:38
devanandattx: fwiw, i thought that format worked just fine for an informal, unrecorded, idea-sharing session20:38
ttxdhellmann: that is not what we say20:38
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:39
dhellmannttx: ok, I guess I need that clarified then because that's what I keep reading20:39
ttxdevananda: I'll let you fight jeblair when he is back20:39
devananda:)20:39
fungidevananda: you can also fight me on it now if you like ;)20:39
*** ToMiles has joined #openstack-meeting20:39
ttxdhellmann: we say that the cross-project teams should pick what they support20:39
dhellmannttx: ok, that feels equivalent20:39
ttxand no longer HAVE TO support the whole "integrated release20:39
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting20:39
* devananda sharpens his wet noodle in preparation to fight with fungi 20:39
*** bvandenh has quit IRC20:39
dhellmannI'll pick on annegentle and say we shouldn't have *a* documentation team if they aren't going to support everyone in some way20:40
ttxdhellmann: currently we have tension because the TC adds stuff, and the horizontal teams HAVE TO support them all20:40
vishyreading scrollback: just a little note about the bylaws changes. The reason things like Trademark are being pulled is that it is extremely difficult to make bylaws changes because a huge percentage of our membership doesn’t vote. We need to get stuff that we are iterating on (like trademark policy) out of the bylaws so that we can change it. There is a very real chance we can’t pass even this bylaws change because we d20:40
vishyget enough votes. We want to prevent that in the future.20:40
annegentledhellmann: if support is "reviews and automation tooling"20:40
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:40
dhellmannannegentle: yes, that would be enough in my mind20:40
*** alop has joined #openstack-meeting20:40
fungiis it really "allowing" cross-project teams to determine their scope, or merely acknowledging that this is what they actually do anyway?20:40
sdaguefungi: I think it's putting a stamp on what is actually happening now20:40
devanandait seemed to me that there was agreement that cross-project teams (like docs) should produce tools and advice, and may choose what projects to directly support with those tools20:40
*** avozza is now known as zz_avozza20:40
ttxdhellmann: the change says: there is no expectation of direct support anymore. Horizontal teams help everyone, but do not have to directly handle more than they can support20:41
dhellmannannegentle: but that's more than "choosing which projects to support", which gives you the option of, for example, not describing how to install something in the install guide20:41
russellbannegentle: dhellmann right, that's what i would expect ... horizontal teams empowering projects to get that task done with tools/etc20:41
dkehn/n20:41
annegentleit's still a tough sell to a common docs team member, "Hey how about you keep an eye on these 20+ repos to see if any changes affect docs"20:41
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:41
dhellmannrussellb: empowering is a good term20:41
annegentleso reviews are tough20:41
ttxdhellmann: I suspect that's because we have differing ideas of what "supporting" means20:41
sdaguedhellmann: so I think that's the you can't have it both ways thing20:41
zanebrussellb: ++20:41
dhellmannannegentle: no, that's not what I'm saying -- it's up to the projects to come to you with those changes20:41
ttxwe provide tools and advice for everyone, for sure20:41
annegentlebut yes, the idea is to hand over the centralization20:41
*** andreykurilin_ has quit IRC20:41
mordreddevananda: sorry, stepped away for a sec20:41
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting20:42
annegentlemore self-service, bring your own writers/words20:42
anteayaempowering requires a hefty use of the word no20:42
mordreddevananda: google hangouts exclude some of teh TC from participating20:42
mordreddevananda: which is very rude20:42
clarkbdoesn't hangouts also limit the number of participants20:42
clarkbwhich is also rude20:42
annegentleheh anteaya well dhellmann was trying to help define what the no could be20:42
* russellb can provide a google-hangout equivalent that's entirely peer-to-peer20:42
russellband no account required20:42
*** andreykurilin_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:42
mordredas long as it doesn't require people to install non-free software20:42
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting20:42
dhellmannright, annegentle and her team should not have to write everything but I don't like that they could possibly turn away a project who does want to come contribute (not that I think they would)20:42
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:42
russellbjust a webrtc capable browser20:42
anteayathen we have to use it, whatever the defition is20:42
devanandamordred: Ididn't say we should only use hangouts :) none the less, I personally found the format acceptable20:43
sdagueclarkb: beyond 4 or 5 it's not really a discussion anyway20:43
annegentlewebrtc ftw20:43
mordredbeause that is a non-starter for a non-zero number of our members20:43
anteayaand no tends not to be popular20:43
sdaguerussellb: ++ for rtc solution20:43
devanandamordred: and none of those members had expressed an interest in that particular meeting time20:43
*** zz_avozza is now known as avozza20:43
sdagueand back to policy20:43
mordreddevananda: sure. just saying20:43
devanandamordred: sure20:43
*** alop has quit IRC20:43
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:43
ttxrussellb: I'll take your webrtc solution20:44
russellbxlnt20:44
*** dboik_ has quit IRC20:44
*** pballand has quit IRC20:44
russellbi can give folks info out-of-band20:44
ttxdhellmann: I think we are on the same page actually20:44
sdaguerussellb: if you could post instructions somewhere, that would be great20:44
dhellmannrussellb: that looks like a typo, is it the name of some app?20:44
*** bknudson has quit IRC20:44
* mordred embraces all of russellb's solutions20:44
* ttx puts dhellmann on the next brainwashing group20:44
dhellmannttx: ok, maybe it's a phrasing issue20:44
russellbdhellmann: which looked like a typo?20:44
ttxdhellmann: example with release management20:44
dhellmannxlnt?20:44
*** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting20:44
russellboh, no ... excellent20:44
dhellmannoh, heh20:45
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:45
annegentlegotta go, will catch up online20:45
ttxdhellmann: We would provide tools for everyone, and define process. But we would only actually push tags and guarantee a common release on the same day for a subset of projects, not all the big tent.20:45
* dhellmann thought it was some x11 app20:45
russellbnah :)20:45
dhellmannttx: sure, that's what I do within oslo, too :-)20:45
*** jecarey_ has quit IRC20:45
dhellmannttx: ok, I think we're closer to agreement that I feared20:45
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:46
ttxdhellmann: "support" is confusing since it applies to both cases20:46
dhellmannright20:46
sdaguedhellmann: I do think the install guide is a good example though. Is the docs team empowered to build the base install guide that they think provides the crispest user experience, or do we need a giant choose your own adventure that includes any projects that comes forward. We do have to give some trust to horizontal teams to do sensible things for the users.20:46
ttxI prefer "directly handle" vs. "empowering"20:46
dhellmannI think in one of these patches I had "provide tools and guidance" instead of "supports"20:46
ttxhorizontal teams empower everyone in the big tent, and may opt to directly handle a few20:46
russellb+120:46
sdaguettx: yep, I think that's solid20:47
dhellmannsdague: sure, I would expect some choices, but if the project doesn't go in "the" install guide, then they need to make it possible to have other guides where the info can land20:47
sdaguedhellmann: sure20:47
ttxrather than "horizontal teams have to directly handle everyone in the tent (so better keep it small)"20:47
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:47
sdagueI think that's the empowering bit20:47
*** yamamoto has quit IRC20:47
dhellmannjust as infra doesn't ask too many questions about the suitability of a project when we add it, I don't think the other cross project teams should be in a position of vetoing another team's goals20:47
mordred++20:48
dhellmannsdague: right, it just wasn't clear from some of the other phrasing that "empowering" was actually the goal20:48
