Tuesday, 2016-07-05

*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:00
*** shashank_hegde has quit IRC00:01
*** piet has quit IRC00:03
*** singhj has quit IRC00:03
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting00:06
*** erlon has quit IRC00:06
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting00:08
*** dgonzalez has quit IRC00:08
*** aranjan has quit IRC00:09
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC00:09
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:10
*** egallen has quit IRC00:10
*** iyamahat has quit IRC00:12
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC00:13
*** dgonzalez has joined #openstack-meeting00:15
*** kus has joined #openstack-meeting00:17
*** kus has quit IRC00:17
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC00:19
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:20
*** piet has quit IRC00:21
*** JRobinson__ has quit IRC00:23
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting00:25
*** yamahata has quit IRC00:28
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting00:29
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC00:29
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:30
*** tellesnobrega_af is now known as tellesnobrega00:31
*** ivc_ has quit IRC00:31
*** dimtruck is now known as zz_dimtruck00:34
*** aranjan has joined #openstack-meeting00:35
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:37
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:39
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC00:40
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:40
*** bobh has quit IRC00:43
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC00:47
*** numans has joined #openstack-meeting00:47
*** tellesnobrega is now known as tellesnobrega_af00:50
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC00:50
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting00:50
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting00:51
*** sarob has quit IRC00:53
*** piet has quit IRC00:59
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting00:59
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:00
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:01
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC01:02
*** iceyao has joined #openstack-meeting01:02
*** Galitz has joined #openstack-meeting01:03
*** shz has quit IRC01:04
*** shihanzhang has joined #openstack-meeting01:05
*** Galitz has quit IRC01:08
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:09
*** dmacpher has joined #openstack-meeting01:10
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting01:10
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:10
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:11
*** piet has quit IRC01:14
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting01:14
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC01:17
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:18
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:21
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:21
*** zhurong has joined #openstack-meeting01:22
*** amotoki has quit IRC01:28
*** jaypipes has quit IRC01:28
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC01:28
*** ljxiash has joined #openstack-meeting01:28
*** piet has quit IRC01:29
*** manikanta_tadi has joined #openstack-meeting01:30
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting01:31
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:31
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:32
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC01:33
*** fzdarsky_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:33
*** ljxiash has quit IRC01:34
*** ljxiash has joined #openstack-meeting01:34
*** singhj has joined #openstack-meeting01:35
*** ljxiash has quit IRC01:35
*** ljxiash has joined #openstack-meeting01:35
*** ljxiash has quit IRC01:35
*** fzdarsky has quit IRC01:36
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:41
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:42
*** enriquetaso has quit IRC01:42
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting01:44
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:44
*** tellesnobrega_af is now known as tellesnobrega01:44
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC01:45
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting01:46
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting01:46
*** bobh has quit IRC01:50
*** amotoki has quit IRC01:51
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC01:51
*** manikanta_tadi has quit IRC01:52
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting01:52
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting01:55
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting01:56
*** chenpengzi has joined #openstack-meeting01:56
*** rfolco_ has quit IRC01:57
*** khushbu has joined #openstack-meeting01:58
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting01:58
*** singhj has quit IRC02:01
*** karthik__ has joined #openstack-meeting02:02
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:02
*** shu-mutou has joined #openstack-meeting02:02
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:02
*** karthik__ has quit IRC02:03
*** amotoki has quit IRC02:03
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC02:03
*** iceyao_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:03
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:03
*** singhj has joined #openstack-meeting02:04
*** iceyao__ has joined #openstack-meeting02:05
*** iceyao has quit IRC02:05
*** Daisy has quit IRC02:06
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting02:06
*** iceyao_ has quit IRC02:08
*** Daisy has quit IRC02:11
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC02:11
*** iceyao has joined #openstack-meeting02:12
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:12
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting02:13
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:13
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC02:13
*** zz_dimtruck is now known as dimtruck02:14
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:15
*** iceyao__ has quit IRC02:16
*** asettle has quit IRC02:19
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC02:22
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:22
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:23
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting02:27
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC02:29
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:30
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-meeting02:30
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:32
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:33
*** sindhu has joined #openstack-meeting02:33
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** ivc_ has quit IRC02:35
*** davechen has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** singhj has quit IRC02:36
*** dimtruck is now known as zz_dimtruck02:36
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting02:37
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting02:40
*** mkrai has joined #openstack-meeting02:42
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:43
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:44
*** khushbu_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:44
*** khushbu has quit IRC02:44
*** karthik__ has joined #openstack-meeting02:45
*** kaminohana has quit IRC02:46
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting02:47
*** yanyanhu has joined #openstack-meeting02:47
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC02:48
*** sindhu has quit IRC02:50
*** khushbu_ has quit IRC02:50
*** bobh has quit IRC02:52
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC02:53
*** Daisy has quit IRC02:54
*** singhj has joined #openstack-meeting02:54
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC02:54
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting02:54
*** shubhams has joined #openstack-meeting02:56
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting02:56
*** flwang1 has joined #openstack-meeting02:56
*** singhj has quit IRC02:57
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC02:58
*** sudipto has joined #openstack-meeting02:59
*** Daisy_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:59
*** Vivek_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:59
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting02:59
hongbin#startmeeting zun03:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 03:00:09 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is hongbin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.03:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.03:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: zun)"03:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'zun'03:00
hongbin#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Zun#Agenda_for_2016-07-05_0300_UTC Today's agenda03:00
hongbin#topic Roll Call03:00
*** openstack changes topic to "Roll Call (Meeting topic: zun)"03:00
mkraiMadhuri Kumari03:00
WenzhiWenzhi Yu03:00
shubhamsShubham sharma03:00
Vivek_Vivek Jain03:00
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
sudiptoo/03:01
*** feisky has joined #openstack-meeting03:01
hongbinThanks for joining the meeting mkrai Wenzhi shubhams Vivek_ sudipto03:01
*** sindhu has joined #openstack-meeting03:02
hongbin#topic Announcements03:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: zun)"03:02
flwang1o/03:02
hongbinThe python-zunclient repo was created!03:02
yanyanhuhi03:02
hongbin#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/317699/03:02
hongbin#link https://github.com/openstack/python-zunclient03:02
hongbinThanks mkrai for creating the repo03:02
mkraihongbin, :)03:03
*** Daisy has quit IRC03:03
hongbinflwang1: yanyanhu hey03:03
yanyanhu:)03:03
*** karthik__ has quit IRC03:03
hongbinAny question about the python-zunclient repo ?03:03
mkraiservice-list command is now supported03:03
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:03
mkrai#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337360/03:04
hongbinGreat!03:04
Wenzhigreat! will try zunclient later03:04
shubhamsI will check and confirm03:04
mkraiThanks!03:04
hongbin#topic Review Action Items03:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Review Action Items (Meeting topic: zun)"03:04
hongbinhongbin draft a spec for design option 1.1 (Work In Progress)03:04
hongbin#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/zun-containers-service-design-spec03:04
hongbinI will continue to work on the etherpad this week03:05
hongbinYou are welcome to collaborate :)03:05
*** epico has joined #openstack-meeting03:05
*** JRobinson__ has joined #openstack-meeting03:05
yanyanhulooks great03:05
hongbinthanks03:05
hongbinI will leave the etherpad offline03:06
hongbin#topic Architecture design03:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Architecture design (Meeting topic: zun)"03:06
hongbin#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/zun-architecture-decisions03:06
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:06
hongbinAt the last meeting, we decided to choose option #1.103:06
hongbinI want to confirm it again03:07
hongbinIs everyone on the same page?03:07
yanyanhuyes, I think so :)03:07
shubhamsYes03:07
Wenzhi+103:07
mkrai+103:07
hongbinAnyone want a clarification. Now it is hte time03:07
hongbinOK. Looks everyone agree03:08
*** namrata has joined #openstack-meeting03:08
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting03:08
hongbinThen, we will work according to the decision03:08
hongbin#topic API design03:08
*** openstack changes topic to "API design (Meeting topic: zun)"03:08
hongbin#link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/api-design The BP03:08
hongbin#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/zun-containers-service-api Etherpad03:08
hongbinmkrai: I gave the stage to you :)03:09
mkraihongbin, Thanks03:09
mkraiI have started creating spec for zun API according to our design03:09
mkrai#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/zun-containers-service-api-spec03:09
mkraiI want everyone to please have a look03:09
mkraiAnd feel free to add to it03:10
*** piet_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:10
mkraiAccording to our discussion, in our first implementation we will support docker and later COEs03:10
flwang1mkrai: just had a quick glance03:10
flwang1i think at the init stage03:10
flwang1we don't have to care about the details of each api endpoint03:11
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:11
flwang1we need to figure out the resource asap03:11
hongbinYes, agree03:11
flwang1and define the details later03:11
mkraiYes it will generally evolve flwang103:11
mkraiOk that will be helpful for me too :)03:11
mkraiI will add all the resources this week03:12
flwang1since it's easy to define the action if we can figure out the objects/resources03:12
mkraiThat's all from my side03:12
flwang1and a relationship between each resources will be lovely03:12
mkraiSure I will add that03:13
sudiptoyeah and given that we have two overlapping runtimes, i wanted to understand if everyone feels - we should look for an overlap - or should we be more like - building our stuff around one runtime - support it well - and then move to the other?03:13
hongbinsudipto: good question03:13
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:14
mkraiWe should abstract container runtimes also03:14
flwang1sudipto: define the two runtimes? you mean container and COE?03:14
mkraidocker and rocket03:14
sudiptoflwang1, sorry should have been clearer. I meant docker and rkt03:14
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:15
sudiptomy point being, is there a need to build both of these API supports simultaneously?  (I'd be clear i have no bias towards either)03:15
mkraiIMO it is not good to have different set of APIs for container runtimes even.03:15
sudiptoit is not about two different set of APIs03:15
*** klkumar has joined #openstack-meeting03:16
sudiptothink about libvirt being the driver nova was built on and later VMWare was added...if that serves as a good analogy03:16
Wenzhione set of API, two different drivers?03:16
sudiptoWenzhi, yeah it will be one set of APIs only. However, you will probably have NotImplementedError() for the one that doesn't support it.03:17
hongbinsudipto: you mean two set of APIs for docker and rkt? or two set of APIs for runtimes and COEs?03:17
sudiptohongbin, two set of APIs for runtimes and COEs...03:17
hongbinsudipto: I see03:17
hongbinsudipto: It looks you challenge the design option 1.1 :)03:17
hongbinsudipto: but let's discuss it03:17
sudiptohongbin, no, i don't think i am challenging that :)03:18
sudiptohongbin, i am just sticking to the API design discussion...03:18
sudiptoanyway, i think we can take it offline...03:18
hongbinsudipto: ok. could you clarify ?03:18
sudiptoon the etherpad that is...03:18
sudiptobasically - should be building around OCI/CNCF?03:19
sudipto*we03:19
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting03:19
hongbinIf collaboration between OCI/CNCF is possible, I am open to that03:19
sudiptoand my point in a more crude way was - if docker supports x y z APIs - should we be building the same x y z for rocket and through a NotImplementedError()03:20
hongbinThat mean we needs to figure out something, and propose it to OCI/CNCF? or just imeplement whatever OCI/CNCF?03:20
sudiptomaybe mkrai is right - we should probably abstract it at a level - where there is a overlap03:21
sudiptomy only concern is - we shouldn't end up doing things not so well for either runtimes...that's all03:21
hongbinYes, that is one option03:21
* eliqiao joins03:21
hongbineliqiao: hey03:21
sudiptohongbin, i will take this on the etherpad and with you and mkrai later, don't want to derail the meeting over it :)03:22
*** sindhu has quit IRC03:22
* eliqiao just arrived at hangzhou(for bug smash day)03:22
flwang1focus on docker, my 0.0203:22
hongbinsudipto: well, I don't have much items to discuss later :)03:22
sudiptoflwang1, yeah i think i meant something like that :) as in the focus bit :)03:22
sudiptodon't end up being a place where nothing works well...03:23
sudiptoAlso, important to refer to what version of remote APIs we will support.03:23
mkraiDo we agree to concentrate on docker now?03:23
mkraisudipto, the latest one?03:24
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:24
sudiptomkrai,yeah mostly, but document per say - latest would be a good to cite in numbers.03:24
sudiptosince the API updates are pretty frequent03:24
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting03:24
mkraiOk03:24
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:25
hongbinwell, I compared the APIs of docekr and rkt03:25
hongbinobviously, docker have double APIs operations than rkt03:25
*** amotoki has quit IRC03:25
*** tochi has quit IRC03:25
hongbinHowever, the basic looks the same03:25
mkraiAgree hongbin03:25
hongbine.g. start, stop, logs, ....03:25
sudiptohongbin, mkrai so we would look at mostly the basic operations?03:25
sudiptoi was more looking at a thing like docker attach for instance...03:26
sudiptodo you consider that basic or necessary?03:26
*** piet_ has quit IRC03:26
hongbinThis is a challenging question03:26
mkraiThe basic ones03:26
shubhamsI think that we should focus on necessary03:27
flwang1docker the target, but we can implement it in several stages03:27
flwang1that said03:27
mkraiYes the basic ones first and later the necessary ones03:27
flwang1at 1st stage, implement the basic(common) api between docker and rokect03:28
eliqiaoagreed.03:28
flwang1and then adding more03:28
*** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting03:28
shubhamsagree03:28
flwang1that's not a problem03:28
sudiptosounds good!03:28
hongbinwfm03:28
mkrai+103:28
mkraihongbin, please mark it as agreed03:29
hongbinEveryone agree?03:29
namrataagreed03:29
* sudipto is worried for the future, but agrees in the present03:29
hongbin#agreed I think there are two general approach to define the API at the beginning, and then adding more later03:29
Wenzhiso we agreed on one set of container runtime API and two different drivers(for docker and rkt)?03:29
*** baoli_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:30
hongbinsudipto: We can discuss it further later03:30
sudiptohongbin, yeah sounds good.03:30
hongbinWenzhi: One thing one set of API for both docker and rkt03:30
hongbinFor the runtimes and COEs, we can discuss if it is one set of APIs or two set03:31
hongbinsudipto: We have plenty of time, we can touch this topic a bit here?03:31
mkraiI think it will be very difficult to abstract COE and container runtime03:32
sudiptohongbin, you mean the COE API design?03:32
hongbinyes03:32
hongbinsudipto: you seem to propose one set of APIs for COEs and runtimes?03:32
*** oferby has joined #openstack-meeting03:33
sudiptohongbin, no no, i don't think it is to overlap them03:33
*** baoli has quit IRC03:33
*** oferby has quit IRC03:33
sudiptoflwang1, the other day had a mention of the vmware apis in nova - i thought you meant something like managing a cluster with the same set of apis - that a compute driver like libvirt would support?03:34
*** JRobinson__ is now known as JRobinson__afk03:34
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:34
flwang1maybe i missed something, but i think we're not going to create one set API to fit both container and COE03:34
*** Kevin_Zheng has joined #openstack-meeting03:34
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:35
flwang1IMHO, we do need a group/set of api for container and one for COE, and the hard part is not on the container part03:35
mkraiYes flwang103:35
flwang1the hard part is the COE part03:35
hongbinYes, possibly need another etherpad for COE03:35
flwang1because, we're going to have a native COE and the other COE support may from magnum03:35
flwang1so how to work out a group/set of api to make everybody happy is the hard part, does that make sense?03:36
flwang1or i'm making it mess ;)03:36
sudiptoyeah it is not just hard, it's like probably impossible.03:36
mkraiEach COE has different resources, so different set of APIs for each COE03:36
mkraisudipto, I agree with you03:36
*** Daisy_ has quit IRC03:37
mkraihongbin, I think its better to create an etherpad for all COE APIs03:37
mkraiAnd then try to take out some common if possible03:37
flwang1hah, i think that's the interesting part of software design :)03:37
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting03:37
flwang1since we have to compromise03:38
hongbin#action hongbin create an etherpad for the COE API design03:38
Wenzhidifferent set of APIs for each COE is not beautiful I think03:38
flwang1or i would say balance03:38
sudiptoyou will be biased in such a case, i think that's fine though ;)03:38
flwang1figure out a balance point between the reality and the design03:38
hongbinI think the hardest part is that almost everyone is using native COE API, how to convince them to use our API is the question03:39
sudiptohongbin, ++03:39
sudiptothat's my primary concern03:39
hongbinFrankly, I don't have an answer for that03:39
hongbinUnless, we make it much simpler or more high-level or somthing03:40