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:48
ttxso what about the limits to the big tent... who is for "no barrier at all", who is for "are you one of us" basic checks, who is for "are you actually useful" checks20:48
*** raildo is now known as raildo_away20:48
mordredI'm for "are you one of us"20:48
sdaguedhellmann: right, I think we're agreed. As long as they have a way that Docs content from one of these projects has a place to live, and a way to be found, even if not in the main install guide, that's the goal20:48
mordredbecause otherwise we're just github20:48
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:48
dhellmannsdague: ++20:49
ttxI know annegentle was leaning towards "are you actually useful" to avoid 30 different chef recipes repos20:49
mordredwell - I think "are you one of us"20:49
dhellmannyeah, we need some sort of community sense at least20:49
devanandamordred: right. 1 = github. 3 = TC making a quality-assessment.20:49
sdague"are you one of us" is pretty nebulous20:49
anteayaI think useful is important20:49
* ttx thinks we at the very least need "are you one of us" (mission and 4 opens check)20:49
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:49
mordredimpplies that you're willing to listen to the TC when we tell you to work with the other chef repos20:49
*** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting20:49
sdaguegot more specifics about one of us/20:49
*** padkrish has quit IRC20:49
sdague?20:49
dhellmannif we're going to support competition, I don't see how we can object to some competition and allow others20:49
devanandadhellmann: ++20:49
* jaypipes is for "are you one of us".20:49
*** johnbelamaric has quit IRC20:50
zanebmordred, jaypipes ++20:50
anteayaif I am going to spend time on something I wuold at least like to feel it is useful20:50
dhellmannI'm not sure I entirely like that, but there it is20:50
ttxsdague: at least vaguely part of the openstack mission, and following the 4 opens20:50
*** johnbelamaric has joined #openstack-meeting20:50
*** khaldrogox has joined #openstack-meeting20:50
jaypipesas in "are you aligned with the OpenStack mission", but not "are you a member of The Cabal"20:50
mordredgabba gabba hey gabba we accept you we accept you, gabba gabba hey gabba we accept you one of us!20:50
dhellmannttx: "4 opens"?20:50
sdaguebecause I'd like whatever definition to be crisp enough that project-config reviewers have the guidance to approve these without TC voting on everyone20:50
* dhellmann feels slow today and blames the cold20:50
mordredsdague: ++20:50
ttxdhellmann: open development, community, design, source20:50
dhellmannk20:50
anteayasdague: ++20:50
jaypipesdhellmann: ++ to the 4 opens. I added that to my governance patch.20:50
devanandasdague: ++20:50
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:51
ttxsdague: actaully I'd like us to delegate that tyo some community council20:51
mesteryttx: ++ to the 4 opens, I like those.20:51
fungialso that's one of the ways we can keep the load on the infra team and systems from going beyond absurd into ludicrous20:51
anteayattx delegate what?20:51
mordred++20:51
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:51
*** Guest22552 has quit IRC20:51
*** asalkeld has joined #openstack-meeting20:52
ttxA community council could check for "are you one of us", the same way they could vet openstack-planet additions or openstack meeting schedule requests20:52
anteayaif we don't have a clear direction coming out of this for how to approave a new repo patch, what is the point?20:52
jaypipesanteaya: the "are you in openstack/ code namespace" decision20:52
ttx(shameless plug for the gerrit-powered-agenda)20:52
jaypipess/are you/can you be/20:52
zanebI think the test should aim to provide mutual benefit. So projects that we can contribute something to other than the "OpenStack" name, and which will contribute something back too20:52
anteayaI thought that's what this was20:52
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting20:53
ttxok, so it feels like there is at least growing consensus for a "are you one of us" barrier20:53
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:53
anteayaa committee has to apply criteria for every repo? that is going to slow things down20:53
mordredanteaya: no, I think the TC wants to not be involved in every repo20:53
markmcclainmordred: ++20:53
anteayagreat20:53
anteayawe create at least one per day20:54
sdaguemordred: right, but ttx said a different committee would be20:54
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:54
ttxI still need to work out a solution for trademark checks, I know openstack/* makes some worried20:54
david-lyleso one committee to decide who's in the community and another to decide the direction? seems like that could get out of sync quickly20:54
mordredsdague: I did not see that20:54
ttxthat community council would have a delegation from the TC20:54
anteayaso whatever the outcome we need to be able to apply criteria and approve patches20:54
mordredI do not agree with that20:54
dhellmanndavid-lyle: ++20:54
sdague<ttx> sdague: actaully I'd like us to delegate that tyo some community council20:54
mordredit seems like if we don't have an idea of if you're one of us enough that anteaya can apply it, we don't know what we're actually talking about20:54
vishywe should probably also require the cla and apache license20:54
ttxdavid-lyle: it's not a separate committee20:54
ttxdavid-lyle: it's a delegation so that we don't rely on TC members for everything20:55
*** jamielennox has left #openstack-meeting20:55
anteayamordred: thanks for hearing me20:55
*** jesusaurus has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
dhellmannvishy: good point20:55
david-lylettx: so a subset of the TC?20:55
*** aepifanov has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
*** DaSchab has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
mordredvishy: actually had some chats about opening up on the apache license part in the "one of us" section20:55
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
devanandadhellmann: i thought your wording already required CLA and Apache license20:55
mordredapache license is only really important if we're intending on your code being something we release20:55
*** devlaps has quit IRC20:55
jaypipesvishy: my proposal specifically lists the license and the DCO as requirements.20:55
sdaguevishy: right, agreed, things like that are crisp and delegatable20:55
dhellmanndevananda: I know it does the license, I don't remember about the cla20:55
* mordred EXPLCITLY opposes codifying apache license20:55
fungiwe definitely already include code under compatible licenses which are not exactly apache20:56
ttxdavid-lyle: or a group of people that we would delegate autrhority to (but we would still have oversight on)20:56
vishymordred: i think both the cla and apache license is important for company contributions20:56
mordredbecause it will make life hell for infra20:56
dhellmanndevananda: the smaller change probably does, since that's there now20:56
mordredno20:56
devanandamordred: oh, right20:56
mordredthere are things infra does that have uptreams20:56
vishyone of the ideas of the big tent is to make it easier for companies to put people on it20:56
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:56
mordredbut I guarantee that work is done as part of openstack and is one of us20:56
dhellmannmordred: don't the bylaws say we have to use the apache license?20:56
vishymordred: but that is not openstack stuff20:56
sdaguedhellmann: not the new bylaws20:56
devanandadhellmann: for what we release20:56
mordreddhellmann: only for code we release as openstack20:56
vishyif it is upstreamed20:56
vishyit is upstream20:56
dhellmannok, sure20:56
mordredvishy: for example20:56
mordredwe would like to rewrite the irc bots using a framework that is GPL20:57
sdagueok, so I think the license thing can probably be detailed out out of band20:57
mordredthe bot code will be openstack-infra code20:57
ttxmordred: current idea is to require "open source", and only require apache on the "open,stack TC approved release" stuff20:57
mordredttx: yes20:57
*** padkrish has joined #openstack-meeting20:57
dhellmannyeah, I think we can make that distinction easily20:57
vishyttx: ok i’m good with that20:57
mordredttx: that would be fine20:57
devanandamordred: wait. infra isn't under openstack/*20:57
sdaguettx: ++20:57
mordreddevananda: sure. I just want to be very clear with our wording20:57
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting20:57
mordredso taht we don't accidentally say somethin gwe don't mean20:57
ttxdevananda: it would still be part of "the openstack project"20:57
mordredyaj20:58
devanandamordred: if we're ONLY saying this stuff applies to openstack/* then I actually don't see the problem20:58
mordredyah20:58
sdaguemordred: yeh, I think we're still reasonable humans mostly20:58
mordredsdague: yes. I believe we all are20:58
mordredI mean20:58
devanandaopenstack-*/* is different20:58
mordredexcept me20:58
ttxOK, we are running out of time.20:58
anteayadevananda: not necesarily20:58
*** annegent_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:58
annegentleok back20:58
*** AlexF has joined #openstack-meeting20:58
anteayathe openstack-* spaces all have reasons for being, only certian repos can go in there20:58
ttxI'll follow up to get a few of you in a meeting later this week, for a smallergroup chat20:58
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC20:59
ttxwe'll put notes on the same etherpad20:59
*** hareeshp has quit IRC20:59
ttxI'm under the impression we are mostly agreeing, just nee dto talk more about it to make sure we agree on the same thing20:59
*** Vek has joined #openstack-meeting20:59
ttx#topic Open discussion20:59
*** DaSchab has quit IRC20:59
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: tc)"20:59
ttxAnything else, anyone ?20:59
ttxannegentle and I will discuss midcycle meetups during the next meeting, you can tag along20:59
ttxspoiler: they are evil!20:59
devanandaa while back, I had started suggesting that we create more top level things, like openstack-ops/*, rather than add all the chef things to openstack/21:00
annegentlehahaha21:00
zehiclejust a heads up that the DefCore/Refstack team is working on defining capability groups for Icehouse and will need review/help21:00
dhellmanndevananda: ++21:00
devanandathen I forgot to bring that up again for a while21:00
ttx#info  DefCore/Refstack team is working on defining capability groups for Icehouse and will need review/help21:00
zehiclethanks21:00
devanandabut I think that might make some of the lines about "are you one of us" clearer by having clearer buckets of "us-ness"21:00
ttx#action ttx to set up new smallgroup meting to progress on converging toward a clear proposal on bigtent21:00
dhellmanndevananda: oooo, taxonomy :-)21:01
david-lyleyour us-ity21:01
markmcclainttx: Wanted to give everyone a warning that I will be starting a thread on the ML to split Neutron into two repos with seperate core teams21:01
devanandamarkmcclain: ++21:01
sdaguemarkmcclain: +321:01
mesterymarkmcclain: ++21:01
dhellmannmarkmcclain: split how?21:01
russellbmarkmcclain: this for the advanced services split?21:01
ttx#info upcopming thread on the ML to split Neutron into two repos with seperate core teams21:01
markmcclainrussellb: yes21:01
russellbseparate from the driver split..21:01
russellbk21:01
ttxok, time is up21:01
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC21:01
ttx#endmeeting21:01
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"21:01
openstackMeeting ended Tue Nov 18 21:01:54 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)21:01
mesteryrussellb: Yes, driver thing is a spin-out, not a split :)21:01
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2014/tc.2014-11-18-20.03.html21:01
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2014/tc.2014-11-18-20.03.txt21:01
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2014/tc.2014-11-18-20.03.log.html21:02
ttxThanks everyone21:02
markmcclaindhellmann: Layer 2/3 focues repo and an Adv Services Repo (Layer 4-7)21:02
dhellmannmarkmcclain: +121:02
annegentlenice markmcclain21:02
ttxdhellmann, morganfainberg, notmyname, eglynn, nikhil_k, thingee, asalkeld, david-lyle, mestery, SlickNik, SergeyLukjanov: around ?21:02
annegentlecan I do that for docs next?21:02
mesteryo/21:02
david-lyleo/21:02
asalkeldo/21:02
nikhil_ko/21:02
eglynno/21:02
* annegentle asks hopefully21:02
dhellmannmarkmcclain: the 4-7 could maybe even be more than one repo21:02
dhellmanno/21:02
russellbmestery: yeah, i need to review where the proposal for the driver part is headed ...21:02
SergeyLukjanovo/21:02
ttx#startmeeting project21:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Nov 18 21:02:54 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.21:02
devanandattx: i feel sad that i'm not on your project meeting ping list21:02
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.21:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: project)"21:02
mesteryrussellb: Ack, me too, I'm still catching up a bit from coming back from paternity leave :)21:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'project'21:02
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting21:03
ttxdeva__: oh! my fault21:03
ttxdevananda: added to template21:03
*** jecarey has joined #openstack-meeting21:03
*** jd__ has quit IRC21:03
ttxOur agenda for today:21:03
mikalHi21:03
ttx#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting21:03
ttx#topic Summary of 1:1 meeting syncs21:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Summary of 1:1 meeting syncs (Meeting topic: project)"21:03
ttxWe had a number of 1:1 syncs today, you can see the log here if you're interested:21:03
ttx#link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ptl_sync/2014/ptl_sync.2014-11-18-08.58.html21:03
ttxmostly about setting release liaisons and turning autokick21:04
ttxas well as testing the new 10-min format21:04
morganfainbergo/ here too21:04
ttx#link http://status.openstack.org/release/21:04
*** xingchao has quit IRC21:04
SlickNiko/21:04
dhellmanndid everyone go over the 10 minutes, or was that just a few of us?21:04
ttxnow shows Kilo release status21:04
*** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting21:04
ttxjust a few21:04
ttxmost stayed within the alloted 10min21:04
*** achanda has joined #openstack-meeting21:05
* dhellmann endeavors to do better next week21:05
*** annegent_ has quit IRC21:05
ttx#topic Turn this meeting into a PTL+CPL meeting ("cross-project meeting")21:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Turn this meeting into a PTL+CPL meeting ("cross-project meeting") (Meeting topic: project)"21:05
ttxSo... As part of a big plan to scale out PTLs and our project leadership in general, we introduced the concept of Cross-Project Liaisons (CPLs) during the Juno cycle21:05
ttxRelease management liaisons are just one type of those, and I don't think this meeting should be limited to them21:05
*** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC21:05
ttxThis is our only cross-project meeting, and looking back at what we discussed here over the last cycle it was going far beyond release management21:05
ttxI think it's time to turn this meeting into a true cross-project weekly meeting, not keep it release-cycle-management-oriented21:05
mestery++, Adding in more CPLs makes sense to me21:06
ttxInviting PTLs and all CPLs with an open agenda21:06
ttxAnd maybe even rotating chairs (release management PTL, Oslo PTL, Infra PTL, QA PTL, Docs PTL..)21:06
morganfainberg++21:06
* ttx opened trap21:06
annegentleheh21:06
ttxlet's see who falls into it21:06
mestery++ to rotating chairs21:06
eglynnttx: do you mean *all* liaisons from all projects? (oslo, docs, qa, api-wg ...)21:06
*** johnbelamaric has quit IRC21:06
* mestery falls into the trap21:06
* fungi saw the trap for what it was21:06
*** johnbelamaric has joined #openstack-meeting21:06
*** otter768 has quit IRC21:06
* mestery thinks we should share the joys of chairing this meeting :)21:07
ttxeglynn: I want us to be able to discuss cross-project topics, and I see CPLs as the cross-project specialists21:07
* morganfainberg let someone else fall into the trap.21:07
dhellmannmestery: you can have my share of that joy21:07
mesterydhellmann: lol21:07
ttxso I would be very happy if they showed up21:07
annegentleI like the all liaisons idea.21:07
mtreinishmestery: I just know when it was my turn to chair it, I'd forget21:07
eglynnttx: that's potentially a *lot* of people21:07
*** jecarey has quit IRC21:07
*** jd__ has joined #openstack-meeting21:07
eglynnttx: ~4/5 per project times how many projects?21:08
mesteryI think a strict agenda with a strong chair will be helpful with the influx of new people21:08
ttxeglynn: not that many, and we have no such thing as a mandatory meeting... the PTL can represent all21:08
dhellmannttx: I'll encourage the oslo liaisons to attend, but many of them only signed up to sling code so I'm not sure how many will do it21:08