*** haiwei_ has joined #openstack-meeting03:40
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC03:40
shubhamshongbin : its only possible if we provide wrapper over existing coe and that wrapper should be same  for each COE to end user/customer for all03:40
Wenzhiunless we can unify them, or I don't think people will use a cmd like zun k8s XXX03:40
shubhamsWenzhi : yeah right03:41
flwang1hongbin: i don't think that's a really problem IMHO03:41
hongbinflwang1: why?03:41
flwang1the main target user of Zun is the application developer, not operator03:41
flwang1do you remember our discussion about the user case of Zun?03:41
hongbinyes03:41
flwang1IMHO, it's like: As a user, i want to create a container03:42
flwang1then i can manage its lifecycle with zun's api/client03:42
*** Daisy has quit IRC03:42
flwang1if03:42
hongbinAs a user, I want to replicate my container to N03:42
flwang1the user also want to create container based on a COE cluster03:42
hongbinAnother use case?03:43
flwang1and the cloud provider didn't provide it03:43
flwang1then he may have to play with the COE API03:43
flwang1then that's users choice03:43
flwang1if we're doing bad job03:43
flwang1then don't expect user will use zun's api to talk with COE03:44
flwang1i think that's fair enough03:44
hongbinYes, this area needs more thinking03:44
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:44
hongbinI am still struggle to figure it out03:44
flwang1imagine a supermarket A has good price and service, why do you want to chose B?03:44
*** baoli_ has quit IRC03:45
mkraiI think user would want to use Zun if they want to run COEs on container infrastructure03:45
flwang1unless B has better price and service03:45
mkraiSorry *openstack infrastructure03:45
flwang1mkrai: yep, the good gene of zun is, it's the native container api of openstack03:46
flwang1it should know more about the infra than the COE itself03:47
hongbinYes, that is a point03:47
sudiptomkrai, that's a weak case at the moment... since the direction is more towards making openstack as an app on kubernetes :) If i read through the SIG discussions right.03:47
flwang1in other words, we can provide better integration with other services03:47
sudiptohowever, that doesn't mean the other way around is not possible,03:47
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:47
sudiptoand it's probably good for people who already have invest heavily on openstack to try out containers as well.03:47
hongbinHow to make COE integrate well with OpenStack?03:48
hongbinI think it is not our job to teach operators to how enable Kuryr in COE?03:49
hongbinIf Kuryr/neutron is not configured in COE, Zun cannot use it03:49
*** davechen has quit IRC03:49
hongbinSame for Cinder, Keystone, ...03:50
hongbinOK. Looks like we need to take the discussion to an etherpad03:51
hongbin#topic Open Discussion03:51
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: zun)"03:51
mkraiI have a concern on managing state of containers03:51
mkraiAre we planning to manage it in Zun db?03:51
hongbinmkrai: I think yes03:52
hongbinmkrai: Although we need to reconsider the "db"03:52
mkraiHow do we sync it will container runtime?03:52
hongbinmkrai: I think etcd will be better03:52
mkrais/will//with03:52
*** dmacpher has quit IRC03:52
yuanyingetcd +103:52
hongbinmkrai: I think it is similar as how Nova sync with VMs03:53
sudiptoI certainly have a strong feeling that we shouldn't treat containers and VMs similarly.03:53
mkraiOk sounds good03:53
Wenzhiwe can sync them with a periodic task maybe03:53
sudiptothe state sync in VMs can be asynchronous - you might end up killing a container before that happens :)03:53
hongbinsudipto: OK. I think it is like how kubelet sync with containers :)03:54
sudiptoas in containers could be very short lived as well.03:54
sudiptohongbin, hah ok.03:54
sudiptomkrai, were you inclined towards something like a distributed db? like yuanying pointed out?03:54
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC03:55
hongbinbut agree, containers are started and stopped very frequently, so db is not the right choice03:55
*** shashank_hegde has joined #openstack-meeting03:55
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting03:55
Wenzhisounds reasonable ^^03:55
mkraiYes03:56
*** M00nr41n has joined #openstack-meeting03:56
hongbinOK. sound like an agree?03:56
hongbinsilient....03:57
*** tochi has joined #openstack-meeting03:57
sudiptoagreed.,03:57
yuanyingagree03:57
hongbin:)03:57
mkrai+103:58
Wenzhi+1 we need a db operation implementation for etcd backend03:58
yuanyingAnd also what about to re-consider "rabbitMQ"?03:58
shubhams+103:58
hongbin#agreed store container state at etcd instead of db03:58
hongbinyuanying: Yes, I am thinking about the message queue as well03:58
hongbinyuanying: what do you think?03:59
yuanyingtaskflow also uses kvs for message passing03:59
yuanyinghttps://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TaskFlow03:59
yuanyingWe can implements conductor on KVS03:59
hongbinOK. TIme is up. We can re-discuss the rabbitmq in the ML or next meeting04:00
hongbinAll, thanks for joining hte meeting04:00
mkraiThanks everyone04:00
hongbin#endmeeting04:00
yuanyingthanks04:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"04:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 04:00:32 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)04:00
Wenzhithanks04:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/zun/2016/zun.2016-07-05-03.00.html04:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/zun/2016/zun.2016-07-05-03.00.txt04:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/zun/2016/zun.2016-07-05-03.00.log.html04:00
*** shubhams has left #openstack-meeting04:01
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC04:02
*** numans has quit IRC04:03
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:05
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:06
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting04:06
*** JRobinson__afk is now known as JRobinson__04:06
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting04:06
*** hongbin has quit IRC04:08
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting04:10
*** Daisy has quit IRC04:11
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC04:13
*** haiwei_ has quit IRC04:13
*** sudipto has quit IRC04:13
*** shashank_hegde has quit IRC04:14
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:15
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:15
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting04:18
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC04:18
*** Vivek_ has quit IRC04:21
*** aeng has quit IRC04:22
*** Daisy has quit IRC04:23
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting04:24
*** aeng has joined #openstack-meeting04:24
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC04:24
*** klkumar has quit IRC04:25
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:25
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:26
*** zhurong has quit IRC04:26
*** M00nr41n has quit IRC04:28
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting04:28
*** Daisy has quit IRC04:29
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting04:30
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:30
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC04:32
*** adisky has joined #openstack-meeting04:32
*** Dinesh_Bhor has quit IRC04:34
*** Daisy has quit IRC04:35
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting04:35
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:36
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:36
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC04:40
*** Daisy has quit IRC04:40
*** irenab has quit IRC04:42
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting04:43
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting04:45
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting04:45
*** mkrai has quit IRC04:46
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:46
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting04:46
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:47
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC04:47
*** amotoki has quit IRC04:48
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting04:49
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC04:49
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC04:51
*** bobh has quit IRC04:53
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC04:56
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting04:57
*** mkrai has joined #openstack-meeting04:58
*** hoangcx has quit IRC04:58
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting05:00
*** Daisy_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:02
*** zhurong has joined #openstack-meeting05:03
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC05:05
*** Daisy has quit IRC05:05
*** dmacpher has joined #openstack-meeting05:05
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:06
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:07
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting05:07
*** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting05:07
*** claudiub has joined #openstack-meeting05:07
*** Galitz has joined #openstack-meeting05:08
*** namrata has quit IRC05:09
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting05:10
*** flwang1 has quit IRC05:11
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:17
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:17
*** shashank_hegde has joined #openstack-meeting05:18
*** anilvenkata has joined #openstack-meeting05:22
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC05:23
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting05:24
*** M00nr41n has joined #openstack-meeting05:24
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting05:25
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:27
*** hoangcx has joined #openstack-meeting05:27
*** Poornima has joined #openstack-meeting05:27
*** ramineni has joined #openstack-meeting05:27
*** numans has joined #openstack-meeting05:27
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:28
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting05:28
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting05:28
*** irenab has joined #openstack-meeting05:28
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting05:29
*** hoangcx has left #openstack-meeting05:32
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC05:32
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting05:32
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC05:32
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting05:34
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting05:36
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:37
*** e0ne has quit IRC05:37
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:38
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:38
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting05:39
*** coolsvap has quit IRC05:42
*** namrata has joined #openstack-meeting05:42
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting05:44
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC05:45
*** katomo has joined #openstack-meeting05:45
*** egallen has quit IRC05:46
*** epico has quit IRC05:47
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:47
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:48
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC05:48
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting05:48
*** epico has joined #openstack-meeting05:52
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting05:52
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting05:52
*** manikanta_tadi has joined #openstack-meeting05:53
*** xiaohhui has joined #openstack-meeting05:53
*** asettle has quit IRC05:54
*** davechen has joined #openstack-meeting05:54
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC05:55
*** AJaeger has joined #openstack-meeting05:55
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC05:58
*** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting05:58
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting05:58
loquacitieshi! anyone here for the install guide meeting?06:00
ildikovo/06:00
loquacities#startmeeting docinstallteam06:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 06:00:29 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is loquacities. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.06:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.06:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: docinstallteam)"06:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'docinstallteam'06:00
loquacitieshi ildikov :)06:00
ildikovhi :)06:00
loquacitiesanyone else here?06:01
AJaegermorning06:01
loquacitieshi AJaeger06:01
katomohi loquacities06:01
loquacitieshi katomo06:01
strigaziSpyros Trigazis (magnum)06:01
loquacitieshi strigazi06:01
loquacitiesthat looks like a quorum to me, let's get started :)06:01
*** Ravikiran_K has joined #openstack-meeting06:01
loquacities#topic Draft index page06:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Draft index page (Meeting topic: docinstallteam)"06:01
*** rcernin has quit IRC06:01
loquacities#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/33170406:01
loquacitiesthis is the current patch for the draft index page06:02
*** amotoki has quit IRC06:02
AJaegerthanks for that page. It's something to get us started but far too long. You miss the different OSes.06:02
loquacitiesyou can see the built pages here: http://docs-draft.openstack.org/04/331704/4/check/gate-openstack-manuals-tox-doc-publish-checkbuild/9c63720//publish-docs/www/draft/draft-index.html and here http://docs-draft.openstack.org/04/331704/4/check/gate-openstack-manuals-tox-doc-publish-checkbuild/9c63720//publish-docs/www/project-install-guide/draft/index.html06:02
loquacitiesAJaeger: yes, i agree06:02
loquacitiesbut i also think we need to merge *something*06:02
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting06:02
loquacitieswe can't bikeshed on this forever06:02
AJaegerloquacities: I'm fine with merging now - and refine then.06:03
AJaegerBut if we merge now, let's put an item on our todo list: Rework index page ;)06:03
loquacitiesyes, i think that's a good plan06:03
katomo+106:03
loquacitiesall those in favour say aye?06:03
strigazi+106:04
loquacities#action AJaeger to merge #33170406:04
ildikov+1 to get progress and refine later :)06:04
loquacities#action loquacities to add 'refine index page' to to do list06:04
loquacitiesawesome, thanks everyone06:04
loquacities#topic Use of the ``only`` directive06:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Use of the ``only`` directive (Meeting topic: docinstallteam)"06:04
loquacities#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2016-July/008804.html06:05
loquacitiesi'd like to get some opinions on this06:05
loquacitiesi can see how restricting use of only can make life a lot easier for us06:05
* AJaeger said everything in his emails - or should I state again here?06:05
loquacitiesAJaeger: hopefully everyone has read the thread06:06
ildikovI've worked on the Ceilometer content and we have quite many files and I didn't even add Debian as we didn't have instructions for that in many places06:06
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting06:06
loquacitieswhat i'm mainly concerned about is how many projects will want to use only, and will us saying not to use it make life difficult for everyone?06:06
ildikovso for some projects we might think about proposing structure as well as if someone just adds all the files that will be a mess06:06
loquacitiesildikov: proposing a structure that uses only?06:07
ildikovloquacities: no a structure if we remove only06:07
loquacitiesoh, right06:07
strigaziildikov: can share some patches to see the files?06:07
ildikovloquacities: I mean how to organize the files in a digestible way kind of thing06:07
loquacitiesright, that makes sense06:07
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:08
loquacitiesisn't that what the cookiecutter already does, though?06:08
AJaegerthe coookiecutter template does not use only - so that's one structure to use.06:08
ildikov#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/330051/06:08
ildikovsorry, it wasn't handy, the Ceilo files ^06:08
loquacitiesis the cookiecutter structure not sufficient?06:08
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting06:08
strigaziildikov: thx06:09
ildikovloquacities: I'll check the latest06:09
loquacitiesok06:10
*** oferby has joined #openstack-meeting06:10
loquacitiesso, is the sensible path forward to say no ``only`` for now, and let's review in six months?06:10
ildikovloquacities: my only concern is that it's not always easy to get people update the docs and if they don't feel comfortable as the structure is not straight forward then it's not really a win either06:10
loquacitiesjust to simplify things for us at least in the short term while we find our feet06:10
loquacitiesildikov: is the cookiecutter structure not appropriate then?06:11
loquacitiesdo we need to work on that some more?06:11
ildikovloquacities: from build job, etc. perspective it's fine to remove "only"06:11
loquacitiesright06:11
ildikovloquacities: I'll check and come back if I have any better idea06:11
loquacitiesok06:11
loquacitiesdo we have a consensus on cutting out only use for now, and reviewing later?06:12
strigaziildikov: if you put the files in dirs? would that help? eg one dir for install-nove06:12
ildikovloquacities: let's leave it how it is now and iterate if I or anyone else has suggestions as I'm not even sure it's good enough how the Ceilometer structure looks right now06:12
AJaegerildikov: Yes, I agree with the straightforward structure. I fear with using only it gets more complex. loquacities, could you review the current structure and see whether we can make it better, please?06:12
strigaziloquacities: +106:12
loquacities#action ildikov to review cookiecutter structure06:12
ildikovstrigazi: I have folders already06:12
loquacities#action loquacities to review cookiecutter structure06:12
loquacitiessure :)06:12
strigaziildikov: oh yes, sorry06:13
loquacitiesmaybe we should get a good IA involved here too. darrenc maybe, if he has time?06:13
ildikovAJaeger: yeah, I think what we can do here is to choose one option and get the best out of it06:13
loquacitiesok, so i think we have a plan of action here, anyway06:13
loquacitiesi'll update the ML with a 'don't use only for now' message, and add it to my newsletter this week06:13
loquacitiesand we can review the cookiecutter to see if we can improve it06:14
ildikovAJaeger: mixing up the two looks messy, I think we all agree on that06:14
loquacities+106:14
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC06:14
katomo+106:14
loquacities#action loquacities to message about not using only06:14
AJaegerildikov: I don't want to mix them up, no worries.06:14
ildikovAJaeger: I just raise my concerns here as I don't want to be the only person updating the Ceilo install guide for the rest of my life as others don't get the structure, but I might just overcomplicate it :)06:15
loquacitiesildikov: you need an apprentice!06:16
ildikovAJaeger: coolio :)06:16
AJaegerildikov: that's why I'm happy to hear that others will take a look at your change and cookiecutter - we need to keep it simple.06:16
ildikovloquacities: good idea06:16
loquacitiesok, final thing on the agenda ...06:17
loquacities#topic work items06:17
*** openstack changes topic to "work items (Meeting topic: docinstallteam)"06:17
loquacities#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/InstallGuideWorkItems06:17
*** tellesnobrega is now known as tellesnobrega_af06:17
loquacitiesi've gone through and updated this, and we're a good way through the list now06:17
ildikovAJaeger: agreed, tnx06:17
loquacitiesAJaeger: what needs to be done on the ops:docs:install-guide tag ?06:18
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:18
*** Daisy_ has quit IRC06:18
AJaegerloquacities: somebody needs to talk with operators or with Tom Fifield directly.06:18
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting06:18
*** feisky has quit IRC06:18
loquacitieswell, thingee has his name up there06:19
loquacitiesmaybe we should reach out to him?06:19
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting06:19
AJaegerloquacities: the operators are in charge of that tag.06:19
loquacitieshrm, ok06:19
AJaegerloquacities: if it's his name, then try him first;)06:19
loquacitiesheh06:19
loquacitiesok, i might send mail, but i'll copy you in because i don't fully understand what needs to happen here06:20
ildikovthey should get together this week I think due to OpenStack Days in that area06:20
loquacitiesi think that and the testing scripts are about all that's left on this list that hasn't been started now06:20
ildikovso if you can reach out to them they might get a chance to discuss it face to face, I mean Mike and Tom06:20
loquacitieswhich is pretty awesome, really06:20
loquacitiesildikov: oh, good plan06:20
*** coolsvap has quit IRC06:20
loquacitiesi'll send that email today before i finish, then06:20
*** oshidoshi has joined #openstack-meeting06:20
ildikovcoolio :)06:21