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting21:08
dhellmannmestery: ++21:08
*** atiwari has quit IRC21:08
ttxbasically, the PTLs can still represent all their team, but we should encouarge CPLs to join21:08
morganfainbergi'd rather see the meeting be run cleanly before we rotate chairs.21:08
*** VijayTripathi has quit IRC21:08
ttxmorganfainberg: sure, not throwing the towel just yet21:08
*** baoli has quit IRC21:09
ttxthe second part was just a suggestion going forward21:09
ttxbasically, it shouold no longer be my meeting21:09
ttxit should be everyone's :)21:09
*** achanda_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:09
devanandattx: aren't there already project-specific cross-project meetigns?21:09
*** achanda has quit IRC21:09
mesteryttx: ++21:09
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC21:10
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
eglynnit might make more sense to have many 30min cross-project meetings focussed on individual concerns21:10
*** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
morganfainbergdevananda, are there? i'm not aware of many formalized ones beside topical e.g. HM21:10
eglynn(i.e. all the oslo liaisons, all the qa liaisons, all the stable-maints etc.)21:10
devanandattx: I'm not sure I see what the goal of "get all CPLs and PTLs together" is, which is not served by just havign the PTLs together21:10
*** DuaneDeC7 has joined #openstack-meeting21:10
annegentledevananda: because PTLs get overloaded21:10
devanandaeglynn: right -- i thought there were already topic-specific meetings for CPLs21:10
fungithink of cpls as ptl delegates21:10
morganfainbergannegentle, PTLs don't scale.21:11
*** stannie has quit IRC21:11
devanandabut maybe I imagined that21:11
annegentledevananda: and need API and docs liaisons for sure21:11
ttxdevananda: the idea is to have a meeting where all sorts of cross-project issues are discussed21:11
dhellmanneglynn: the oslo liaisons are all supposed to be coming to the oslo meetings already -- that's a big part of what we do in our meetings21:11
ttxwhatever is on the agenda21:11
clarkbcorporals?21:11
ttxthat's already the case, but the meeting is still called the release meeting21:11
mesteryIf we publish the agenda beforehand, we'll only need particualr CPLs for each meeting, which lightens the load from people having to attend all meetings21:11
sdaguedevananda: it's still really hard to make a coherent cross project whole by just assuming a bunch of smaller cross projects facets will magically make it happen21:11
dhellmannI think inviting all of those people to attend is a good way for us to foster new leadership within the project.21:11
devanandattx: for example, if there is an oslo issue that the oslo CPLs need to discuss, does that need to take up time from the docs and qa and api CPLs of every project?21:11
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC21:11
fungiclarkb: cross-project liaisons21:11
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC21:11
SlickNikdhellmann: ++21:12
mesterydhellmann: ++21:12
devanandadhellmann: that's a fair point as well21:12
dhellmanndevananda: I don't think the point is necessarily to talk about oslo issues, as much as to get the people who think about cross-project things together at a time when we're talking about cross-project issues21:12
ttxdhellmann: ++21:12
anteayaI think ttx is proposing an experiment, I'm for giving it a shot and re-evaluating at K221:12
sdaguehonestly, I think as long as the agenda is crisp, more people here is fine21:12
fungiif it's an oslo-only issue, then it's likely off-topic anyway right?21:12
devanandadhellmann: ack21:12
sdaguedhellmann: ++21:12
sdaguefungi: agree21:12
mesterysdague: ++21:12
dhellmannfungi: right, and we'd cover it in our oslo meetings21:12
devanandaok, I'm ++ for the experiment as well21:12
morganfainberg++21:12
SlickNiksdague: agreed about the crisp agenda21:13
dhellmannttx: are you going to send email to the -dev list inviting everyone? I'll mention it next monday in our oslo meeting, too21:13
SlickNikI'm all in favor of the experiment for K1 as well.21:13
fungiincluding cpls allows to avoid a ptl having to say, "oh i have a liaison handling that, i need to ask them and get back to you next week"21:13
*** Riddhi has quit IRC21:13
dhellmannfungi: also a good point21:13
asalkeldis it optional for cpls?21:14
eglynndoes anyone see there being a practical scaling limit to the number of people who can effetcively participate in an IRC meeting?21:14
*** Riddhi has joined #openstack-meeting21:14
Vekdepends on how many talk in said meeting.21:14
mesteryeglynn: Yes, thus the proposal for a crips agenda and strong chair :)21:14
mestery*crisp21:14
sdaguemestery: ++21:14
anteayadepends on the displine of the participants21:14
ttxsorry, my desktop just froze21:14
dhellmanneglynn: I expect most people to lurk rather than talk, but yeah, that might become an issue21:14
fungiasalkeld: i would think everything is optional to some degree. seems to me more like "encouraging" cpls to participate21:14
sdagueeglynn: there are already 433 people in this room right now21:14
ttxat this point the only change is to rename it "cross-meeting project"21:14
eglynnVek: well if they don't get to talk, they might as well just read the logs after the fact IMO21:14
ttxand then explain that the agenda is open (it already was)21:15
sdaguettx: ++21:15
dhellmannttx: "cross-project meeting"?21:15
*** DuaneDeC7 has quit IRC21:15
*** bknudson has quit IRC21:15
ttxand that we encourage everyone to join (already the case too)21:15
eglynnsdague: being on the channel != being at the meeting in any active sense21:15
* dhellmann does not want a "meeting project"21:15
devanandattx: it sounds like another change would be to actually encourage specific other people to join / participate21:15
ttxoops21:15
Vekwell, unless you're going to turn the channel +m, everyone has the opportunity to talk and contribute...21:15
ttx"cross-project meeting" yes21:15
devanandawhich, at least, is not something I have done within Ironic21:15
dhellmannttx: :-)21:15
sdagueeglynn: sure, but people can decide if it's relevant for them to participate21:15
sdagueand a strong chair can correct them when they are wrong21:16
ttxfrankly, it's more a change on the door signthan a change on the content of the room21:16
mesterysdague: ++21:16
ttxbut I think it will go a long way to empower new people21:16
sdaguettx: agree21:16
mesteryI think we already let people optionally attend this meeting anyways, nothing stops them at the moment.21:16
ttxkey word of the day "empowerment"21:16
russellb:)21:16
eglynnttx: how did it work out back in the day when everyone attended the weekly release meeting?21:16
Vekmestery: thus my presence :)21:17
mesteryVek: Exactly!21:17
ttxeglynn: back in the day it was called the "project meeting"21:17
ttxand that was the allhands meeting21:17
ttxit worked out well, but obviously didn't scale21:17
* russellb imagines an all hands irc meeting these days ...21:18
ttxso we turned it into a release meeting21:18
ttxbut than, that didn't scale...21:18
ttxand we switched to 1:1 syncs, with special topics being discussed at the meeting21:18
* dhellmann wonders how many cases we have where the same person is liaison for multiple facets, or multiple projects21:18
* Vek imagines russellb's scenario...and the memory leak that would occur on all the IRC servers ;)21:18
ttxand then...21:18
ttxspecial topics were just not all about release21:18
annegentledhellmann: yea was wondering that also21:19
eglynnso my recommendation would be to at least pick an individual cross-project concern to concentrate on each week21:19
ttxhence the next logical step: call it "cross-project meeting" and not make those release dudes special anymore21:19
eglynnoslo one week, docs the next, qa the week after21:19
sdagueeglynn: so I think that was the point of crisp agenda21:19
ttxeglynn: I think that would prevent the hot topic of the day to be discussed21:19
ttxin most cases, the hot topic is found the same day of the meeting21:19
eglynnsdague: the point was to set the expectation of attendence explicitly21:19
ttx(during the 1:1s)21:20
* Vek prefers sdague's "crisp agenda" to eglynn's "one per meeting" too21:20
ttxanyway, I'll put it in words and suggest it on the -dev ML21:20
eglynnsdague: i.e. "calling all oslo liaisons to attend this week" as opposed to all CPLs feeling semi-obliged to turn up every week21:20
asalkeldit seems fairly harmless to me21:20
sdagueVek: yeh, because the relevant concerns are going to be topical based what we need now21:20