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting06:22
strigaziloquacities: about the launch an instance section06:22
loquacitiesyes?06:22
strigaziI sent an email the other day, should I push in openstack manuals06:22
strigazior we are going to move that section as well?06:22
strigazito project repos06:23
loquacitiesi think i missed this email, sorry06:23
AJaegerstrigazi: Why do you want to move it?06:23
loquacitiesah, found it06:23
loquacitiesit got lost in all the only emails ;)06:23
AJaegerIt fits IMHO perfectly into what we have...06:23
*** mkrai has quit IRC06:24
strigaziok06:24
AJaegerFor magnum, I guess, you'll want to have a sepcific "launch a container" section.06:24
loquacitiesthat would be considered core services, i think ...06:24
strigaziit's launch a COE :)06:24
*** coolsvap has quit IRC06:25
*** hichihara has joined #openstack-meeting06:25
*** hogepodge has quit IRC06:25
strigaziloquacities: so what I should do?06:25
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting06:25
strigazipush in our repo?06:26
loquacitiesi think AJaeger is right to leave it where it is06:26
loquacitiesin our repo06:26
AJaegerstrigazi: push it in your repo - and I suggest that we revisit this in a couple of weeks again and see how it looks like.06:26
strigaziunder install-guide?06:27
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting06:27
AJaegerIMHO we need the complete guide first up and then might need to consolidate06:27
loquacitiesright06:27
AJaegerstrigazi: yes, under install-guide06:27
strigaziAJaeger: makes sense06:27
loquacitiesany other businesS?06:27
ildikovwe discussed one more topic in the mails last week06:28
ildikovwhich was how to organize docs in the project repos06:28
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:28
ildikovwe agreed on having the install-guide folder and the doc folder co-existing06:28
loquacitiesoh, right, yeah06:28
loquacitiesyeah, moving everything under /doc is appealing, but i think it's a huge scale change06:29
ildikovI think it would be good to revisit this later as well and try to have one doc folder06:29
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting06:29
ildikovwe can have this as a cross-project topic06:29
loquacitiesprobably sensible06:29
katomoyeah06:29
ildikovbut as I said in the mails it's not that urgent, although I think it would be beneficial long term06:30
*** tellesnobrega_af is now known as tellesnobrega06:30
AJaegerildikov: My assumption is that we have several books - developer guides, install-guide, api-ref.06:30
AJaegerEach of them gets published to a different place.06:30
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting06:30
katomoildikov: +106:30
AJaegerSo, we cannot have a single doc/source directory to publish all of them with one sphinx invocation.06:30
AJaegerdoc/source for developer docs;doc/install-guide;doc/api-ref; looks very strange to me.06:31
ildikovAJaeger: I guess we can have a doc/<name-of-teh-guide>/source or something similar structure06:31
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting06:31
AJaegerAnd I don't want to rename developer docs - accross all OPenStack repos...06:31
loquacitiesyeah, that's my main concern too06:31
AJaegerSo, this would work: doc/developer for developer docs;doc/install-guide;doc/api-ref - but that's a lot rename from doc/source to doc/developer/source06:31
ildikovAJaeger: openstack manuals is using mostly sphinx as well and has a good structure06:32
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting06:32
AJaegerildikov: but has not doc/source06:32
katomohmmm...06:32
ildikovAJaeger: I understand your concern, but it's not a big restructuring, although in lots of repos06:32
ildikovif we consider moving more content to project trees, then I still think one folder is more reasonable06:33
AJaegerildikov: If you get it done, I'm happy to review - but this is task that I don't want to push ;)06:33
ildikovbut we don't necessarily have to solve this today06:33
loquacitiesheh06:33
AJaegerildikov: yes, it's only a move - if we change anything we need to see how it integrates with CI scripts and how to have consistency accross repos06:33
ildikovAJaeger: I'm happy to at least try and if we get too much push back then we can be relaxed that it's a community decision :)06:34
loquacities+106:34
loquacitiesi think this needs to be brought up in a cross-project meeting06:34
AJaegerildikov: go for it ;) But let's not block us on this, please (and I don't see us blocking right now)06:34
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC06:34
ildikovAJaeger: of course, my plan wasn't to secretly ruin the whole docs build ;)06:34
loquacitiesalthough i never seem to get to those any more ...06:34
ildikovAJaeger: so +1 on that06:34
loquacitieslol06:35
loquacities#topic open discussion06:35
*** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: docinstallteam)"06:35
loquacitiesanything else?06:35
ildikovAJaeger: again, I think it's more a long term task, so I'll try to put some plan together and we can discuss it on the next Summit also as a cross-project topic maybe06:36
AJaegerloquacities: which chapters still need moving to project repos?06:36
loquacitiesswift, and manila, i think?06:36
loquacitieshttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/330070/06:36
loquacitieshttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/317152/06:36
*** yuval has joined #openstack-meeting06:36
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting06:36
*** hdaniel has joined #openstack-meeting06:37
strigaziYes, that is all06:37
AJaegermanila uses only AFAIU.06:37
loquacitiesah06:38
katomoToT06:38
*** phil_ has joined #openstack-meeting06:38
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:39
*** phil_ is now known as Guest9132406:39
AJaegerhope that those two will be merged for our next meeting. I suggest to help reviewing - and ping for core reviews once we're happy.06:39
loquacitiesah, yes, it does06:39
loquacitiesdo we need to discuss this with goutham?06:39
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting06:39
*** fzdarsky_ has quit IRC06:40
loquacitieswill it be a problem having only in there?06:40
*** emagana has quit IRC06:40
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC06:41
katomobecome complex...06:42
AJaegerloquacities: do you want to open the discussion from earlier again? I thought we had consensus to not use only for now - and revisit later06:42
loquacitieswell, that's my point06:42
loquacitieswe have consensus to not use it, so why should we merge the manila patch?06:43
loquacitiesshouldn't we be asking goutham to remove it?06:43
AJaegerloquacities: Oh, I misunderstood you -yes, we should ask him.06:43
katomoah06:43
*** lpetrut has quit IRC06:43
*** chenpengzi has left #openstack-meeting06:44
loquacitiesok, i'll reach out to him06:44
*** nkrinner_afk is now known as nkrinner06:44
*** egallen has joined #openstack-meeting06:44
AJaegerthanks06:44
katomothanks06:44
loquacitiesnp06:44
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting06:44
loquacities#action loquacities to chat to goutham about use of only in manila patch 31715206:44
loquacitiesok, anything else?06:44
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting06:44
loquacitiesor can i give you 16 minutes back06:44
loquacities?06:45
AJaeger15 mins, please ;)06:45
katomonothing from me.06:45
loquacitiesyay!06:45
ildikov:)06:45
loquacitiesthanks for attending everyone :)06:45
katomowe get 15 mins !06:45
strigazibye06:45
*** sridharg has joined #openstack-meeting06:45
loquacities#endmeeting06:45
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"06:45
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 06:45:32 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)06:45
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docinstallteam/2016/docinstallteam.2016-07-05-06.00.html06:45
katomothanks, all06:45
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docinstallteam/2016/docinstallteam.2016-07-05-06.00.txt06:45
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/docinstallteam/2016/docinstallteam.2016-07-05-06.00.log.html06:45
ildikovthanks!06:45
AJaegerhave a great day/night etc everybody06:45
*** mikelk has joined #openstack-meeting06:45
*** katomo has quit IRC06:45
*** AJaeger has left #openstack-meeting06:46
*** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting06:46
*** andreas_s has joined #openstack-meeting06:47
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC06:49
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:49
*** ramineni has left #openstack-meeting06:49
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting06:49
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting06:50
*** lpetrut has quit IRC06:50
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC06:52
*** adiantum has quit IRC06:52
*** JRobinson__ has quit IRC06:53
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting06:55
*** bobh has quit IRC06:55
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting06:56
*** hdaniel has quit IRC06:57
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC06:59
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting07:00
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC07:00
*** amotoki has quit IRC07:01
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:01
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting07:04
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC07:05
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting07:07
*** tesseract- has joined #openstack-meeting07:09
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC07:09
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:10
*** RuiChen has joined #openstack-meeting07:13
*** ujuc has quit IRC07:15
*** lpetrut has quit IRC07:16
*** ujuc has joined #openstack-meeting07:16
*** nick-ma has quit IRC07:17
*** kevinbenton has quit IRC07:17
*** iceyao_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:17
*** ItSANgo has quit IRC07:17
*** Yingxin has quit IRC07:17
*** gongysh has quit IRC07:17
*** iceyao has quit IRC07:17
*** rhagarty__ has quit IRC07:17
*** nick-ma has joined #openstack-meeting07:17
*** ItSANgo has joined #openstack-meeting07:17
*** rhagarty__ has joined #openstack-meeting07:18
*** chenpengzi has joined #openstack-meeting07:18
*** nibalizer has quit IRC07:18
*** mikelk has quit IRC07:19
*** clenimar has quit IRC07:19
*** lennyb has quit IRC07:19
*** beisner has quit IRC07:19
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC07:19
*** mkrai has joined #openstack-meeting07:19
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC07:20
*** mikelk has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** clenimar has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** lennyb has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** kevinbenton has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** Yingxin has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** beisner has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:20
*** amotoki has quit IRC07:21
*** epico has quit IRC07:24
*** hdaniel has joined #openstack-meeting07:24
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC07:26
*** nibalizer has joined #openstack-meeting07:26
*** epico has joined #openstack-meeting07:28
*** namnh has joined #openstack-meeting07:29
*** namnh has quit IRC07:29
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting07:30
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC07:30
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:31
*** jlanoux has joined #openstack-meeting07:31
*** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting07:32
*** zhonghua-lee has joined #openstack-meeting07:34
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting07:36
*** shashank_hegde has quit IRC07:39
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC07:40
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:41
*** dmacpher has quit IRC07:42
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting07:46
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting07:47
*** zeih has quit IRC07:49
*** dmacpher has joined #openstack-meeting07:50
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC07:50
*** rbartal has joined #openstack-meeting07:50
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting07:51
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC07:52
*** hashar has joined #openstack-meeting07:53
*** mrmartin has quit IRC07:53
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting07:54
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting07:55
*** dmacpher has quit IRC07:55
*** amotoki has quit IRC07:57
*** hdaniel has quit IRC07:57
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC07:59
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:01
*** zeih has quit IRC08:01
*** rubasov has left #openstack-meeting08:01
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:01
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting08:03
*** toscalix has joined #openstack-meeting08:03
*** SerenaFeng has joined #openstack-meeting08:03
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting08:04
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC08:04
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC08:08
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:11
*** zhurong has quit IRC08:11
*** ygbo has joined #openstack-meeting08:12
*** zhonghua-lee has quit IRC08:14
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:14
*** davechen has left #openstack-meeting08:15
*** zhonghua-lee has joined #openstack-meeting08:15
*** flwang1 has joined #openstack-meeting08:16
*** shu-mutou has quit IRC08:16
*** mickeys has joined #openstack-meeting08:16
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting08:19
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:21
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:22
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting08:22
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting08:31
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:31
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:32
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:33
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC08:37
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC08:37
*** acoles_ is now known as acoles08:38
*** yinwei_computer has joined #openstack-meeting08:39
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:42
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:42
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting08:43
*** Daisy has quit IRC08:44
*** electrofelix has joined #openstack-meeting08:44
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting08:44
*** claudiub|2 has joined #openstack-meeting08:45
*** egallen has quit IRC08:48
*** claudiub has quit IRC08:48
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting08:48
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC08:48
*** fzdarsky_ has joined #openstack-meeting08:49
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting08:49
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC08:52
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC08:54
*** mickeys has quit IRC08:56
*** bobh has quit IRC08:56
*** mickeys has joined #openstack-meeting08:57
*** emagana has quit IRC08:57
*** nisha has joined #openstack-meeting08:57
*** amotoki has quit IRC08:58
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting08:58
saggi#startmeeting smaug09:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 09:00:14 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is saggi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.09:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.09:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: smaug)"09:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'smaug'09:00
saggihi everyone09:00
yuvalhello09:00
yinwei_computerhi09:00
*** zhangshuai has joined #openstack-meeting09:01
*** zhangshuai has left #openstack-meeting09:01
saggiis it just the 3 of us?09:01
*** mickeys has quit IRC09:01
yinwei_computernot sure09:01
oshidoshio/09:01
chenpengzihi09:01
yuvalchenying, chenzeng and xiangxinyong will not arrive09:01
*** zhangshuai has joined #openstack-meeting09:01
zhonghua-leehi09:02
*** smile-luobin has joined #openstack-meeting09:02
*** hichihara has quit IRC09:02
saggiOK, let's start. They all can look at the logs later.09:02
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:02
saggi#topic Core Nomination09:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Core Nomination (Meeting topic: smaug)"09:02
smile-luobinhi09:02
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:03
saggiI would like to nominate yinwei_computer as a core team member for Smaug. She has been one of the leading minds on the project from the start and I think she deserves it.09:03
oshidoshi+109:04
yuval+109:04
smile-luobin+109:04
zhonghua-leethough i am not core, +109:04
chenpengzi+109:04
saggiI think that's unanimous.09:04
yinwei_computerthanks saggi09:04
saggiSo from here on forth, yinwei by my ptl powers I dub thee a core member.09:05
yuvalCongratulations yinwei!09:05
saggicongratulations09:05
yinwei_computerthanks guys!09:06
zhonghua-leecongratulations09:06
zhangshuaicongratulations09:06
smile-luobincongratulations09:06
yinwei_computerit's my pleasure and honor to work with you guys.  Let's do it better!09:06
*** hoangcx has joined #openstack-meeting09:07
*** fzdarsky_ has quit IRC09:07
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting09:07
saggi#topic enhance restore object with status and resource info09:07
*** openstack changes topic to "enhance restore object with status and resource info (Meeting topic: smaug)"09:07
*** hoangcx has left #openstack-meeting09:07
saggiI did not put this on the docket, so whoever wanted this discussed please speak.09:08
yinwei_computerI put it09:08
yinwei_computerso the background is we want to support concurrent restore on the same checkpoint09:09
yinwei_computerwhich introduces to maintain restore status on restore object09:09
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC09:09
yinwei_computerBut one issue smile-luobin has raised is that, since cinder doesn't support multiple restore on the same backup09:09
yinwei_computeris it necessary for smaug to support that feature?09:10
saggiCan we queue it on our end?09:10
saggiAlso, it might not matter when restoring since cinder might not be involved.09:10
*** adisky has quit IRC09:10
yinwei_computerok. so the answer is smaug will support concurrent restore on one checkpoint, right?09:11
saggiyes09:11
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC09:11
*** tochi has quit IRC09:12
yuvalbtw, since you can't backup a volume concurrently, that means that protecting the same resources twice in the same time has this issue as well09:12
yinwei_computerIf this is the requirement, then we need maintain session of restore, same as checkpoint09:12
saggiWe might get less concurrent if we block on cinder but if\when they fix it we will be ready.09:12
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:12
saggikeystone session?09:12
*** fzdarsky has joined #openstack-meeting09:13
yinwei_computeryuval, do you mean we backup one volume in two plans at the same time?09:13
yuvalyinwei_computer: yes09:13
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:13
yinwei_computersaggi, sorry, when I said session here I mean lease09:13
yinwei_computeryuval, yes, the same issue.09:13
saggiHow hard is it to internally reuse to the backup.09:14
saggi?09:14
*** namrata has quit IRC09:14
saggiOr is it too complex for now09:15
yinwei_computerreuse existed lease mechanism, you mean?09:15
yuvalsaggi: and what happens upon delete?09:15
saggirefcount09:15
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting09:15
yinwei_computeryes, ref count09:15
yuvalsaggi: maintained where?09:15
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting09:16
saggiyuval: has to be on the backup md09:16
*** zhongjun_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:16
yinwei_computeranother index09:16
yinwei_computerref from restore to checkpoint09:17
*** sshnaidm has quit IRC09:17
saggiI'm less worried about the refcounting and more about internal synchronization09:18
yinwei_computerwhat do you think to assign smile-luobin to update current lease rst to show the solution? so people can check the details on review board?09:18
yinwei_computeryou mean sync from protection service to api service?09:18
saggiyinwei_computer: Sure, it should be similar to checkpoint. Since it's just there to protect the restore object.09:18
saggisync protection service with itself09:19
yuvalUsing leases for cinder backup sounds like a solution, but this is in the hands of the protection plugin09:19
yuvalmaybe we can provide protection plugins with a general lease api09:19
yinwei_computercould you tell more about the sync? sync what, from whom, to whom?09:19
saggiWhy do we need leases for cinder? don't they tell us if we double act?09:19
yinwei_computerlease is not a cinder specific solution09:20
yuvalsaggi: I figured that was yinwei_computer meant09:20
saggiI would prefer not having a resource specific lease09:20
saggilease for checkpoint and restore make sense09:20