dhellmannyeah, I don't know that we can predict in advance what facet will be important, but also the point is to bring together more people who have the general concern of cross-project issues to deal with whatever the hot topic actually is21:20
sdaguedhellmann: ++21:21
ttxand frankly, some times there won't be any topic to discuss21:21
ttxand that's fine21:21
dhellmannbecause if we don't start growing our leadership team, we're going to have some new growing pains pretty soon21:21
ttxI just want a predefined avenue to raise general online discussions21:21
ttxand I want to get CPLs more recognition too21:21
ttxanyway, will push to -ml21:22
mesterydhellmann: ++21:22
*** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting21:22
ttx#action ttx to put his "cross-project meeting" rename into more words and a thread21:22
ttx#topic Mid-cycle meetups: what and why21:22
*** openstack changes topic to "Mid-cycle meetups: what and why (Meeting topic: project)"21:22
ttxWe are just back from the Design Summit, and we already see mid-cycle meetups being organized and announced21:22
*** bknudson1 has joined #openstack-meeting21:22
ttxOn one hand that only makes sense, a cycle is only 6 months and last-minute travel planning is costly and painful21:22
dhellmanneglynn: I think the really interested folks will self-select anyway, but an invitation may push some people to attend who might not have thought of it otherwise21:22
ttxOn the other hand... mid-cycle meetups can be seen as a failure to collaborate virtually with just 2 F2F meetings per year, and requiring more21:22
ttxMy personal view on meetups is that they should not be mandatory, they should not be for making project decisions in a hidden corner with a priviledged few21:23
ttxThey should be to get specific work done. They should be more like a sprint, a workshop, a hackathon, than a core subsummit.21:23
ttxLast cycle, some of them were a bit too much direction-setting imho, mostly because we couldn't agree much on direction at the summit21:23
ttxWe took steps to fix that with a more team-oriented format in Paris21:23
ttxannegentle has been reaching out to midcycle meetup organizers to check *why* they thought they needed one21:23
ttxto make sure we cover all the bases21:24
ttxannegentle: what was the feedback like ?21:24
annegentleto make sure we get feedback on the summit changes, whether they were working also21:24
devanandattx: "like a sprint, a workshop, a hackathon" ++21:24
annegentleso, I asked keystone reps, heat reps, and neutron reps and got answers back that were very insightful21:24
russellb+1 to the description of when they could make sense21:24
ttxI want us to keep calling them "midcycle sprints" to reinforce the results-driven approach21:25
mesteryttx: ++21:25
ttxrather than "meetups"21:25
asalkeldmy major issue with them is the financial burden on companies21:25
annegentlesome of the feedback was around the summit itself not really being good for deep design work, serious discussions, or team reviews and coding21:25
dhellmannbeating the alliteration is going to be challenging :-)21:25
annegentleso that lends itself to the sprint model21:25
russellbmestery: i think the description of the neutron one is good - it makes it clear that it's focused on sprinting on a small set of targeted efforts21:25
nikhil_kGlance (by history): "like a sprint, a workshop, a hackathon" -> -121:25
annegentlethe keystone input was around the release cycle model itself, and the timing21:25
annegentleso that was a bit surprising, I hadn't thought of that21:25
nikhil_kdirection +121:25
devanandathe co-location of ironic and nova's midcycles served a very useful purpose, which I believe could not have been served at the summit21:25
mesteryrussellb: Thanks, and we've had success doing it that way.21:25
annegentleeveryone agrees it's costly and difficult to get people together more often than summits for F2F21:26
eglynnso one aspect of midcycle that's positive is that there are essentially self-organized21:26
morganfainbergand i stand by our use for cadence of release - and it's been successful (at least in my view) for keeping us hitting the targets.21:26
eglynni.e. the project team controlls the format21:26
sdagueeglynn: yes, part of the productivity has come from that21:26
*** bknudson has quit IRC21:26
*** stevemar has quit IRC21:26
eglynnI'd be leery of smothering that aspect21:26
annegentleit wasn't necessarily that we didn't get the "right" people to the summit21:26
mikalNova used the last meetup to track progress on features we'd promised at the summit21:26
mikalThat was a useful exercise that saw a number of things land which wouldn't have otherwise21:27
anteayaI went to three last release and they were all useful21:27
annegentleI think mestery said it well, it's for focus.21:27
mikalI also have only received feedback about disliking meetups from employees of a single company (literally)21:27
annegentlethe summit doesn't offer or afford focus21:27
russellbi don't think anyone argues they aren't useful21:27
anteayaeach program has its own style and all three meetups were very different in format21:27
*** sergef has joined #openstack-meeting21:27
anteayaand all repsondants felt they were useful21:27
Vek<annegentle> the summit doesn't offer or afford focus <- +121:28
*** gholler has quit IRC21:28
ttxmikal: I think that's fine -- we just need to make sure they are optional, not that they are useless :)21:28
russellbit's not a useful vs. not-useful question for me21:28
mikalrussellb: that's untrue -- I receive email telling me that "OpenStack has failed as an open source project" because we have physical meetings21:28
mesteryNeutron's are always optional, FYI21:28
annegentlemy take is, of course they're useful, they're high fidelity communications and focused.21:28
morganfainbergdevananda, keystone and barbican tend to get the same benefit (for at least an overlap day)21:28
mesteryannegentle: ++21:28
russellbmikal: that doesn't mean work wasn't done21:28
annegentleBut I also have to say you can't just take input from those who go to them.21:28
anteayafolks dealt with content they couldn't address at summit, mostly due to needing to multitask at summit21:28
russellbit's about nurturing processes that are as inclusive as possible21:28
annegentlenot everyone is that privileged - either for budget or time reasons or location reasons, we can't expect that much travel21:28
dhellmannannegentle: ++ to both21:28
mesteryannegentle: ++ to both as well21:29
eglynnis the thought here to set cross-project standards on what a mid-cycle should be?21:29
annegentleand honestly, I don't think the issue is about cost as much as choices. I don't choose to travel to all the midcycles I'm invited to. Heck I don't go speak at all the conferences I'm invited to. I have to pick and choose.21:29
*** colinmcnamara has quit IRC21:29
annegentleso I just wanted to bring it forward to ensure we have good guideance21:30
russellbeglynn: or perhaps what they should not be21:30
anteayais the current communication limiting choice?21:30
annegentleI can't spell :)21:30
ttxFTR I'l not saying we should stop doing them -- I'm saying we should make sure they stay optional, and that we could technically get rid of them if they are not needed anymore21:30
russellbttx: ++, optional, tactical/sprint focused21:30
morganfainbergttx, ++ i would like to see them become, if needed, pure virtual meetings.21:30
asalkeldttx isn't that up to the project?21:30
mesteryttx: +1 to optional21:30
morganfainbergand stay focused on sprint/results21:30
morganfainbergas well as optional.21:30
annegentlewe called a doc one a "boot camp"21:30
mikalttx: in what way are they non-optional now? I don't understand.21:31
anteayaare there current sprints that are communicated as non-optional?21:31
eglynnrussellb: yeah, I think a general principle should be: "don't assume you need one, just all the cool kids seem to be having one"21:31
ttxasalkeld: sure: my point ius, no project should feel compeeled to do one just because everyone else does21:31
nikhil_k"pure virtual meetings" +121:31
morganfainbergmikal, i think it's a concern that they don't become "mandatory"21:31
sdaguettx: so I agree with breaking that assumption21:31
* devananda is back ... network dropped21:31
morganfainbergmikal, not that they are required now21:31
fungiyeah, of the two infra has done so far, one was an onboarding-focused get together, and the other was a join sprint with the qa team, but we're also trying not to just have one every cycle21:31
ttxmikal: what morgan says.21:31
russellbthere's mandatory, and there's "expected/ *strongly* encouraged", and I don't think it should be either of those21:32
ttxmikal: "stay optional" if youprefer21:32
mesteryrussellb: ++21:32
mikalnikhil_k: the TC can't even agree on a _tool_ for a short online meeting, how can we expect to get all of a large core team to one?21:32
eglynnagreed on defaulting to not needing one, unless there's *specific* justification21:32
clarkbfungi: ya I think the question we have asked in the past is "Do we have a specific reason to get together this cycle?"21:32
eglynnbut if the project team decides they want one, up to them how they format it21:32
russellbmikal: who do you *expect* to show up to the nova one this time?21:32
anteayaisn't that the default now?21:32
nikhil_kmikal: haha, try vidyo ;)21:32
clarkbsometimes we do and otehrs we don;t21:32
fungii mainly worry that there's pressure on some teams to have mid-cycle assemblies just because everyone else is doing it21:32
ttxclarkb: "yes: skiing"21:32
dhellmannso if we assume we don't need them until we find a reason, how do we deal with the issues around planning for them on short notice?21:32
clarkbttx: :)21:32
nikhil_kmikal: and we did that for 17 odd folks (not sure what the size of nova core is)21:33
sdaguedhellmann: yeh, I think that's a pretty valid point21:33
morganfainbergrussellb, i will always say I prefer people to come if they can. Why, because i like working with them and get benefit from it. If they can't or don't want to, i expect them to keep contributing in the way everyone has since the beginging :) - and provide feedback we can include while people are there face-to-face21:33
eglynnfungi: yep, status anxiety ;)21:33
devanandawhile cost and travel burden are an issue, for many people, that is outweighed by the benefit of the f2f time21:33
fungittx: skiing as a service? is that a new infra project?21:33
mtreinishttx: heh, that was the proposed qa/infra/rel-mgt one right? :)21:33
*** AlexF has quit IRC21:33
dhellmannsdague: I'd hate for us to realize we need one and then not be able to put it together, too21:33
sdaguebecause I know that's one of the reason's mikal started working on tihs early, as there were complaints that there was not enough runway21:33
sdagueon the last nova one21:33
mikalnikhil_k: I have people who will refuse to use vidyo because its proprietary21:33
mikalnikhil_k: ditto google hangouts21:33
dhellmannsdague, mikal : exactly21:34
morganfainbergrussellb, but we have at least 1 core that doesn't come because of distance.. i'd say impact has been generally minimal if anyone skips.21:34
* mestery notes there is no perfect video solution that everyone is happy with21:34
nikhil_kmakes sense, that's a hard problem21:34
dhellmannmikal: do those people use open source airplanes? :-)21:34
annegentlelol21:34
ttxagree with mikal on that -- pure virtual meetings, you can do them on IRC, that's what we do when we do bugdays and other "events"21:34
sdaguedhellmann: you should ask them :)21:34
russellbmikal: you see my question above?  i'm curious what your view is on attendance at the nova one this time.21:34
ttxand they won't replace spending time together anyway21:34
morganfainbergmikal, i'd say the "it's proprietary" is a really annoying argument for not using something. but i don't like getting into flamewars or starting them so i avoid the question.21:34
russellbor will it depend on a set of sprint topics not decided yet?21:34
russellbor?21:35
asalkeldtime zones are a bigger issue than video software21:35
ttxasalkeld: ++21:35
mikaldhellmann: I have zero interest in arguing wiht people about software choices. You can do that for me if you'd like.21:35
eglynnasalkeld: agreed21:35
morganfainbergmikal, +++++++21:35
dhellmannmikal: I'm with you, actually.21:35
mikalrussellb: I see the majority of nova core coming to this one, but I might be wrong.21:35
* devananda hands mikal a wet cat to throw at fungi21:35
nikhil_kttx: "pure virtual meetings, you can do them on IRC" <- almost none participation21:35
nikhil_kttx: and also depends on the goal of the meetup21:36
dhellmannfwiw, I think it's great that mikal has started planning the nova meetup so early (and others have too, I guess)21:36
* fungi is willing to take on the "choosing proprietary alternatives is destructive to the open community" debate whenever21:36
ttxnikhil_k: my point is, pure virtual meetings won't replace face-to-face sprints21:36
morganfainbergwe've done a couple hangouts for keystone - and voice communication often works better for communicating some concepts than IRC ever will21:36
ttxyou can't just have a pure virtual meeting with contributors all over the globe21:36
nikhil_kttx: ah, didn't read the next line. oops21:36
sdagueannegentle: so back to an earlier point about surveying not only the attendees, have you gotten good feedback from non attendees of the midcycles on their impacts (good and bad) to the contributor base?21:37
dhellmannfungi: apparently we have some sort of asterix server we can use? how do we get access to that?21:37
russellbfungi: you wrote a nice -dev post on that a few months ago :)21:37
devanandattx: is the point to have a general agreement on "mid cycle sprints should be optional for projects to have, andattendance of them should also be optional" ?21:37
*** sergef has quit IRC21:37
fungidhellmann: there's a wiki. you dial into it with a phone or a free sip client21:37
annegentlesdague: ah yes, so there's no way to do that is there? I guess that was my point. We can't take the survey from people who consider travel a perk :)21:37
eglynndevananda: ++21:37
ttxdevananda: yes, and try to fish some ideas to make design summit time more efficient21:37
dhellmannfungi: ok, I've used asterix so I was asking specifically about our server. I'll look in the wiki21:37
nikhil_kttx: just worried - topics like these might get messier with with all the CPLs21:37
fungidhellmann: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Conferencing21:37
sdagueannegentle: well you know who went right?21:37
eglynnttx: is this discussion somehwat related to the idea that the design summit and conference should be decoupled?21:38
sdagueand you know core team members that didn't go21:38
annegentlesdague: mostly could figure it out21:38
devanandattx: i don't think the midcycles should have any bearing on the main summit -- if we say they do, then we've just said the midcycles are no more optional than the summit21:38
ttxdevananda: some people told me: "it's the only way to get only $PROJECT people in a room without bystanders21:38
sdagueso they could be asked directly21:38
dhellmannfungi: thanks21:38
SlickNikfungi: thanks for that link21:38
ttxdevananda: if that's the only reason, we can evolve the design summit format to allow for that21:38
annegentleso is it "cores who couldn't make it" or "people who will never be core if they don't travel tons" or?21:38
Vekttx: I don't know that we can make design summit time more efficient; there's just too much going on, and several of us need to check out multiple worlds when we get a chance.21:38
mesteryttx: That's a true statement. Whether that's a good statement or not is left up for debate.21:38
sdagueannegentle: so part B is harder to figure out21:38
devanandattx: i agree with that. almost. Friday made me think it was possible21:38
morganfainbergttx, i really hope thats not the goal of a midcycle. i'd rather have anyone come to ours that wants to and contribute...but just be focused on keystone work.21:38
sdaguebut part A would be some data21:38
annegentlewe did toy around with "design summit in boring location" at one point21:38
* morganfainberg shrugs.21:38
* eglynn doesn't understand why bystanders are such an issue21:38
morganfainbergeglynn, ++21:39
devanandattx: we had a half day on friday where only ironic ATCs stood at a white board and designed something21:39
devanandattx: it was awesome. and only about 2 hours long21:39
annegentleI think another data point we need to gather going forward is more understanding across projects21:39
sdagueeglynn: you apparently weren't in the performance art have to be on the microphone sesssions in the nova room :)21:39
david-lyleeglynn: ++21:40
Vekheh21:40
morganfainbergsdague, i heard keystone was the real performance art :P but i'm not surprised you have the same issues in nova.21:40
dhellmannsdague: maybe we should not have mics at the next summit21:40
annegentledo some teams meet midcycle because nova did it? because it became tradition? That sort of patterning might help21:40