yinwei_computerlease is a general solution which is maintained by protection service itself09:20
yinwei_computerfrom protection to bank server09:21
saggiI think we are having multiple discussions at once09:21
yinwei_computersaggi, I think we're on the same page09:21
saggi**cinder not allowing multiple actions on the same resource09:21
saggiLet's say that we just wait until cinder allows us to perform the action. I assume if you try while another operation is in progress you get a special error.09:22
yuvallease for checkpoint and restore - how does it cope with different providers and the same resources?09:22
saggiyuval: in a minute09:22
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:23
saggiyinwei_computer: would that solve cinder issue?09:23
yinwei_computeryes09:23
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:23
yinwei_computerI got your idea, we just queue inside protection service to avoid parallel failure on cinder09:23
saggiyinwei_computer: exactly09:24
*** asettle has quit IRC09:24
yinwei_computerthe lease is to check idle restoring status restore objects09:24
saggiBut it needs to also work if multiple protection services on different hosts act09:24
saggi**restore status09:24
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting09:24
*** lcastell has quit IRC09:24
saggifor restore adding a lease seems like the right solution to check for stale restores09:25
yinwei_computerhmm, sounds like we need a test before queueing09:25
saggiyinwei_computer: yes, it needs to keep checking. Unless there is a way to get a notification from cinder09:26
*** lcastell has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
yinwei_computeragree09:27
saggias for restore. The lease is just for liveness or do we want to support continuing a failed restore?09:27
*** sambetts|afk is now known as sambetts09:27
saggiI think for a start we just use it for liveness unless there is some Heat magic that can solve this for us easily.09:28
yinwei_computerliveness for now09:28
*** beekhof_mb has joined #openstack-meeting09:28
yinwei_computerunless we first have task flow to work in a persisted storage, we are not able to support continuing failed restore/protect09:29
saggiOK09:29
yinwei_computerwe depend on the task flow to maintain status09:29
saggiBTW errors should also be reported on the restore object. Similar to checkpoint.09:29
yinwei_computeryes09:29
*** asettle has quit IRC09:30
yinwei_computerok. Let's check the details from later rst commit for review.09:30
yinwei_computerif there's no more questions about this issue09:30
saggiI'm good09:30
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC09:30
*** jlanoux has quit IRC09:30
yinwei_computerothers?09:30
yinwei_computerI think we can switch to next topic09:31
saggi#topic yuval is going to China09:31
*** openstack changes topic to "yuval is going to China (Meeting topic: smaug)"09:31
saggi$topic09:32
*** jlanoux has joined #openstack-meeting09:32
yinwei_computerwow, welcome!09:32
saggiis everyone properly excited09:32
yuval^^09:32
yinwei_computerBeijing and chengdu are on you agenda?09:32
yuvalyes, both09:33
saggiyuval: Could you say what you are planning on doing for the record?09:33
yuvalOfcourse09:33
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:33
yuvalI'll be attending OpenStack Days China in Beijing, with zhonghua-lee09:33
yuvalHopefully be part of his talk09:33
yuvalLater I'll arrive to Chengdu09:34
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:34
zhonghua-leesorry, I left for a while...09:34
zhonghua-leeyuval: welcome09:34
yinwei_computeryou will have a speech in beijing, yuval?09:34
zhonghua-leewish you have a nice journey09:34
yuvalyinwei_computer: zhonghua-lee is speaking, and hopefully I'll deliver a short talk about Smaug09:35
yuvalMaybe zhonghua-lee can elaborate09:35
*** nisha has quit IRC09:35
zhonghua-leeI will try my best09:36
*** nisha has joined #openstack-meeting09:36
yinwei_computerhave you two guys got a rehearsal?09:37
zhonghua-leenot yet09:37
yinwei_computerzhonghua-lee, what are you going to talk? an introduction or cooperation?09:37
zhonghua-leeI am writing the presentation09:37
zhonghua-leenow09:37
yinwei_computerok09:38
zhonghua-leewe plan to show some demo about DP09:38
zhonghua-leeintroduce all the related projects09:38
yinwei_computeroh, yes09:38
zhonghua-leee.g. Smaug, Cinder...09:39
*** bogdando has quit IRC09:39
yinwei_computerare you going to demo cross regions DP?09:39
zhonghua-leethat's in our plan09:39
zhonghua-leebut we met some problem right now, I am not sure if it will be finished before the summit starting09:40
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting09:41
yinwei_computerlet's check issues together09:41
*** hoangcx has joined #openstack-meeting09:42
*** bogdando has joined #openstack-meeting09:42
zhonghua-leeyinwei_computer: thank you09:42
saggiI hope you are going to show Yuval a good time09:42
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting09:43
saggi#topic open discussion09:43
*** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: smaug)"09:43
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:43
*** hoangcx has left #openstack-meeting09:43
zhonghua-leesaggi:  :)09:43
saggiAnything else anyone want to talk about?09:43
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:44
yinwei_computerI used to talk with chenying, about supporting cross region/openstack DP09:44
yinwei_computerwhat's the plan about this feature?09:44
saggiIt should be implicitly supported in the right configuration.09:45
zhonghua-leedo we plan to discuss about the RoadMap?09:45
yinwei_computercross regions, cinder/nova/glance.. don't share db09:45
saggiFor nova and glance it shouldn't matter.09:46
yinwei_computerso there will issues to protect in region1 but restore to region209:46
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC09:47
saggiFor cinder jgriffith offered to make sure that we know if we can perform a cinder manage on a target. This is required for restore on a different site.09:47
saggiAs in make it something that a volume type will report09:47
yinwei_computercross region, keystone is shared09:48
*** arif-ali has quit IRC09:48
yinwei_computerso it's not a problem to manage cinder09:48
saggicinder manage is an api call09:48
saggito make a volume managed under cinder09:48
saggiso you copy it to the target and than add all the cinder metadata09:49
yinwei_computerwill it generate a cinder volume for the data backend?09:49
saggiIt's for cases where the data exists on the target but cinder doesn't know about it09:50
yinwei_computerso the procedure of restore is not to call cinder restore, but cinder manage, right?09:50
*** arif-ali has joined #openstack-meeting09:50
saggirestore only works for backups that where made on the same cinder instance09:50
saggiWe need to move the data to the new site and then add the information to cinder09:51
saggithis is what cinder manage is fore09:51
yinwei_computerbut from which way we notify the backend to restore from backup data to a volume?09:51
saggiThan we should be able to restore09:51
yuvalI'm not sure managing a volume also 'imports' its backup09:52
saggiIt'09:53
yinwei_computersay, we have a backend like ceph, which backup rbd from site1 to site2.  The backup data is in a snapshot diff format.  We need first ask the backend to restore snapdiff to a rbd image.  Then we call cinder manage to map a cinder volume to the backend:ceph rbd image.09:53
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting09:53
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC09:53
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting09:54
yinwei_computeranother way beyond 'manage', as yuval told is 'import' backup.09:54
saggiCinder manage is a way to set up the MD for data that is already on the target09:54
saggiimport is for data that isn't on the target09:54
yinwei_computerthen we can restore the imported backup to a volume, where the backend will be notified in this way.09:54
*** iceyao_ has quit IRC09:55
yinwei_computerimport backup, i mean09:55
saggiFor volumes on swift import should work09:55
saggifor replicated volume we will need to use manage09:55
saggiSince they are already on the target09:55
*** iyamahat has joined #openstack-meeting09:56
yinwei_computerat least there should be a link to know the volume backend id (swift object), and if it is available (swift replication)09:56
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting09:56
*** fzdarsky is now known as fzdarsky|lunch09:56
saggiWe're almost out of time. yinwei_computer could you write a blueprint so we could start discussing this on gerrit?09:57
yinwei_computerthis link is missing if we use manage procedure: we need a link to check/restore the data of the volume on the target backend09:57
yinwei_computernp09:57
yinwei_computersure09:57
*** bobh has quit IRC09:57
saggiOK Thanks everybody09:59
saggi#endmeeting09:59
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"09:59
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 09:59:05 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)09:59
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/smaug/2016/smaug.2016-07-05-09.00.html09:59
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/smaug/2016/smaug.2016-07-05-09.00.txt09:59
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/smaug/2016/smaug.2016-07-05-09.00.log.html09:59
*** iceyao has joined #openstack-meeting10:00
*** fzdarsky|lunch has quit IRC10:01
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:04
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:04
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting10:08
*** SerenaFeng has quit IRC10:08
*** Ravikiran_K has quit IRC10:10
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC10:12
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting10:12
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:14
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:15
*** lcastell has quit IRC10:15
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC10:16
*** lcastell has joined #openstack-meeting10:18
*** yinwei_computer has quit IRC10:19
*** beekhof_mb has quit IRC10:20
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:21
*** neiljerram has quit IRC10:21
*** sshnaidm has joined #openstack-meeting10:22
*** yanyanhu has quit IRC10:22
*** iyamahat has quit IRC10:22
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:24
*** reedip has quit IRC10:25
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:25
*** khushbu_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:25
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC10:25
*** beekhof_mb has joined #openstack-meeting10:26
*** neiljerram has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting10:30
*** ntpttr has quit IRC10:30
*** ntpttr has joined #openstack-meeting10:31
*** Daisy has quit IRC10:33
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting10:33
*** zeih has quit IRC10:34
*** iceyao has quit IRC10:34
*** sarob has quit IRC10:34
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:34
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:35
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting10:36
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting10:36
*** reedip has joined #openstack-meeting10:37
*** erlon has joined #openstack-meeting10:37
*** Daisy has quit IRC10:38
*** dims has joined #openstack-meeting10:38
*** kaminohana has joined #openstack-meeting10:38
*** rossella_s has quit IRC10:39
*** khushbu_ has quit IRC10:39
*** rossella_s has joined #openstack-meeting10:40
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC10:41
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting10:43
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:45
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:45
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting10:50
*** rodrigods has quit IRC10:51
*** rodrigods has joined #openstack-meeting10:51
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting10:54
*** krtaylor has quit IRC10:55
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC10:55
*** jlanoux has quit IRC10:57
*** jlanoux has joined #openstack-meeting10:58
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting10:58
*** bobh has quit IRC10:58
*** beekhof_mb is now known as beekhof-ng10:59
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC11:01
*** epico has quit IRC11:03
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting11:04
*** hoangcx has joined #openstack-meeting11:04
*** beekhof is now known as beekhof-ng-v211:04
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:05
*** salv-orl_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:05
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:08
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting11:09
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC11:10
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC11:13
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:15
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:15
*** cdelatte has joined #openstack-meeting11:17
*** acabot has quit IRC11:17
*** piet has quit IRC11:18
*** asettle has quit IRC11:20
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting11:21
*** zeih has quit IRC11:23
*** weshay has joined #openstack-meeting11:25
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:26
*** asettle has quit IRC11:26
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:26
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC11:27
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting11:27
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC11:28
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting11:30
*** rbowen has joined #openstack-meeting11:31
*** zeih has quit IRC11:32
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC11:35
*** manikanta_tadi has quit IRC11:35
*** mkrai has quit IRC11:35
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:36
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:36
*** nisha_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:38
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting11:39
*** tpsilva has joined #openstack-meeting11:39
*** nisha has quit IRC11:40
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:46
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting11:47
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:47
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting11:47
*** manikanta_tadi has joined #openstack-meeting11:48
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting11:51
*** rtheis has joined #openstack-meeting11:54
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting11:54
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting11:56
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC11:56
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting11:56
*** nisha_ has quit IRC11:57
*** nisha_ has joined #openstack-meeting11:57
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC11:57
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting11:58
*** zeih has quit IRC12:01
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting12:04
*** beekhof-ng has quit IRC12:06
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:07
*** iceyao has joined #openstack-meeting12:07
*** raildo-afk is now known as raildo12:07
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:07
*** rfolco_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting12:08
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:09
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC12:09
*** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting12:10
*** emagana has quit IRC12:12
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC12:13
*** akuznetsov has quit IRC12:15
*** Akis__ has joined #openstack-meeting12:16
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:17
*** fzdarsky has joined #openstack-meeting12:17
*** speller has joined #openstack-meeting12:17
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:18
*** Akis_ has quit IRC12:19
*** _prad_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:21
*** dneary has joined #openstack-meeting12:23
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting12:25
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:27
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting12:27
*** zeih has quit IRC12:28
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC12:28
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:28
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC12:29
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting12:31
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting12:32
*** lamt has joined #openstack-meeting12:33
*** claudiub has joined #openstack-meeting12:33
*** sarob has quit IRC12:35
*** claudiub|2 has quit IRC12:37
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:37
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:38
*** _prad_ is now known as _\prad12:38
*** _\prad has quit IRC12:38
*** lixinhui_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:38
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting12:41
*** pradk- has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** shuaizhangk has joined #openstack-meeting12:43
*** amotoki has quit IRC12:47
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:48
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:48
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting12:49
*** ItSANgo has quit IRC12:50
*** mrmartin has quit IRC12:52
*** manikanta_tadi has quit IRC12:53
*** elynn has joined #openstack-meeting12:55
*** zhangshuai has quit IRC12:55
*** mdavidson has quit IRC12:55
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting12:55
*** zhangshuai has joined #openstack-meeting12:56
*** yanyanhu has joined #openstack-meeting12:56
*** rubasov has joined #openstack-meeting12:57
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC12:58
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting12:59
*** sarob has quit IRC12:59
*** haiwei_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:00
*** Poornima has quit IRC13:00
yanyanhu#startmeeting senlin13:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 13:00:43 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is yanyanhu. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.13:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.13:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: senlin)"13:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'senlin'13:00
yanyanhuhi13:00
elynnHi!13:00
Qiminghi13:00
haiwei_hi13:01
*** Akis__ has quit IRC13:01
yanyanhuhi :)13:01
yanyanhuQiming, you are here13:01
*** Akis__ has joined #openstack-meeting13:01
Qimingseems so13:01
Qimingwatching13:01
yanyanhu:P13:01
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting13:01
*** ianychoi has quit IRC13:01
yanyanhufree to hold the meeting?13:01
Qimingpls go ahead13:01
yanyanhuok13:01
yanyanhuhttps://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/SenlinAgenda#Weekly_Senlin_.28Clustering.29_meeting13:01
*** zzxwill has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
yanyanhuplz feel free to add items to agenda13:02
*** zzxwill_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
yanyanhu#topic newton workitem13:02
*** openstack changes topic to "newton workitem (Meeting topic: senlin)"13:02
*** gjayavelu has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
*** claudiub has quit IRC13:02
*** jmckind has joined #openstack-meeting13:02
yanyanhuok, lets go through newton workitem first13:02
yanyanhuhttps://etherpad.openstack.org/p/senlin-newton-workitems13:02
yanyanhuno new progress in testing I think13:02
yanyanhubut the functional test migration has been done13:02
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom13:03
*** zzxwill_ has left #openstack-meeting13:03
lixinhui_hi13:03
*** zhangshuai has quit IRC13:03
yanyanhuso will remove this item from etherpad13:03
yanyanhuI guess also no progress in performance test13:03
yanyanhuso lets skip it13:03
yanyanhuhi, lixinhui_13:04
yanyanhunext item is about HA13:04
yanyanhuhi, lixinhui_, so you mentioned the fencing part has been done last week?13:04
lixinhui_yes13:04
lixinhui_manually set up13:04
lixinhui_need to consider how to automatically enable the scenario13:05
* Qiming raises his thumb, both ...13:05
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting13:05
lixinhui_and the bug of nuetron-lbaas...13:05
yanyanhuGreat. Since we have proposed a topic about end-to-end HA solution based on Senlin HA to summit, we may need to finish some basic support to build a PoC for it13:05
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting13:05
lixinhui_still need some time to get review13:05
yanyanhulixinhui_, yes, I saw you have assigned the bug to yourself :)13:06
yanyanhuyes13:06
yanyanhuhi, Qiming, any idea about this work item13:06
yanyanhuor something we need to pay attention13:06
Qimingit is fine13:06
Qimingwe may need a full story13:06
Qimingeven though we still have something missing13:07
yanyanhuyes, full story is very important, not only for a demo13:07
yanyanhuhttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/senlin/+spec/support-health-management-customization13:07
yanyanhuso this etherpad is about HA design13:07
yanyanhuhttps://etherpad.openstack.org/p/senlin-ha-recover13:08
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:08
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting13:08
yanyanhusomething is still missing13:09
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting13:09
yanyanhuespecially about the health policy13:09
Qimingwe can have a basic policy poc before summit13:09
yanyanhuyes13:09
yanyanhuthat's a basic goal I think13:09
yanyanhunot very difficult I guess13:10
Qiminga broader topic may involve mistral13:10
Qimingwhich should be discussed in section 4.113:10
yanyanhuto control the workflow of node recovery?13:10
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC13:10
*** noslzzp has quit IRC13:10
Qimingyes13:11
Qimingthere might be some out-of-band resources that need to be taken care of13:11
yanyanhuI see.13:11
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting13:11
lixinhui_agree13:11
*** irenab has quit IRC13:11
yanyanhuanother item I'm still not clear is about application/service deployed inside VM13:12
yanyanhuwill senlin handle their failure as well?13:12
yanyanhuby watching lbaas member status e.g.13:13
lixinhui_I think so13:13
*** enriquetaso has joined #openstack-meeting13:13
lixinhui_we should provide listening to the event of member status change13:13
yanyanhuit is possible to support app HA partially13:13
lixinhui_if the lbaas service is created by senlin13:14
zzxwillFor all different kinds of applications/services?13:14
Qimingnot an easy job, but we, as always, can do our best for failure detection13:14
lixinhui_difficult for all ... I think13:14
yanyanhusorry, just dropped13:15
haiwei_detect  application's failure?13:15
Qiminganother thought on this -- maybe a thread in parallel --- is to setup guest level Linux HA cluster13:15
zzxwillIs there a layer controlled by senlin which can detect their status?13:15
Qimingsuppose an application has been protected using Linux HA before, migrating them to Senlin cluster should be an easy job13:16
Qimingzzxwill, a generic solution for application failure detection is almost impossible13:16
yanyanhuso maybe we build a full HA story with typical use case and then figure out how senlin support it?13:17
*** galstrom is now known as galstrom_zzz13:17
Qimingyes13:17
zzxwillThanks. lixinhui and Qiming.13:17
yanyanhuif there are some gap, we know what part is missing in Senlin's HA mechanism13:18
Qimingfor example, in some domains, openais has been planted into the application code, so that reliable failure detection becomes a possibility13:18
yanyanhuQiming, yes13:18
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:18
*** Akis_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:19
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting13:19
yanyanhuactually, I think whether senlin can support the fail over of an app also depends on how app expose their user interface13:19
Qimingwe can start with some wireframe diagram13:19
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting13:19
*** zhurong has joined #openstack-meeting13:20
yanyanhuyes. we need more detailed design and complete the proposal which is just a draft now13:20
Qimingbased on such a draft we can identify where it makes sense for senlin to play a role, and where it makes sense to reuse/integrate with existing technology/solutions13:21
yanyanhuagree13:21
yanyanhuto decide our scope13:21
Qimingwe have quite some piece technologies to integrate, to massage ...13:21
yanyanhuand then we can start more concrete work13:21
yanyanhuand decide their priority13:21
yanyanhuyes, actually I just try to add zaqar driver to senlin13:22
yanyanhubut met lots of problem13:22
yanyanhuwill talk about this issue a bit more later13:22
Qimingright, so ... comment on the etherpad would be very helpful: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/senlin-ha-recover13:22
*** Akis__ has quit IRC13:22
Qimingok13:22
*** gjayavelu has quit IRC13:22
yanyanhuQiming, will you be free for a call this week or next week before tuesday?13:23
Qimingyes, I think so13:23
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC13:23
*** esberglu has joined #openstack-meeting13:23
yanyanhugreat, then I will arrange a call for some discussion about this topic13:23
Qimingpls involve everyone who feels interested in this13:24
yanyanhuok, anything else about HA?13:24
yanyanhusure13:24
yanyanhuwill send out the invitation13:24
zzxwillGreat.13:24
Qimingthe listener implementation has some flaws13:24
yanyanhu#action yanyanhu send out invitation about the call for HA topic discussion13:25
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting13:25
yanyanhuok, lets move on13:25
QimingI was seeing some exceptions thrown from oslo.messaging occasionally13:25
Qimingwill dig more into it13:25
yanyanhu#topic profile for docker13:25
*** openstack changes topic to "profile for docker (Meeting topic: senlin)"13:25
*** sheel has quit IRC13:25
yanyanhuhi, haiwei_ , any new progress about it?13:25
haiwei_I have no progress on container jobs, this week13:26
yanyanhubig network latency here...13:26
haiwei_honestly, I am a little confused what to do the next13:26
yanyanhuQiming, great, thanks :)13:26
yanyanhuhaiwei_, yes?13:26
haiwei_the network is not good to me, either13:27
Qimingpour your confusion here, haiwei_13:27
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting13:28
haiwei_I have added container create/delete functions to Senlin, maybe container_list , and after that what should we do?13:28
haiwei_to support storage and network?13:28
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:29
Qimingthink from a user's perspective13:29
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting13:29
*** xyang1 has joined #openstack-meeting13:29
haiwei_or support cluster actions for container first?13:30
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:30
Qimingeither way13:30
yanyanhuThis is really a big topic I think. Maybe we first finish the work we have done as PoC in last summit?13:31
Qimingsupporting cluster actions doesn't sound a great challenge, IIUC13:31
yanyanhuincluding the docker driver/profile and a basic placement policy for it13:31
*** ItSANgo has joined #openstack-meeting13:32
Qiminghowever, if we are running some workloads, we will find that we will need to provision storage/network for some basic services13:32
Qimingright, "scheduling" is another topic to work on13:33
haiwei_I am still concern about the container's host when thinking about cluster actions, because things are different when containers are in one host or different hosts13:34
*** raildo has quit IRC13:34
Qimingthat is not senlin's scope13:34
Qimingwe will just leverage whatever existing technology to provision the network13:34
*** raildo-afk has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
*** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
*** ljxiash has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
*** nisha_ has quit IRC13:35
yanyanhuoh, BTW, in latest docker release, more and more functionality has been integrated into the docker-engine, including the orchestration13:35
*** zhonghua-lee has quit IRC13:35
*** jckasper has joined #openstack-meeting13:35
Qimingthe difference should be masked from users13:35
Qimingbecause ... they don't care13:35
yanyanhuthis is not a bad news I think13:35
*** jckasper has quit IRC13:36
yanyanhuthat means relying on less 3rd service/tools to support container cluster13:36
yanyanhuimo13:36
*** raildo-afk is now known as raildo13:36
*** nisha_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:36
*** jckasper has joined #openstack-meeting13:36
yanyanhus/3rd/3rd part13:37
haiwei_docker will use docker swarm to support container cluster I think13:37
yanyanhuhaiwei_, in latest 1.12, swarm has been the history :)13:37
yanyanhuit is part of docker engine now I think13:37
zzxwillYes, I heard it from your WeChat.13:37
Qimingso ... my general feeling is ... sometimes we are too easy to be brain washed13:37
haiwei_ok, really13:37
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting13:37
lixinhui_I am not a docket kong13:38
yanyanhuhaiwei_, yes, they call it docker orchestration13:38
Qimingto understand the reality, we have to try it out13:38
lixinhui_but feel interested at network part13:38
yanyanhuQiming, yes13:38
lixinhui_will you leverge kuryr for that?13:38
*** yuikotakadamori has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
*** links has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
yanyanhuso my feeling is their are in fast progress13:38
*** Leo_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
Qimingsetup swarm and use it, and see if it works as expected13:39
yanyanhulixinhui_, you mean senlin?13:39
*** zhonghua-lee has joined #openstack-meeting13:39
lixinhui_yes13:39
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:39
lixinhui_yanyanhu13:39
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting13:39
*** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting13:39
lixinhui_orchestration part is very complicated13:39
*** cardeois has joined #openstack-meeting13:39
yanyanhuQiming, announcement is different from reality some times :P13:39
*** hoangcx has quit IRC13:39
Qimingeveryone is moving fast, because this is a brutal, crazy world13:39
*** pnavarro has quit IRC13:39
lixinhui_I am trying to understand the driver part firstly13:39
Qimingsome companies are very good at "generalizing" things13:40
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting13:40
lixinhui_for example13:40
yanyanhulixinhui_, based on my understanding, docker network is still in preliminary mode, compared with SDN support in openstack13:40
lixinhui_deploy a lbaas in container13:40
Qimingbetter test and verify it using your own machine13:40
*** zzxwill__ has joined #openstack-meeting13:40
lixinhui_can senlin automatically fo that?13:40
yanyanhuits overlay network or some 3rd part tools support13:40
*** jckasper has quit IRC13:40
*** hoangcx has joined #openstack-meeting13:41
yanyanhulixinhui_, lb in side container?13:41
yanyanhuor lb for container cluster13:41
*** ravelar159 has joined #openstack-meeting13:42
lixinhui_the the one13:42
lixinhui_the later one13:42
yanyanhuI'm not sure about the former one. for the latter one, it is a basic requirement I guess?13:42
lixinhui_do not know13:43
lixinhui_at least13:43
Qimingyes, will definitely need it13:43
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting13:43
lixinhui_network need to be done13:43
yanyanhuthey need to support it, otherwise, it is useless :P13:43
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting13:43
yanyanhuso we may need more investigation here13:43
*** zeih has quit IRC13:44
yanyanhufor what docker-engine can support now13:44
*** gcb_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:44
yanyanhuand what it doesn't13:44
lixinhui_I do not think so13:44
*** Daisy has quit IRC13:44
haiwei_yes, yanyanhu13:44
lixinhui_since floating ip is created by neutron in this way13:44
lixinhui_how for applications or container know that?13:44
yanyanhuafter we better understand it, we can make the correct decision :)13:45
*** links has quit IRC13:45
*** hichihara has joined #openstack-meeting13:45
yanyanhulixinhui_, if you mean network integration with openstack for docker, I'm not clear about the progress...13:45
yanyanhubut I feel it is not an easy job13:46
Qimingfor networking stuff, we already have kuryr working on that, so we don't have to reinvent a thing (hopefully)13:46
*** claudiub has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** zzxwill__ has quit IRC13:46
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
Qimingif we don't know kuryr, then we should learn it, instead of just imagining it13:46
yanyanhuat least not as easy as integrating nova with neutron :P13:46
yanyanhuQiming, yes13:46
yanyanhuthis is a homework have to do13:47
Qimingyes13:47
lixinhui_forgive me if driver layer is not ready13:47
Qimingwhen we have found something missing from kuryr, we propose a work item for that team/project13:47
yanyanhuI'm trying to build a docker1.12 env and try it13:47
elynnI think it's almost about container cluster, not about the IaaS cluster for container, we can proceed it and assume that network is done.13:47
lixinhui_orchestration is more complicated to discuss13:47
yanyanhuhope can understand its latest release better13:47
elynnWe should focus how do we use senlin to deploy docker application on senlin cluster cluster.13:48
*** jtomasek_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:48
Qimingright, 'orchestration' may mean a thousand different things from different group, to different people13:48
elynnopenstack have magnum to deploy the IaaS cluster for cluster.13:48
*** yuikotakadamori has left #openstack-meeting13:48
*** uxdanielle has joined #openstack-meeting13:48
*** r-mibu has quit IRC13:48
*** zzxwill has quit IRC13:49
elynnfor docker cluster13:49
*** r-mibu has joined #openstack-meeting13:49
yanyanhukinda agree with elynn13:49
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:49
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting13:49
Qimingem ... magnum is not about clustering13:49
yanyanhuyes, it isn't13:50
QimingIIUC, it is always about glueing a COE onto openstack13:50
yanyanhujust feel maybe focusing on docker app cluster deployment  is a better idea?13:50
yanyanhuand more useful13:50
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting13:50
yanyanhufor end user13:51
*** zeih has quit IRC13:51
Qimingfrom end user's perspective, that is true, I think13:51
elynnThat's what I mean yanyanhu :)13:51
haiwei_yanyanhu, not really understand you, build a docker app cluster is different from building a docker cluster?13:51
yanyanhuyes, since pure docker instance(s) is not that useful I feel13:51
*** zeih has joined #openstack-meeting13:51
yanyanhuhaiwei_, it is the same if you treat docker instance deployment as app deployment13:52
haiwei_when you start a container, you use an docker image, and in the image the app is installed, right?13:52
yanyanhusince the reason user deploy docker is for deploying app I think13:52
yanyanhuhaiwei_, yes13:52
Qimingyes? what is the difference?13:52
yanyanhuso a docker cluster is actually an app cluster13:52
haiwei_so, I think it is the same thing13:53
yanyanhuso docker orchestration is actually service orchestration I feel?13:53
yanyanhuhaiwei_, yes13:53
haiwei_I think so13:53
Qimingwhy are we deploying pure docker instances?13:53
yanyanhujust want to clarify which layer we are focusing on :)13:53
Qimingit is only about wording13:53
yanyanhuQiming, yes :)13:53
Qimingany technology difference?13:54
*** Galitz has quit IRC13:54
*** boden has joined #openstack-meeting13:54
QimingI am not a big fan of strict layering13:54
Qimingit means nothing to end users13:54
Qimingthey don't care13:54
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting13:54
yanyanhuyea13:54
yanyanhuso I think we are on the same page now for this topic :)13:54
Qimingis this service a paas, or a iaas?13:54
Qimingwho cares?13:55
*** vhoward has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** maeca1 has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** Daisy has quit IRC13:55
yanyanhuok, last 5 minutes13:55
haiwei_since we import containers to senlin, we need to think about how to make containers fit for senlin's architecture13:55
*** links has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
yanyanhuhaiwei_, +113:56
yanyanhuafter we finish our homework :)13:56
Qimingyes, we can transparently adapt senlin's architecture for this purpose, provided that we are not breaking existing users13:56
yanyanhuwill learn more about in coming weeks13:56
yanyanhuand lets have further discussion about it later13:56
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** Julien-zte has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** namnh has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
yanyanhuok, anything else about this issue?13:57
lixinhui_cool13:57
haiwei_ok, I will express my thoughts by code13:57
Qiming+2, got to jump into the pool an learn swimming that way13:57
yanyanhuoops, big latency again...13:57
Qiminginstead of reading a thousand books on swimming, staying away from the pool13:57
*** annp has joined #openstack-meeting13:58
yanyanhuQiming, +213:58
yanyanhutrying it is the best way to learn it in most cases13:58
haiwei_I went to pool last sunday, and got burnt13:58
elynnit's always a controversial  topic, better done then always discuss. Just do IT ;)13:58
yanyanhuhaiwei_, :P13:58
QimingLOL13:58
yanyanhuyea13:58
yanyanhuok, last 2 minutes13:58
yanyanhu    https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/senlin-proposal-barcelona-summit13:58
Qimingbtw, forwarded you (yanyanhu) an email from a user13:58
yanyanhuQiming, ok13:58
Qimingthey are seeing some NULL respose from senlin API13:58
*** links has quit IRC13:59
Qimingwhich is impossible in theory13:59
yanyanhuok, will check it13:59
Qimingthx13:59
yanyanhuno problem13:59
yanyanhu    https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/senlin-proposal-barcelona-summit13:59
*** janzian has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
*** john-davidge has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
yanyanhuplz add concrete idea to this etherpad13:59
yanyanhuit is for our topic proposal for coming summit13:59
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC13:59
yanyanhuwe may have to finish the proposal before this weekend13:59
*** amuller has joined #openstack-meeting13:59
Qimingok14:00
yanyanhusince next Wednesday is the deadline14:00
yanyanhuok, time is over14:00
yanyanhulets move back to senlin channel14:00
yanyanhuthanks you guys for joining14:00
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
yanyanhu#endmeeting14:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"14:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 14:00:48 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)14:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/senlin/2016/senlin.2016-07-05-13.00.html14:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/senlin/2016/senlin.2016-07-05-13.00.txt14:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/senlin/2016/senlin.2016-07-05-13.00.log.html14:00
*** korzen has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
armaxho14:01
armaxhi14:01
yamamotohi14:01
namnhHì14:01
bodenhowdy14:01
armax#startmeeting networking14:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 14:01:14 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is armax. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.14:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:01
haleybhi14:01
*** elynn has quit IRC14:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking)"14:01
hichiharahi14:01
HenryGo/14:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'networking'14:01
hoangcxhi14:01
annpHì14:01
andreas_shi14:01
korzenhello14:01
john-davidgeo/14:01
bloganhi14:01
rossella_shi14:01
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC14:01
*** andy__ has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
bcafarelhowdy14:01
andy__wow14:01
carl_baldwinHi14:01
amullerhiya14:02
annpHi14:02
andy__hi14:02
akamyshnikova_hi14:02
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
*** ravelar159 has quit IRC14:02
armaxToday is national holiday for Ihar, so he won’t be joining14:02
namnhHi14:02
jschwarzhello14:02
amotoki\o14:02
armaxlet’s dive in14:02
*** andy__ has left #openstack-meeting14:03
*** davidsha has joined #openstack-meeting14:03
armaxThe agenda, as usual14:03
armax#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/Meetings14:03
armax#topic Announcements14:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: networking)"14:03
*** cardeois_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:03
armaxSome mid-cycles are approaching14:03
*** trevormc has joined #openstack-meeting14:03
armaxfor more details14:03
armax#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints#Newton_sprints14:03
*** hashar is now known as hasharAway14:04
armaxplease sign up if you plan to attend, make sure you watch out the etherpads and contribute in the area of your interest, even if you don't14:04
armaxplease be aware of the Nova FFE process14:05
armax#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/098666.html14:05
armaxif you have something in your work plan that affects14:05
armaxNoca14:05
*** woodster_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
armaxNova14:05
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
armaxI strongly advise you to stay on top of the Nova’s schedule14:06
*** sbelous_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:06
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting14:06
*** cardeois has quit IRC14:06
*** Daisy has quit IRC14:07
*** eezhova has joined #openstack-meeting14:07
*** kaminohana has quit IRC14:07
armaxAnother thing I wanted to mention is this thread14:08
armax#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-June/097930.html14:08
*** annp_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:08
*** nkrinner is now known as nkrinner_afk14:08
armaxat one point we had gate-neutron-dsvm-functional-py34 in the check queue14:09
armaxand we demoted it to experimental because it was not working as it should have14:09