SlickNikeglynn: Often bystanders ask questions, and you don't really want to shut someone out who's trying to learn.21:40
russellbheh, the microphone hostility doesn't exist in all rooms21:40
russellbneutron room happily used the mic, and honestly, i didn't feel like it hurt the discussion21:40
SlickNikeglynn: But that does come at a cost of time21:40
eglynnsdague: I caught some of the performance art at the summit feedback session, very bizzare21:40
sdagueeglynn: :)21:40
* mestery notes neutron has used the mic for many summits in a row now without major issues21:40
dhellmannrussellb: we used it some in oslo, but we had a smaller group and I have a loud voice so maybe we just didn't need it as much :-)21:41
eglynn... but that was the only disuptive randomer I saw all summit21:41
sdagueeglynn: that's not the issue21:41
nikhil_kannegentle: for glance we started as nova did and then it became evident that mini-summits are power*100 more productive than the main event21:41
russellbIT'S ABOUT MONEY!  WE HAVE TO FIX THE ECONOMY!21:41
russellb(for anyone who was at the feedback session)21:41
sdaguethe issue is there was noticable throughput difference in the non miced nova sessions21:41
mesteryI can only speak for neutron, but we've found midcycles important to close on important work: Icehouse it was QA/Tempest for neutron, Juno it was nova-network parity, and Kilo it's paying down technical debt.21:41
ttxECONOMY BAD21:41
sdagueand the miced ones21:41
morganfainbergSlickNik, i think if you go in with a focus vs. the more general summit - the bystander issue would be less problematic21:41
annegentlerussellb: that was freaky21:41
ttxI think we are going off-topic now, so it's time for...21:42
sdaguelike the non miced ones probably covered 2 - 4x more content and agreement21:42
ttx#topic Open discussion21:42
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: project)"21:42
*** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting21:42
ttxfeel free to continue on the same topic though21:42
morganfainbergannegentle, we all were a little shocked by that one.21:42
ttxjust want to signal it's fine throwing random comments starting from now21:42
*** alop has joined #openstack-meeting21:42
* dhellmann isn't sure whether to be glad or sad that he missed it21:42
eglynndid we come to any specific conclusions above?21:42
russellbeglynn: was just wondering that21:42
morganfainbergdhellmann, it was special21:42
annegentlettx: I can write a summary email to the openstack-dev list if that helps on midcycle consistency21:42
Vekdhellmann: ++21:42
russellbtrying to think of how we bring some closure to the mid-cycle discussions we keep having21:42
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC21:42
dhellmannttx, annegentle : is the goal for this discussion just to understand more, or are we seeking a specific change?21:43
ttxeglynn: actually yes. I think theer is consensus around the "stay optional" and the "should be a sprint to get something done" ideas21:43
sdaguerussellb: yeh, honestly, it feels like there is mostly a latency issue21:43
notmynameour swift hackathons (mid-cycle whatevers) started with 2 rules: (1) no slides (2) no "intro to swift" sessions. and we started doing them in specific response to the summits (where we kept having lots of beginner/intro qeustions and topics)21:43
VekI think the basic problem is that the summit and the midcycles solve two distinct problems, both of which need to be solved for.21:43
annegentlefor me, it was just to gain more understanding, and test our Board/TC discussions with the real-world21:43
ttxannegentle: ++21:43
morganfainbergi think we just need to make it clear it's self-organising and that they are optional21:43
ttx#action annegentle to write a summary email to -dev to foster midcycle consistency21:43
devananda++ keep them small ++ optional ++ actually get real work done21:43
anteayaannegentle: I hosted the neutron mid-cycle in montreal last january as a direct response to the hong kong summit being ineffective for devs21:44
eglynnkey point from my PoV is to encourage projects to reflect on whether they *really* need one21:44
russellbttx: where should we capture that?  a governance resolution that expresses what we feel is appropriate async self-organized meetups outside of our normal process/tools?21:44
morganfainbergdevananda++21:44
sdaguebecause the mid cycle planning happened early, because last time people complained they didn't have enough time to plan21:44
eglynn.. but leave the format up to them if they really feel that they do21:44
annegentledhellmann: the change we talked about at Board/TC was to communicate that midcycles are for focused sessions only and not to have them be the default/defacto operating process21:44
russellboh, i see the annegentle action ...21:44
*** oanufriev has joined #openstack-meeting21:44
anteayathat situation is beginnnig to be better at summits, somewhat21:44
sdagueand now we change the summit format to hopefully make them less required, but the gears are in play, because they already were21:44
dhellmannannegentle: we should write that down somewhere, as russellb suggests :-)21:44
ttxrussellb: i don't think that calls for a TC resoltuion, just a sane ML thread should do21:44
*** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting21:44
russellbwe've had non-sane ML threads already21:44
sdagueand I don't know if we'll know until they happen if they really feel less needed21:44
russellb:-p21:44
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting21:44
annegentleright dhellmann -- but russellb I think a ML thread is fine.21:45
morganfainbergsdague, i agree we will likely see a 1 cycle lag on21:45
morganfainberg"are these needed"21:45
dhellmannsdague: right, it may take this full cycle before we know how well the summit changes worked, since we're already planning for some sprints this cycle21:45
eglynnttx: wasn't there a related topic at the joint TC/board meeting in Paris? ... what was the outcome of that discussion?21:45
* Vek shakes his head at mikal :)21:45
sdagueso in some ways it feels a little premature to demonize the midcycles at this stage21:45
*** oanufriev has left #openstack-meeting21:45
ttxeglynn: didn't go very far21:45
mesterysdague: ++21:45
*** baoli has quit IRC21:45
dhellmanneglynn: that's what annegentle was saying, that we seemed to agree on discouraging making attendance "mandatory"21:46
ttxeglynn: was mostly about communication around them21:46
annegentlesdague: yeah, not demonizing at all, they fill a need21:46
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting21:46
ttxeglynn: like they should all be referenced in one place (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints)21:46
* mestery wonders which mid-cycle had mandatory attendane as a requirement21:46
mesteryDoes anyone know of one?21:46
mesteryI'm not aware of one21:46
sdaguemestery: none21:46
dhellmannmestery: it may just have been an impression rather than an actual rule21:46
mesterysdague: Right, so I don't get that argument by people then.21:46
ttxmestery: some suggested that they should be mandatory for -core in their project21:46
*** gokrokve_ has joined #openstack-meeting21:46
anteayado they still?21:47
notmynamemestery: explicit mandetory or implicit/social mandetory?21:47
fungithe one time i saw it proposed, it got some fairly heated counterarguments on the ml21:47
Vekthere's also the question of whether it's mandatory for a project to have a midcycle...21:47
mesteryI think we need to make it explicit that attendance is optional21:47
sdagueVek: right, and that should definitely be a no21:47
mesteryI've tried to do that for neutron21:47
mesteryI encourage others to do the same21:47
nikhil_k"some suggested that they should be mandatory for -core in their project" <- bad21:47
nikhil_kit would be hard to get cores from china to US for mid-cycle21:47
sdaguenikhil_k: so I think that straw man is beaten to death21:47
*** baoli has quit IRC21:48
* Vek has enough trouble trying to make it to the summits21:48
nikhil_ksdague: lol, yeah no kidding21:48
*** rushiagr is now known as rushiagr_away21:48
fungiwell, attendance to anything is "optional" but i think it's worth stating that projects would rather core reviewers show up for the summits than the mid-cycles21:48
sdagueif feels like the mandatory thing is a straw man that never materialized, but that everyone wants to argue about :)21:48
devanandathere's the implicit social pressure -- core team members who can't attend may feel like they will be missing on some big discussions21:48
mesteryfungi: ++21:48
morganfainbergfungi, ++21:48