*** yanyanhu has quit IRC14:09
armaxif there’s anyone interested in this low hanging fruit activity14:09
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC14:10
armaxperhaps we can see if we can restore it and replace it with the py27 counterparts?14:10
*** cleong has joined #openstack-meeting14:10
armaxsingular, counterpart14:10
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:10
*** obondarev has quit IRC14:10
*** galstrom_zzz is now known as galstrom14:11
HenryGarmax: I will sync up with you on that later14:11
armaxthanks HenryG14:11
armaxat the time we demoted I recall there was something wrong with the DB migrations14:11
armaxbut don’t quote me on that14:11
*** claudiub|2 has joined #openstack-meeting14:12
armaxok, enough with reminder14:12
armaxs14:12
armaxunless someone has anything to add?14:12
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-meeting14:13
armaxno? Ok, moving on14:13
armax#topic Blueprints14:13
*** openstack changes topic to "Blueprints (Meeting topic: networking)"14:13
armaxthat’s our current workload14:13
armax#link https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/newton-214:13
*** claudiub has quit IRC14:13
armaxthe next milestone is in a week14:14
*** permalac has quit IRC14:14
armaxI mean14:14
armaxN-2’s deadline is in a week-ish14:14
armax#link http://releases.openstack.org/newton/schedule.html14:14
armaxCan I trouble the assignee/approvers of blueprints to update the whiteboard to reflect the latest status of the work you’re following?14:14
*** cardeois_ has quit IRC14:15
*** nisha_ has quit IRC14:15
ajoof course you can14:15
*** nisha has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
rossella_sarmax yes :)14:15
armaxplease captures things outstanding, things that landed and potential blockers14:15
*** cardeois_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
*** liamji has joined #openstack-meeting14:16
armaxOnce the milestone is cut we can over what items can realistically land safely for Newton14:16
armaxajo, rossella_s: thanks for the support!14:16
armaxwe have currently 22 blueprints outstanding, we can probably squeeze a handful more, but only if we behave14:16
armaxok if nobody has anything to add, let’s move on14:17
armaxbut before I do14:17
*** zhurong has quit IRC14:18
armaxplease remember http://status.openstack.org/reviews/14:18
armaxand the teeny tiny link at the top14:18
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
armaxkudos to rossella_s14:18
armaxif you wake up in the morning and you don’t know what to review14:18
rossella_sarmax thanks14:18
armaxthat link helps you stay focussed and review what matters for the release14:19
HenryG+1 rossella_s14:19
armaxnot that we all have this problem, but you never know, I thought I’d better remember14:19
hichiharaI use :)14:19
*** annp has quit IRC14:19
armaxhichihara: good :)14:20
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC14:20
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-meeting14:20
*** annp has joined #openstack-meeting14:21
armaxnext topic14:21
armax#topic Bugs14:21
*** openstack changes topic to "Bugs (Meeting topic: networking)"14:21
*** dmellado has quit IRC14:21
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:21
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting14:21
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-meeting14:21
armaxdeputy for last week was rossella_s14:22
*** spotz_zzz is now known as spotz14:22
armaxrossella_s: anything you want to share?14:22
rossella_sI was in charge of bugs last week...it was a quiet week, nothing to report apart from https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/159852514:22
openstackLaunchpad bug 1598525 in neutron "KeyError: 'processor_architecture' on ./stack.sh" [Critical,Confirmed]14:22
rossella_sthis should be fixed by infra14:22
armaxyes, that has been fixed14:22
*** Daisy has quit IRC14:23
armax#link http://grafana.openstack.org/dashboard/db/neutron-failure-rate14:23
armaxshows that things have gone back to sanity14:23
armaxthough...14:23
*** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting14:24
armaxthere’s been an interesting spike lately14:24
*** haiwei_ has quit IRC14:24
armaxnot sure if it’s related to 1598525 as I only saw it affecting the functional job14:24
armaxas far as jobs are concerned14:25
*** dneary has quit IRC14:25
armaxplease be aware of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/319770/ and14:25
armaxhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/336099/14:25
armaxif you are a maintainer of a project that depends on the ovs agent14:25
armaxplease make sure that the switch to native interfaces is something you’re happy with14:26
armaxI know that the switch to ovsdb caused a little hiccup to OVN14:26
*** richm has joined #openstack-meeting14:26
*** dneary has joined #openstack-meeting14:26
*** speller has quit IRC14:26
*** richm has left #openstack-meeting14:26
armaxanother potential hiccup might be caused by https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181023/14:26
armaxthis is the switch to pluggable ipam14:27
rossella_slot's of switches :)14:28
armaxI just noticed bug 159908614:28
openstackbug 1599086 in neutron "Security groups: exception under load" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1599086 - Assigned to Gary Kotton (garyk)14:28
*** annp has quit IRC14:28
armaxmarked as critical, can someone look into it?14:28
armaxkevinbenton: ^14:28
rossella_sarmax, I had a brief look before the meeting, garyk has a patch for it14:29
armaxrossella_s: I am not sure we can blindly retry14:29
armaxrossella_s: but I don’t fully understand the failure mode14:29
*** dmellado has quit IRC14:29
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting14:29
*** gcb_ has quit IRC14:30
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting14:30
rossella_sarmax, that's what I thought too...I remember a conversation with you about all these retries14:30
*** yuval has quit IRC14:30
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC14:30
*** annp has joined #openstack-meeting14:30
rossella_sarmax, me neither, I didn't have the time to look more into it14:30
*** lixinhui_ has quit IRC14:30
*** dmellado has joined #openstack-meeting14:30
armaxrossella_s: ok, thanks14:30
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:31
armaxis there anyone interested in being deputy for the week of July 18?14:31
armaxthis week we’re covered by johndperkins and next week by blogan14:31
armaxkudos to both of them14:31
*** spzala has quit IRC14:31
armaxok, while you go and check your calendars…14:32
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting14:32
*** eezhova has quit IRC14:33
armaxI wanted to remind you that there’s another potential low hanging fruit activity related to bug 155296014:33
openstackbug 1552960 in neutron "Tempest and Neutron duplicate tests" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1552960 - Assigned to Assaf Muller (amuller)14:33
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting14:33
armaxif anyone is interested helping moving this activity along, please reach out to amuller14:33
*** sigmavirus_away is now known as sigmavirus14:33
amullerI will buy a beer to anyone who merges a patch related to that bug in Barca14:33
*** sigmavirus is now known as bops14:33
armaxand I’ll match amuller’s offer14:34
*** bops is now known as sigmavirus14:34
ajo:-)14:34
*** namnh has quit IRC14:34
*** dkehn__ is now known as dkehnp14:34
*** Daisy has quit IRC14:34
armaxI’d rather see some of the patches targeting this work than some silly trivialfix for a grammar typo14:34
*** dkehnp is now known as dkehn_14:34
armaxbut that’s just me14:35
armaxI should probably start -2 stuff and tell people to go and work on that instead14:35
* armax has got a great idea!14:35
*** noslzzp has quit IRC14:35
*** namnh has joined #openstack-meeting14:35
armaxok, anyone for deputy the week after the next?14:36
*** xenogear has joined #openstack-meeting14:36
mlavallearmax: I'll do July 18th14:36
armaxmlavalle it is!14:36
*** spzala has quit IRC14:36
armax#action mlavalle bug deputy for the week of July 18th14:36
armaxmlavalle: thanks!14:36
*** myoung has quit IRC14:37
*** jesusaur has quit IRC14:37
*** myoung has joined #openstack-meeting14:37
armaxok14:38
armaxmoving on14:38
*** zzxwill has joined #openstack-meeting14:38
armax#topic Docs14:38
*** openstack changes topic to "Docs (Meeting topic: networking)"14:38
armaxanything to bring up?14:38
armaxif not, we can dive in into the special sections of the meeting OSC and Keystone v3 respectively14:39
*** rossella_s has quit IRC14:39
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC14:39
armax#topic OSC14:39
*** openstack changes topic to "OSC (Meeting topic: networking)"14:39
*** qwebirc97961 has joined #openstack-meeting14:39
*** jesusaur has joined #openstack-meeting14:39
*** qwebirc97961 has quit IRC14:39
amotokii just proposed many backports to mitaka. if you write something which can be backported to mitaka, please add 'backport: mitaka' tag to doc commit msg.14:39
*** rossella_s has joined #openstack-meeting14:39
amotokioh... OSC....14:39
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting14:39
armaxamotoki: that’s good too14:40
hichiharaamotoki: you are very slow14:40
armaxrtheis: ^ anything you want to add on OSC14:40
korzenI have started some defref about hot to use objects in Neutron: https://review.openstack.org/33651814:40
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting14:40
armaxrtheis: is there anything the team should be aware of?14:40
rtheishttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/309587/14:40
rtheisamotoki is working the initial plugin support14:40
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC14:40
amotokiI confirmed it worked with most cases.14:40
armaxrtheis: great, thansk14:40
amotokiwithout and with SSL (insecure and verify)14:41
rtheishopefully we can get that merged soon which opens the way for the plugins14:41
amotokii believe it can go.14:41
armaxamotoki: ack14:41
*** jtomasek_ has quit IRC14:41
rtheisAlso, osc is working on an osc-lib which can be used by plugins for common functionality14:41
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:41
*** nisha has quit IRC14:42
armaxthe failures seem genuine though14:42
rtheisas soon as it is ready, I think we'll have neutron plugin us it14:42
armax#link http://logs.openstack.org/87/309587/7/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-src-python-neutronclient/7f533dc/logs/devstacklog.txt.gz#_2016-07-04_14_54_18_33214:42
armaxis there a missing dependency?14:42
amotokiam looking at this14:43
armaxanyhow, good job, let’s get this pushed asap14:43
armaxa reminder for the team14:43
*** haneef has quit IRC14:43
armaxneutronclient changes will follow the stricter requirements feature freeze14:43
armaxso if you have things that must go in the neutronclient be aware that once feature freeze kicks in you’ll have a harder time getting an exception14:44
*** jckasper_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:44
armaxQOS folks got burned last cycle for this very reason14:44
armaxajo: ring any bell?14:44
*** yuikotak_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:44
ajoit does14:44
ajoit does :)14:44
armaxok, anything else to add?14:45
armaxamotoki, rtheis thanks for pushing this activity14:45
armax#topic Keystone v314:45
*** openstack changes topic to "Keystone v3 (Meeting topic: networking)"14:45
rtheisyw14:45
armaxHenryG, dasm ^14:45
armaxanything worth sharing?14:46
dasmone thing: currently i'm dealing with db migrations14:46
HenryGdasm has the big change out for review14:46
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
sbelous_is there any plan to make gate-tempest-dsvm-neutron-identity-v3-only-full-nv voting? anybody knows?14:46
*** jamesdenton has joined #openstack-meeting14:46
amotokithe review is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335786/14:46
dasmyes, and it occured that this db migration breaks a lot of other subprojects14:46
armaxsbelous_: I did not know, but I’ll look into it14:46
armaxdasm: ack14:47
HenryGthanks for alerting to that job sbelous_14:47
*** raildo is now known as raildo-afk14:47
*** raildo-afk is now known as raildo14:47
*** uxdanielle has quit IRC14:47
armaxdasm: let’s take this offline on how to best manage the merge of this patch14:48
sbelous_armax: thanks!14:48
dasmarmax: ok.14:48
armaxwe may want to help some of the subprojects out14:48
HenryGat least do one that the others can copy14:48
armaxdasm, HenryG do we expect that after dasm’s patch merges that no more migrations using ‘tenant_id’s are valid?14:49
*** uxdanielle has joined #openstack-meeting14:49
HenryGarmax: I would say we can impose that rule now14:49
armaxHenryG: you mean after merge?14:50
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC14:50
amotokiHenryG: does it mean we always need to use contract migrations?14:50
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting14:50
amotokiHenryG: sorry. it is not true. ignore me14:50
*** anshukch has joined #openstack-meeting14:50
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC14:51
*** Daisy has quit IRC14:51
HenryGarmax: any patches now that touch tenant_id will interfere with dasm's patch14:51
armaxHenryG: of course14:51
armaxHenryG: but that’s how it is14:51
armaxwe currently have dasm’s conflicting with dasm’s patch14:51
armaxand there are others that are affected as well14:51
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting14:51
*** piet has quit IRC14:51
ajoSo it's correct to keep telling people to use project_id on API & DB layers on new patches,14:52
HenryGmost of the conflicting patches are not directly with tenant_id14:52
ajoI'm just remembering that I'm doing that later, but that I had to check14:52
ajolater->lately14:52
armaxajo: if we are 99% ready to pull the trigger on the tenant->project transition yes14:53
armaxwhat I want to avoid is a mixed tenant/project id user experience14:53
armaxthe goal would be at teh end of Newton to have one or the other14:53
armaxnot both14:53
ajoah, ok14:54
ajoI will keep that in mind while reviewing14:54
armaxI imagine we may want to enforce a mini-freeze while we handle dasm’s patches14:54
HenryGarmax: yup14:54
armaxI’ll sit down with HenryG to figure out a plan and share it with the core review team14:55
armaxso that we know which patches to block/defer/rebase14:55
ajomakes sense14:56
*** siam0ss has joined #openstack-meeting14:56
*** dprince has quit IRC14:57
hichiharaI hope that the mini-freeze is very short so that it doesn't interrupt our development14:57
siam0ssHi14:57
amotokisounds reasonable. I think API patch will come after that.14:57
*** yuikotak_ has quit IRC14:57
*** siam0ss has quit IRC14:57
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting14:57
amotokii think it can lead to more discussion.14:58
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting14:58
armaxamotoki: or before, depending on how quickly we can whip dasm’s patch into shape14:58
dasmamotoki: that's the plan to tackle api after db. but we can discuss this later.14:58
armaxoh hang on I misunderstood14:58
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC14:58
hichihara1min14:59
armaxamotoki: what API patch(es) are you talking about?14:59
*** timcline has joined #openstack-meeting14:59
amotokiarmax: what in my mind is a patch which accepts project_id.14:59
amotokiam i missing it?14:59
armaxamotoki: right14:59
armaxok14:59
armaxI am with you15:00
armaxwe’ll have to adapt the API layer to handle both tenant and project id too15:00
HenryGTime. Let's switch to the neutron channel.15:00
amotokii try my best on the series of reviews.15:00
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
armax#endmeeting15:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"15:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 15:00:35 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)15:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2016/networking.2016-07-05-14.01.html15:00
armaxthanks for joining folks15:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2016/networking.2016-07-05-14.01.txt15:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2016/networking.2016-07-05-14.01.log.html15:00
dasmthanks15:00
yamamotobye15:00
davidsha thanks15:00
hichiharabye15:00
annpbye15:00
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
namnhBye15:00
*** amuller has left #openstack-meeting15:01
*** namnh has quit IRC15:01
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:01
*** cardeois__ has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
carl_baldwin#startmeeting neutron_routed_networks15:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 15:01:28 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is carl_baldwin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.15:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'neutron_routed_networks'15:01
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
*** hoangcx has quit IRC15:01
carl_baldwinAnyone around today?15:01
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
xiaohhuihello15:01
john-davidgehi15:01
*** Teresita-Warrior has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
johndperkinsyo15:01
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:01
mlavalleo/15:01
*** sbelous_ has quit IRC15:02
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:02
carl_baldwinHi all.15:02
*** Daisy has quit IRC15:02
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:02
carl_baldwin#topic Announcements15:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:02
carl_baldwinEtherpad is here:15:02
carl_baldwin#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/routed-provider-networks-notes15:02
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting15:03
carl_baldwinNewton-2 is coming right up.  It'd be very good to get a couple of things merged by then.  Namely DHCP, deferred IP ports in Nova, and service subnets.15:03
*** cardeois_ has quit IRC15:04
carl_baldwinBut, there are lots of smaller improvements that could go too.15:04
carl_baldwinAny other announcements?15:04
* carl_baldwin feels like we were just here. He had a 4 day week-end away from work.15:04
mlavalleRemind people of the Neutron mid-cycle, August 17 - 19, Cork Ireland15:04
*** annp has quit IRC15:05
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Thanks.  I've booked my travel.  I'll be there the.15:05
carl_baldwins/ the//15:06
carl_baldwinAnything else?15:06
mlavalleTalks submission deadline July 13th15:06
mlavallefor the Summit15:06
carl_baldwinThanks again.15:07
*** bobh has quit IRC15:07
carl_baldwinMoving on...15:08
carl_baldwinWe've got lots of miscellaneous patches on the etherpad.  Be sure to check there when you can.15:08
carl_baldwinI've been trying to make sure that all of the patches are listed on there with their status.15:08
carl_baldwinIf you have a patch that isn't listed, please list it in the appropriate section.15:09
*** aysyd has quit IRC15:09
*** hichihara has quit IRC15:10
*** aysyd has joined #openstack-meeting15:10
carl_baldwinWe're still merging at a decent rate.  So, just double check the status of your patches.15:10
*** boden has left #openstack-meeting15:11
*** khushbu has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
carl_baldwin#topic DHCP15:11
*** openstack changes topic to "DHCP (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:11
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:11
carl_baldwinblogan said he won't be able to make it today.15:11
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
* neiljerram slips in late15:11
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:11
carl_baldwinI'm going to try to pick up where I left off last week and get DHCP working in mlavalle 's fantastic vagrant environment.15:12
* mlavalle blushes15:12
*** scottda has joined #openstack-meeting15:12
*** scottda is now known as scottda_vacation15:13
mlavalleI will also keep an eye on blogan'a next patchset. Janzian and I will also be testing it15:13
*** Daisy has quit IRC15:13
carl_baldwinI think we're close.  I think blogan has some work to fix the problem of the agent requesting subnets on other segments and then we've got an RPC thing to fix.15:13
carl_baldwinmlavalle: great.15:13
carl_baldwinI'm going to try hard to get this fixed by Newton-215:14
carl_baldwinAnything else on DHCP?15:14
carl_baldwin#topic Deferred IP allocation15:15
*** openstack changes topic to "Deferred IP allocation (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:15
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:15
carl_baldwinI've got to close on this one15:15
carl_baldwin#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/29959115:15
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC15:16
mlavalleI took a look yesterday and made a comment15:16
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Thanks for your comment.  I was just replying.15:17
carl_baldwinI don't think it should matter if the extension is enabled the way I wrote it.15:17
carl_baldwinIt will return None which will be interpreted as not deferred.15:17
mlavalleJust wanted to make sure it was considered15:17
*** bobh has joined #openstack-meeting15:17
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Thanks.15:17
carl_baldwinI still need to digest the rest of the conversation.  I might need to ping Matt today.15:18
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:18
*** julen has joined #openstack-meeting15:18
mlavalleI will also try to comment on the broader conversation, now that I have a dded a patchset to that seires15:18
mlavalleseries^^^15:19
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting15:19
carl_baldwinmlavalle: What do you mean by "added a patchset ..."?15:19
mlavalleI added a new patchset for the interaction with routed networks from nova. We can comment in the NOva update15:20
mlavalledoesn't interfere with yours15:20
carl_baldwinmlavalle: ok15:21
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:21
carl_baldwin#topic Service Subnets15:22
*** openstack changes topic to "Service Subnets (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:22
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:22
carl_baldwinjohn-davidge: haleyb:  Hi, anything on this?15:22
haleybcarl_baldwin: i am trying to get the WIP out so john can iterate on it, too much FTO for me last week :(15:23
haleybit's my priority today15:23
john-davidgehaleyb: Thanks, please do everything you can to get it uploaded today, I'm ready to work on it fulltime15:23
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:24
carl_baldwinI'll be happy to take a look at it too.15:24
*** korzen has quit IRC15:24
carl_baldwin... when it is posted.15:24
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:24
*** Daisy has quit IRC15:24
carl_baldwinAnything else?15:25
*** Simonsen has joined #openstack-meeting15:25
haleybnot from me15:26
*** ljxiash has quit IRC15:26
*** Simonsen has left #openstack-meeting15:26
carl_baldwinIt is probably a stretch at this point to get this merged by Newton-2.  That is fine but it'd be nice to close on it soon after.  I'm willing to help anytime you need another perspective.15:26
carl_baldwin#topic Integration with Nova Scheduler15:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Integration with Nova Scheduler (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:27
mlavalleFirst of all, many thanks to johnthetubaguy and the Nova core team for merging the patchsets in the prep for network aware scheduling series up to here:15:27
mlavalle#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/329851/15:27
*** Julien-zte has quit IRC15:27
*** annp_ has quit IRC15:28
mlavalleFollowing johnthetubaguy advise from last week's meeting, I added this patchset on top of it:15:28
mlavalle#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337387/15:28
mlavalleThis patchset adds the ineraction from allocate_for_instance in Nova with the Routed Networks API15:29
mlavalleI made some assumptions as to the precise features in the Neutron side, because some of that is not ready yet15:30
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Do you think there is any chance to get this reviewed?15:31
carl_baldwinI have to admit I don't understand this patch's purpose yet.  I need to look at it.15:31
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:32
mlavallecarl_baldwin: Well, it was John's advise. So I am assuming they will review it. I will certainly give it visibility on Monday's during the scheduler meeting15:32
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:32
carl_baldwinI'll take a look at it.15:33
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting15:33
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Do you know what the time table for the scheduler changes is?15:33
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Still targeted for Newton?15:33
mlavallecarl_baldwin: it is still targeted for Newton15:34
*** amotoki has quit IRC15:34
mlavalleLast night I started working in the Vagrant environment adding 2 aggregates15:34
mlavalleOn top of that I want to deploy this week the g-r-p series of patchsets15:35
*** jmckind_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:35
carl_baldwinSounds like good progress.  Keep up the good work and let me know if / when we need to help.15:35
*** dprince has quit IRC15:35
*** sridharg has quit IRC15:35
mlavallethe purpose is two fold15:35
mlavalle1) Get a sense of how ready g-r-p is ready15:35
*** zeih has quit IRC15:35
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:36
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting15:36
mlavalle2) Start prototyping in Neutron the interaction with that API15:36
mlavalleThat's all for today15:37
carl_baldwinmlavalle: Good plan.15:37
reediphi15:37
carl_baldwin#topic Open Discussion15:37
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: neutron_routed_networks)"15:37
*** haneef_ has quit IRC15:37
carl_baldwinWhat have we left out?15:37
reedipcarl_baldwin, john_davige : wanted to know if l2_adjacency would be false if we have a single segment15:38
*** sshnaidm is now known as sshnaidm|afk15:38
*** jmckind has quit IRC15:38
mlavalletah is when l2_adjacency is true, as far as I understand it15:39
carl_baldwinreedip: I wouldn't count segments.  I think if subnets are associated with segments then it should be false.15:39
*** rbartal has quit IRC15:39
reediphmm ... okay15:39
carl_baldwinA multi-segmented network might start out as a single segment but with the intention that it become multi-segmented soon.15:39
*** yuikotakadamori has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
mlavalleThat makes sense15:40
reedipjohn-davidge had this comment, so wanted to know for sure15:40
*** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting15:40
mlavalleThe intention being signaled be associating subnets to the segment15:40
carl_baldwinI don't want the value of l2adjacency to suddenly change when a new segment is added.15:40
john-davidgecarl_baldwin: Perhaps I misunderstood the spec, but that's how I read it15:41
*** mikelk has quit IRC15:41
carl_baldwinmlavalle: ++15:41
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:41
john-davidgehttps://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/newton/routed-networks.html#l2-adjacency15:42
reedipjohn-davidge : thanks for the comment though, made things clear :)15:42
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:42
john-davidgeaccording to the above ^^^ l2 adjacency should be true only if there is a single segment15:42
carl_baldwinjohn-davidge: Unfortunately, we didn't get some updates in to the spec.15:42
*** mrmartin has quit IRC15:42
carl_baldwin:(15:42
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:42
carl_baldwinThat is my mistake.  I meant to get that updated but did not.15:43
*** sshnaidm|afk has quit IRC15:43
john-davidgecarl_baldwin: Ok, so the new expectation is that l2_adjeacency will be true only if the netowkr has zero segments?15:43
mlavallejohn-davidge: yeah, that is how I read it a few months ago. But I think that we should expect this evolution in thinking happen, as we develop the functionality15:43
*** zz_dimtruck is now known as dimtruck15:43
reedipmlavalle, john-davidge, carl_baldwin : can you review and let me know how to move forward with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304647/ , whenever you have time?15:43
mlavallecarl_baldwin, john-davidge: wrestling with the code always enhance our understanding15:44
carl_baldwinjohn-davidge: Not really.  It will be true only if there are no subnets associated with segments.15:44
john-davidgecarl_baldwin: Ah, ok15:44
carl_baldwinjohn-davidge: Sorry about that confusion and thanks for your diligence.  This one really is on me.  I forgot that was not properly changed in the spec.15:45
*** dane_leblanc has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
*** lezbar has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
mlavalleYeah, in both cases the question is what subnets are associated to15:45
john-davidgecarl_baldwin: No worries, thanks for the clarification. I guess I missed the discussion where that chnaged15:45
carl_baldwinI'll post an update to the spec but those aren't always given much priority.  But, at least we'll have an update to reference.15:45
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting15:45
carl_baldwin#action carl_baldwin will post update to clarify l2adjacency in the spec.15:46
*** jmckind_ has quit IRC15:46
*** khushbu has quit IRC15:47
carl_baldwinreedip: I will review the update.15:48
carl_baldwinreedip: Thanks for your work there.15:48
*** jmckind has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
*** khushbu_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:48
carl_baldwinAnything else?15:50
mlavalleLate last week janzian, yb and I had a conversation about adding tempest tests for routed networks15:50
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:51
mlavallejanzian is going to follow up soon adding segment api support to the neutron driver in tempest15:51
mlavalleand the api tests15:51
mlavalleyb will be working on a scenario test15:51
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** amotoki has quit IRC15:51
*** amitgandhinz has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting15:52
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC15:52
carl_baldwinmlavalle: It will be great to have well tested code in Newton.  I hope we can set a good example.15:52
janzianYes, please tear my code apart when I get it up for review :)15:52
carl_baldwinSpeaking of good examples, we also need good documentation.  I started writing some but haven't completed it.15:53
*** leeantho has joined #openstack-meeting15:53
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting15:53
carl_baldwinjanzian: :)  I hope that's not what I'm doing when I review.  But, I like to be thorough.15:53
*** obondarev has quit IRC15:53
*** ivc_ has quit IRC15:53
*** iceyao has quit IRC15:53
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
carl_baldwinI will recommit to creating some documentation -- at least a complete draft -- by the end of Newton-3.15:54
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** emagana has quit IRC15:55
carl_baldwinAnything else?15:55
*** sripriya has joined #openstack-meeting15:55
*** janki has joined #openstack-meeting15:55
carl_baldwinGoing once...15:56
carl_baldwin... twice ...15:56
carl_baldwin#endmeeting15:57
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"15:57
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 15:57:02 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)15:57
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_routed_networks/2016/neutron_routed_networks.2016-07-05-15.01.html15:57
carl_baldwinThanks!15:57
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_routed_networks/2016/neutron_routed_networks.2016-07-05-15.01.txt15:57
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_routed_networks/2016/neutron_routed_networks.2016-07-05-15.01.log.html15:57
john-davidgebye o/15:57
*** Daisy has quit IRC15:57
*** mlavalle has left #openstack-meeting15:57
*** anilvenkata has quit IRC15:57
*** janzian has left #openstack-meeting15:57
*** yuikotakadamori has quit IRC15:58
*** dkushwaha__ has joined #openstack-meeting15:58
*** aranjan has quit IRC15:59
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
*** tbh has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
*** aranjan has joined #openstack-meeting15:59
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC16:00
sridhar_ram#startmeeting tacker16:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 16:00:53 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is sridhar_ram. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.16:00
*** cardeois__ is now known as cardeois16:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.16:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tacker'16:00
*** spzala has quit IRC16:01
sridhar_ram#topic Roll Call16:01
*** manikanta_tadi has joined #openstack-meeting16:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Roll Call (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:01
vishwanathjo/16:01
dkushwaha__o/16:01
tbho/16:01
jankio/16:01
sripriyao/16:01
*** sambetts is now known as sambetts|afk16:01
*** trevormc has left #openstack-meeting16:01
*** santoshk has joined #openstack-meeting16:01
sridhar_ramhowdy all !16:01
*** KanagarajM_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
manikanta_tadio/16:02
sridhar_ramKanagarajM_:  are you here ?16:02
*** emagana has quit IRC16:02
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, hi16:02
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
*** tung_doan has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:02
*** john-davidge has left #openstack-meeting16:02
sridhar_ramalright, lets start..16:02
*** zzxwill has quit IRC16:02
sridhar_ram#topic Agenda16:02
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting16:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Agenda (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:02
sridhar_ram#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Tacker16:03
s3wongo/16:03
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:03
sridhar_ram#topic Annoucements16:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Annoucements (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:03
sridhar_rammaster based python-tackerclient is released16:03
sridhar_ram#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-announce/2016-June/001259.html16:03
sridhar_ramgoing forward we will make regular client releases based off master16:04
KanagarajM_Nice :)16:04
sridhar_ramDoodle poll to narrow down the date / time for Midcycle meetup is at..16:04
sridhar_ram#link http://doodle.com/poll/qzsagbhnhqbuurth16:04
*** ivc_ has quit IRC16:04
sridhar_ramPlease respond to the poll16:05
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:05
* sridhar_ram notes to send this poll link to ML16:05
sridhar_ramOpenStack Barcelona Summit talk submission is coming up - July 13th!16:05
*** khushbu_ has quit IRC16:05
sridhar_rammoving on...16:05
sridhar_ram#topic Audit Event log16:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Audit Event log (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:06
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: KanagarajM_: please take it away16:06
*** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting16:06
vishwanathjsridhar_ram thanks ....16:06
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** andreas_s has quit IRC16:07
vishwanathjI think at this time, KanagarajM_ and I believe that the spec is in a reasonable shape for other reviewers including core reviewers to start reviewing and provide feedback ......16:07
sripriyavishwanathj: can you please share the link?16:08
vishwanathjhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/321370/16:08
sripriyavishwanathj: thanks16:08
*** takashi has joined #openstack-meeting16:09
*** ygbo has quit IRC16:09
*** spzala has quit IRC16:09
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: KanagarajM_: are Horizon UI changes just going to be per resource ?16:09
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting16:09
*** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting16:09
*** jlanoux has quit IRC16:09
sridhar_ramare you envisioning any general "Events" tab that spans across all tacker resources ?16:10
vishwanathjsridhar_ram, yes we are envisoning a general "Event" tab.....16:10
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: okay16:10
*** chenpengzi has quit IRC16:10
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:10
vishwanathjhowever, would want to first focus on getting the per resources implementation working.....16:11
*** sdake has quit IRC16:11
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: sure, that can be a follow on..16:11
vishwanathjthe Events tab display in Horizon would be easier given the way data is structured in the database....16:11
sridhar_ramagree16:12
sridhar_ramon my side, i'm good to sign off on this one .. i don't see any major blocker at this time16:12
*** michael_bredel has joined #openstack-meeting16:12
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:12
vishwanathjalso we are making an attempt to keep the paradigm for accessing events in Horizon and tacker client similar....16:12
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:13
vishwanathjthe idea in Horizon for e.g; when you click on a VNF, it would display VNF details in one tab and would have another tab for list of asscociated events....16:13
*** Daisy has quit IRC16:13
sripriyavishwanathj: will we be retaining events data for ever or is there some kind of an expiry on the data?16:13
*** neel has joined #openstack-meeting16:13
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:13
michael_bredelo/16:14
vishwanathjsimilarly in tacker client when the tacker vnf-show <id> command is executed, we are thinking of displaying VNF details info along with VNF event details info16:14
neelo/16:14
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC16:14
*** shuaizhangk has quit IRC16:15
vishwanathjKanragarajM_ feel free to chime in.....16:15
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: VNF visibility is a huge deal for NFV ...16:15
anshukcho/16:15
sridhar_ramvishwanathj: we shd make this a prominent 'first-class' feature of any Tacker resource16:15
*** khushbu_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:16
vishwanathjsripriya, there will be a command provided to purge entries from database....16:16
sridhar_ramlets not relegate this into a show command ooption16:16
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC16:16
vishwanathjsridhar_ram I see your point for the VNFs16:16
sripriyavishwanathj: i see that, thanks16:16
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
*** takashi has quit IRC16:17
sridhar_ramsounds good...16:17
vishwanathjsridhar_ram, there will be a separate events level support for all resources....16:17
vishwanathjadditionally for VNF resources, we plan to have vnf-show-events style command as per your feedback16:18
*** chenpengzi has joined #openstack-meeting16:18
*** Guest91324 has quit IRC16:18
sridhar_ramcool, I'd encourage other reviewers to provide their comments / +1s / +2s..16:18
vishwanathjKanagaragM_ anything that you want to add I might have missed ....16:19
manikanta_tadi+1 for vnf-show-events style command16:19
KanagarajM_vishwanathj, i think all covered16:19
sridhar_ramokay, let's move on..16:20
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:20
sridhar_ram#topic Network Services Descriptor (NSD)16:20
*** openstack changes topic to "Network Services Descriptor (NSD) (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:20
sridhar_ram#link https://review.openstack.org/30466716:20
sridhar_ramdkushwaha__: tbh: please take over..16:20
*** nisha has joined #openstack-meeting16:21
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, thanks.16:21
*** aarefiev has quit IRC16:21
*** ivc_ has quit IRC16:22
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, I have committed WIP prototype patches for nsd16:22
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:22
dkushwaha__in which tbh also working with me16:22
*** aarefiev has joined #openstack-meeting16:23
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:23
sridhar_ramthe main thing IMO to be resolved for this effort is (a) scope of this initial NSD work and (b) tosca-parser dependency16:23
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:23
sridhar_ramon the scope, the spec should describe what is the plan for ..16:24
*** sdake_ has quit IRC16:24
sridhar_ram(a) VNFFG embedded in NSD .. will this be supported ?16:24
tbhsridhar_ram, regarding the tosca-parser dependency, do you think we have any dependencies on tosca-parser apart from substitution_mappings?16:24
sridhar_ram(b) can each VNF be placed in different VIMs ?16:24
*** Daisy has quit IRC16:25
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
sridhar_ramtbh: substition_mapping is probably the main thing.. but there might be others that you would get to know only when you starting trying :)16:25
*** Apoorva has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:25
*** amitgandhinz has quit IRC16:26
*** mtanino has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** amitgandhinz has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
sridhar_ramback to scope, my suggestion is to introduce this with limited scope - to support just VNFs, VLs and not support VNFFG in the initial NSD16:27
tbhsridhar_ram, sure, for VNF placement I think we are taking --vim-id input, dkushwaha__ am I correct?16:27
sridhar_ramalso restrict it, all VNFs in the same VIM16:27
KanagarajM_tdh: this would need nested template support generation from heat-translator.16:27
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, tbh yes.16:27
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, as VNFD already supports to place across VIM, will it be an issue for supporting in NSD ?16:28
*** sshnaidm|afk has joined #openstack-meeting16:28
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, currently I planed scope with  to support just VNFs, VLs16:28
sridhar_ramKanagarajM_: no, we shouldn't take that approach16:28
sridhar_ramTacker-NSD feature should call Tacker-VNFM to stand-up each VNF specified in the NSD16:28
tbhKanagarajM_, can you elaborate  on nested template support?16:29