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting21:48
Veksdague: agreed21:48
mesterysdague: lol21:48
devanandawhat can we do to lessen that?21:48
russellbdevananda: that.21:48
dhellmanndevananda: ++21:49
devanandabesides, of course, stress that it isn't a design / planning session21:49
devanandabut a hackathon21:49
Vek"midcycle hackathon"21:49
devanandathat, however, was not my experience at any of them -- the three I attended were all planning sessions21:49
anteayabut sometimes it is a design session21:49
anteayaneutron had ideas for mulitnode testing that I took to the infra mid-cycle21:49
russellbdevananda: you're nailing the issue, IMO21:49
fungiright, stress that you're going to miss out on face time and getting some specific work done is not so bad as stress that you're missing out on the planning and direction setting21:49
devanandafungi: right21:50
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting21:50
sdaguerussellb: so agreed, but at the same time, ironic driver would not have landed without portland21:50
devanandaso perhaps we should stress that planning should not happen in f2f meetings21:50
dhellmannit's odd to say "it's ok to get together in a room and build something, just don't make any decisions about how to do that"21:50
fungianteaya: i saw that as a feature design, a la sprint-worthy21:50
*** gokrokve has quit IRC21:50
mesterydhellmann: ++21:50
devanandaas that is not in keeping with our principle of "open"21:50
annegentleearly on in formation, teams get a lot out of face to face21:50
russellbsdague: "let's push on the ironic driver" would be a reasonable sprint i think21:50
Vekdhellmann: also not something that's enforceable, either.21:50
anteayafungi: which it was, yes21:50
eglynnon the hackathon question, do we have any sense that this is a productive way for an opensource community to write code?21:50
sdagueso there is definitely a balance there, because that was important to do21:50
ttxdevananda: at the very least we should discourage it, yes. We can't prevent it really21:50
annegentlehappened for the docs team for sure21:50
devanandattx: sure21:50
dhellmannVek: true21:50
devanandathat's what I mean :)21:50
mesteryeglynn: Not that I'm aware of, no.21:51
fungithere is plenty anecdotal evidence that lots of projects participate in hackathons though21:51
dhellmanneglynn: I'd love to lock the oslo cores in a room and having them do reviews. Wait, did I say "lock"?21:51
devanandadhellmann: it's not "dont decide HOW to do it" -- I think that's fine in a midcycle21:51
dhellmanndevananda: just not "whether"?21:51
devanandadhellmann: perhaps my thought is better phrased as "dont decide WHAT to do"21:51
devanandaor whether, sure. that alsow orks21:51
morganfainbergthere have been a couple things that came up for Keystone mid-cycle that were based on earlier development21:51
*** neelashah has quit IRC21:51
morganfainbergthat ended up being designed there21:51
morganfainberge.g. K2K federation21:51
eglynnmestery: yep, so restricting midcycles to a hackathon style makes no sense to me ... we should be able to collaborate on code remotely21:51
mikalnikhil_k: I think that's a reference to me, and that's not what I said21:51
mikalnikhil_k: its a deliberate misquite21:52
mikalmisquote even21:52
devanandato the ironic/nova example -- it was clearly known by all the core team members on both sides that we would be having taht discussion21:52
anteayaI disagree with the discourage it angle, I would hate to see the shape neutron would be in if we hadn't meet in Montreal about tempest21:52
nikhil_kdhellmann: "d love to lock the oslo cores in a room and having them do reviews. Wait, did I say "lock"?21:52
mikalnikhil_k: what I said was they were "strongly encouraged" for cores21:52
nikhil_k+121:52
dhellmanndevananda: ok, but I think the question of how is often just as important21:52
wendarthe concerns about exclusion might be helped by planning a specific time in the middle of the sprint for remote participation21:52
ttxmorganfainberg: in that specific case I think the design summit failed for you21:52
VekI think the idea is that a midcycle needs to be focused on just a small handful of topics; the exact mechanics of how those topics are handled probably aren't important.21:52
morganfainbergttx, well sortof.21:52
*** alop has quit IRC21:52
morganfainbergttx, we didn't know where it was going at the summit time.21:52
sdagueanteaya: yeh, no kidding. We'd probably have thrown own neutron if we didn't have that.21:52
morganfainbergttx, it was a logical step once we saw how it worked.21:52
mesteryeglynn: We definitely can and do, but we've found the face time to be useful. Point noted however.21:52
anteayasdague: exactly21:52
* mestery sees a future where mid-cycles don't exist21:53
devanandacounter-point to my own point ... the introduction of IPA to Ironic happened at a midcycle21:53
ttxmestery: I have a dream too21:53
nikhil_kmikal: gotcha, "strongly encouraged" +121:53
anteayawendar: that doesn't work for all groups21:53
mesteryttx: so, how can we change the summit to give us what the mid-cycles are giving people now? If we do that, we remove the need for mid-cycles21:53
morganfainbergttx, it wasn't a complete new feature it was an enhancement that would have either needed to wait another cycle or it would have not landed. was all the design done there? no, but the initial "use standards, don't reinvent the wheel" type stuff21:53
*** nshaikh has left #openstack-meeting21:53
anteayawendar: the groups that can do that are already21:53
*** baoli has quit IRC21:53
*** mpaolino has joined #openstack-meeting21:54
*** mpaolino has quit IRC21:54
nikhil_kdmellado: s/oslo/<some_project>/ -> lock cores in a room :)21:54
ttxmestery: I think it will never give us full coverage.21:54
devanandaanteaya: but do they?21:54
nikhil_kdhellmann: ^21:54
mesteryttx: Maybe we can continue evolving it that way and see what happens though21:54
ttxmestery: for example, we liked Friday because everyone was in some room somewhere predictable21:54
anteayadevananda: yes, the ones that have a dynamic that includes that do already21:54
mikalnikhil_k: the problem we are trying to solve for is there being no concensus on the core team about direction of nova21:54
morganfainbergttx, but that is definitely the exception to the rule for our hackathon(s).21:54
wendaranteaya: ISTR, the regular project meeting is usually canceled in a sprint week21:54
ttxand people like meetups because they are small and relaxed21:54
anteayadevananda: the ones that don't, don't21:54
*** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting21:54
wendaranteaya: even just holding that as a sync point could help21:54
mesteryttx: Very true21:54
anteayawendar: sorry I am missing the point of the last comment21:54
ttxyou can't have both :)21:54
mikalnikhil_k: and trying to solve that problem in the context of some people refusing to attend online meetings using proprietary software, or outside their normal work hours21:54
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting21:54
mesteryttx: It's a tough nut to crack for sure21:55
ttxso I think they can coexist. Do a meetup if one is needed to get some specific work done21:55
wendarbut... I would be interested to see one project experiment with a pure-virtual sprint this cycle, maybe just for one day21:55
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting21:55
mesterywendar: Define "day", depends on where you're located :)21:55
ttxI just felt like the ones for this cycle were organized not because they are needed, but becaus ethey need to be planned in advance21:55
anteayawendar: the infra manual spriont it scheduled for 48 hours21:55
anteayado attend21:55
*** jecarey has joined #openstack-meeting21:55
wendar(anteaya: then I probably just misunderstood what you meant)21:55
nikhil_kmikal: agreed, I think nova is a special case as it's so many times more complex. we'd avoid generalizing the concept and that prolly happens due to mis-communication21:56
anteaya#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/VirtualSprints21:56
wendarmestery: sure, but shifting to a different time-zone for one 12 hour period is doable21:56
morganfainbergttx, i think a 1 cycle delay on "are these really needed" is acceptible21:56
mikalOn another note, I hear stories of mid-cycles in exotic locations21:56
*** banix has quit IRC21:56
mikalI think that would be a much more interesting conversation to have21:56
wendarmestery: (may require a lot of coffee, but doable)21:56
mesterywendar: True21:56
dhellmannmikal: indeed21:56
ttxmorganfain