*** rfolco_ has quit IRC16:29
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
*** Apoorva_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:29
sridhar_ramI've placed a midcycle meetup topic to discussion Tacker NFVO and Tacker VNFM separation16:29
*** spzala has quit IRC16:30
KanagarajM_tbh, As NSD is containing VNFD and VNFD is already an HOT tempalte, you may endup in placing multiple VNFD hot template inside NSD HOT tempalate16:30
*** Daisy has quit IRC16:30
*** hemnavacation is now known as hemna16:30
sridhar_ramwe should avoid Tacker NFVO features to be tightly coupled with Tacker VNFM16:30
KanagarajM_tbh, but i see the sridhar_ram point too16:30
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:31
sridhar_rami envision we might end up having two git repos in the near future .. one for tacker-nfvo and one for tacker-vnfm16:31
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, yes. that is good to address16:31
*** amitgandhinz has quit IRC16:31
*** rcernin has quit IRC16:31
tbhKanagarajM_, got it thanks16:32
*** amitgandhinz has joined #openstack-meeting16:32
sridhar_ramthis is one of the learnings from the recent OPNFV summit :)16:32
*** asettle has quit IRC16:32
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting16:33
*** Apoorva has quit IRC16:33
sridhar_ramtbh: dkushwaha__ : please continue to shape / iterate on the spec... describe the scope clearly.. what it will do and *more importantly* what it will NOT do :)16:33
*** tesseract- has quit IRC16:33
*** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting16:33
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:33
*** pcaruana has quit IRC16:33
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
sridhar_ramwe also could make use of a workflow engine like mistral to implement..16:34
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, yup, I will update the spec this week16:34
*** anshukch_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:34
*** hogepodge has quit IRC16:34
sridhar_ram.. instead of coding all the workflow steps in python..16:34
sridhar_ramthere are pros and cons to such an approach..16:34
* sridhar_ram wonders if bobh is here ..16:34
tbhsridhar_ram, sure will update the spec based on recent learnings16:34
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC16:35
* bobh is on a conf call and not really paying attention....16:35
sridhar_ramtbh: dkushwaha__ : sounds good..16:35
*** anshukch has quit IRC16:35
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting16:35
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC16:35
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting16:35
michael_bredelSonata includes Mistral as workflow engine. If you want, we can share our experiences at some point16:36
*** maeca1 has quit IRC16:36
sridhar_ramwe can make this a recurring agenda item for next few weekly meeting to track its progress16:36
sridhar_rammichael_bredel: that would be great!16:36
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, yes sure16:36
*** khushbu_ has quit IRC16:37
*** Leo_ has quit IRC16:37
*** spzala has quit IRC16:37
sridhar_ramIMO, if we can embrace a full-featured worflow engine like Mistral, we can achieve lot more feature velocity by generating worflow templates for features instead of coding lot of python code to achieve the same16:38
sridhar_ramperhaps this could be another Midcycle topic..16:38
*** Apoorva_ has quit IRC16:38
sridhar_rammichael_bredel: would you be able to join our midcycle meetup to share you Sonata<->Mistral experience ?16:38
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, I completely agree on it !16:38
*** Apoorva has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** amitgandhinz has quit IRC16:39
sridhar_ramanything else on NSD ?16:39
*** amitgandhinz has joined #openstack-meeting16:39
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, currently no from my side.16:40
sridhar_ramokay, lets move on...16:40
*** sbelous_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:40
sridhar_ramtbh: dkushwaha__: nice to see you both picking this piece up!16:40
sridhar_ram#topic Midcycle Meetup Topics16:41
*** openstack changes topic to "Midcycle Meetup Topics (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:41
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting16:41
sridhar_ram#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tacker-newton-midcycle16:41
*** Daisy has quit IRC16:41
sridhar_ramPlease RSVP on this etherpad if you plan to join16:41
sridhar_ramNeed less to say, if you would like to discuss a particular topic .. please add them16:43
sridhar_rambased on the content, we can make it 1-day or 2-day event16:43
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:43
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, shall we keep the things to discuss on newton cycle priority16:43
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, you have listed many topics for meetup !16:44
*** lpetrut has quit IRC16:44
sridhar_ramKanagarajM_: you mean the things currently in flight for Newton ?16:44
*** tonytan_brb has joined #openstack-meeting16:44
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, currently in and planned for newton16:45
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting16:45
sridhar_ramKanagarajM_: sure, we can discuss them..16:45
*** jungleboyj has joined #openstack-meeting16:45
sridhar_ramWe have always tried to balance with things in flight + the upcoming roadmap16:45
*** tonytan4ever has quit IRC16:46
sridhar_ramNext, the biggest challenge I've is to find a timeslot that would ensure max participation16:46
*** baojg has quit IRC16:46
sridhar_ramI see we are spread across vast diff timezones16:47
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, yeah. timezone really seems difficult part16:47
*** s3wong has quit IRC16:47
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:47
*** khushbu_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:48
sridhar_ramI've picked early morning PDT that overlaps with late afternoon / evening in India.. but is late evening for Korea16:48
*** sbelous_ has quit IRC16:48
KanagarajM_it comes between 7:30 PM to 1:30 AM for india16:48
sridhar_ramUS East coast and CET (Central European) gets reasonable16:49
sridhar_ram*has reasonable timing16:49
sridhar_ramperhaps we can go one hour earlier ?16:49
sridhar_ramor make it two-days and reduce the hours16:50
tung_doansridhar_ram: np.. still keep time  if it is fine for almost guys :)16:50
*** hogepodge has quit IRC16:50
sridhar_rammay be both :)16:50
dkushwaha__sridhar_ram, I missed few weekly meetings due to timezone only,  as it is 1AM JST :(16:50
sridhar_ramtung_doan: I'm trying my best to see if you can join..!16:50
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC16:50
sridhar_ramdkushwaha__: ouch!16:50
tung_doansridhar_ram: thanks :)16:52
sridhar_ramokay, should we do 2-day / 5-hour slots starting at 6AM PDT,  6:30PM IST ?16:52
KanagarajM_sridhar_ram, its better choice16:52
*** Daisy has quit IRC16:52
jankisridhar_ram: better option16:52
sridhar_ramany violet objections ?16:52
sridhar_ram*violent16:53
* sridhar_ram looks at sripriya16:53
* sridhar_ram .. and s3won16:53
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC16:54
sripriyasridhar_ram: 2-day works fine IMO16:54
sridhar_ramsripriya: okay16:54
sridhar_ramlet's spread the suffering :)16:54
sridhar_ramlets pencil this in..16:54
sridhar_ramwill send a note to ML16:54
sripriyasridhar_ram: coffeee to the rescue16:54
sridhar_ramsripriya: absolutely!16:54
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
sridhar_ramanything on this subject ?16:55
sridhar_ram#topic Open Discussion16:55
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: tacker)"16:55
*** zhurong has joined #openstack-meeting16:56
sridhar_ramtung_doan: we should also circle back to your monitoring spec.. lets discuss that in the next week's meeting to see if we can wrap that up16:56
*** Suyash has joined #openstack-meeting16:56
*** zhhuabj has quit IRC16:56
KanagarajM_please start to review https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:tacker-scaling16:57
tung_doansridhar_ram: yes, right.. i really want. thanks, sridhar16:57
sridhar_ramlooks we are done for today..16:57
*** zhhuabj has joined #openstack-meeting16:57
sridhar_ramthanks everyone for joining16:57
sridhar_ram#endmeeting16:57
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"16:57
KanagarajM_bye.16:57
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 16:57:27 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)16:57
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tacker/2016/tacker.2016-07-05-16.00.html16:57
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tacker/2016/tacker.2016-07-05-16.00.txt16:57
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tacker/2016/tacker.2016-07-05-16.00.log.html16:57
tung_doanbye16:57
*** sripriya has left #openstack-meeting16:57
*** anshukch_ has left #openstack-meeting16:58
*** tung_doan has quit IRC16:58
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting16:58
*** cathy_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:58
*** michael_bredel has quit IRC16:58
*** Leo_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:58
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
*** janki has quit IRC16:59
*** shashank_hegde has joined #openstack-meeting16:59
cathy_#startmeeting network_common_flow_classifier17:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 17:00:49 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is cathy_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.17:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: network_common_flow_classifier)"17:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'network_common_flow_classifier'17:00
cathy_hi there17:01
igordcardhello cathy_17:01
davidshaHey!17:01
*** emagana has quit IRC17:02
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting17:02
*** spzala has quit IRC17:02
*** KanagarajM_ has quit IRC17:02
*** ayoung has quit IRC17:02
*** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting17:02
cathy_anyone else joining this meeting? Sorry It was US National holiday and long weekend. I did not send out meeting reminder notice.17:02
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting17:02
davidshaI'm pinging ajo17:03
igordcardhope you've had a great 4th of july17:03
*** vishwanathj has quit IRC17:03
*** Apoorva_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:03
cathy_igordcard: thanks17:03
*** Daisy has quit IRC17:03
ajohi , I'm on another company meting, I didnt' realize we had this17:03
ajoI'll try to be on both17:03
*** piet has quit IRC17:03
ajoping me when necessary17:03
cathy_ajo: sorry about this. I forgot to send out the meeting notice due to holiday17:04
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:04
*** banix has quit IRC17:04
ajonp, ping me when you think it's relevant, I will try to follow the meeting17:04
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting17:04
cathy_igordcard: davidsha I do not have any urgent issues on my side17:04
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting17:04
cathy_igordcard, Louis and I have worked on the spec and posted it for review17:05
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
*** maishsk has joined #openstack-meeting17:05
*** neel has left #openstack-meeting17:05
cathy_So I think we need to wait for more people's review comments17:05
igordcardcathy_: it's now reposted in neutron-specs17:05
igordcardcathy_: all your content preserved17:05
cathy_igordcard: Ok17:05
ajolink?17:05
*** santoshk has quit IRC17:06
cathy_igordcard: I see some comments. would you like to respond to it?17:06
davidshahttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/333993/17:06
*** iyamahat has joined #openstack-meeting17:06
igordcardthanks davidsha17:06
*** oshidoshi has quit IRC17:06
cathy_davidsha: thanks17:06
igordcardcathy_: yes, I'd appreciate more feedback on approach (at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333993/)17:06
*** Apoorva has quit IRC17:07
igordcardcathy_: I'm also going to provide more feedback about at least approach 117:07
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:07
cathy_igordcard: Ok.17:07
*** comay has joined #openstack-meeting17:07
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC17:07
cathy_Regarding the bug status, looks like it is not in rfe-approved yet17:07
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:08
cathy_I see Armando's comment and he would like more clear description of the spec.17:08
cathy_igordcard: I assume that you will reply to Armando's comment. OK with you?17:08
*** Daisy has quit IRC17:09
*** permalac has joined #openstack-meeting17:09
davidshaHe's reviewing the spec as well, so the conversation will probably be moved to there now.17:09
igordcardcathy_: yes we need to converge on an approach so we can then start discussing the internals, which seems to be what armax is mostly looking for17:09
*** BobH_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:09
*** khushbu_ has quit IRC17:09
igordcardcathy_: any specific comment?17:10
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting17:10
*** ivc_ has quit IRC17:10
cathy_igordcard: you can probably first reply to his comments inline. We can then discuss the approaches in next meeting when more people will join.17:10
cathy_I will send a reminder of the meeting next time.17:11
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting17:11
*** jckasper_ has quit IRC17:11
cathy_Let's continue working on the spec and comments.17:11
igordcardcathy_: sure I'll be replying to the best I can, especially for approach 217:12
*** jckasper has joined #openstack-meeting17:12
*** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting17:12
igordcardcathy_: but please check as well since there might be questions or doubts about the other approaches too17:12
igordcardcathy_: yeah17:12
cathy_igordcard: OK17:12
cathy_I guess we can end the meeting today and resume in two weeks17:13
cathy_igordcard: davidsha OK with you?17:13
igordcardalso, he's commented in the RFE and pointed to the following neutron-drivers meeting minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2016/neutron_drivers.2016-06-30-22.00.log.html#l-8617:13
davidshakk, just to throw it out there PS 2 of flow manager is up17:13
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting17:13
cathy_davidsha: could you clarify what you mean?17:14
cathy_there PS 2 of flow manager is up?17:14
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:14
davidshahttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/323963/17:14
*** phil_h has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** Daisy has quit IRC17:15
davidshaflow table management it the WIP to ajos spec.17:15
cathy_Which spec are these codes for?17:15
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
davidshahttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/32043917:15
igordcardawesome davidsha, I'll have a review of it too17:15
cathy_davidsha: thanks, will take a look and ask others to review too17:16
*** Daisy has joined #openstack-meeting17:16
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC17:16
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting17:16
davidshaigordcard, cathy_ : thanks17:16
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC17:16
cathy_davidsha: welcome!17:16
*** lixinhui_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:16
cathy_Ok, bye for now. talk to you later.17:16
cathy_#endmeeting17:17
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"17:17
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 17:17:17 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)17:17
davidshacathy_: thanks!17:17
*** aranjan has quit IRC17:17
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/network_common_flow_classifier/2016/network_common_flow_classifier.2016-07-05-17.00.html17:17
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/network_common_flow_classifier/2016/network_common_flow_classifier.2016-07-05-17.00.txt17:17
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/network_common_flow_classifier/2016/network_common_flow_classifier.2016-07-05-17.00.log.html17:17
*** jckasper has quit IRC17:17
igordcardcya all17:17
*** cathy_ has quit IRC17:17
*** hogepodge has quit IRC17:17
*** obondarev has quit IRC17:17
*** vishnoianil has quit IRC17:18
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting17:18
*** bnemec has quit IRC17:19
*** s3wong has quit IRC17:20
*** lixinhui_ has quit IRC17:21
*** Daisy has quit IRC17:21
*** manikanta_tadi has quit IRC17:21
*** unicell has joined #openstack-meeting17:22
*** shashank_hegde has quit IRC17:23
*** mdavidson has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:24
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting17:24
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC17:25
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC17:25
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:25
*** zhonghua-lee has quit IRC17:25
*** zhonghua-lee has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:26
*** bnemec has joined #openstack-meeting17:27
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting17:27
*** hogepodge has quit IRC17:28
*** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:31
*** csomerville has joined #openstack-meeting17:31
*** davidsha has quit IRC17:31
*** liamji has quit IRC17:32
*** electrofelix has quit IRC17:32
*** Leo_ has quit IRC17:33
*** sdake has quit IRC17:34
*** tonytan_brb has quit IRC17:34
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC17:34
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:35
*** rajinir has joined #openstack-meeting17:36
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting17:36
*** nisha_ has joined #openstack-meeting17:36
*** maishsk has quit IRC17:37
*** mickeys has joined #openstack-meeting17:37
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:38
*** factor has quit IRC17:39
*** karthik__ has joined #openstack-meeting17:39
*** nisha has quit IRC17:40
*** factor has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting17:41
*** Chirag has joined #openstack-meeting17:41
*** gagehugo has joined #openstack-meeting17:41
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC17:41
*** acoles is now known as acoles_17:44
*** sudipto has joined #openstack-meeting17:44
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:45
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:46
*** shashank_hegde has joined #openstack-meeting17:46
*** gagehugo has quit IRC17:47
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting17:47
*** zhurong has quit IRC17:47
*** gagehugo has joined #openstack-meeting17:50
*** HeOS has quit IRC17:51
*** johndperkins has quit IRC17:51
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting17:51
*** baojg has quit IRC17:53
*** jaugustine has joined #openstack-meeting17:55
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC17:55
*** hogepodge has quit IRC17:55
*** karthik__ has quit IRC17:55
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting17:56
*** noslzzp has quit IRC17:57
*** maeca1 has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting17:57
*** aranjan has joined #openstack-meeting17:58
rodrigodso/17:59
stevemaro/17:59
stevemar#startmeeting keystone18:00
*** noslzzp has quit IRC18:00
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 18:00:04 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is stevemar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.18:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.18:00
*** MeganR has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'keystone'18:00
stevemarreminder for ajayaa, amakarov, ayoung, breton, browne, crinkle, claudiub, davechen, david8hu, dolphm, dstanek, edmondsw, gyee, henrynash, hogepodge, htruta, jamielennox, joesavak, jorge_munoz, knikolla, lbragstad, lhcheng, marekd, MaxPC, morgan, nkinder, notmorgan, raildo, rodrigods, rderose, roxanaghe, samleon, samueldmq, shaleh, stevemar, tjcocozz, tsymanczyk, topol, vivekd, wanghong, xek18:00
roxanagheo/18:00
*** henrynash has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
knikollao/18:00
xeko/18:00
jaugustinehello18:00
*** jamielennox has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
MeganRo/18:00
gyee\o18:00
raildoo/18:00
stevemaragenda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-weekly-meeting18:00
*** shaleh has joined #openstack-meeting18:00
gagehugoo/18:01
dolphm\o18:01
*** jamesmca_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
dstaneko/18:01
*** noslzzp has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
stevemargive it a minute or so, lazy cores not showing up >.<18:01
shaleh\o18:01
stevemaroh there they are18:01
*** Teresita-Warrior has quit IRC18:01
*** pvaneck has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
henrynashhi18:01
stevemareveryone ready to talk about specs!18:01
henrynash(laxy core, present and correct)18:01
*** nk2527 has joined #openstack-meeting18:01
*** vishnoianil has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
jamielennoxo/18:02
*** samueldmq has joined #openstack-meeting18:02
samueldmqhi everyone o/18:02
stevemarquick first topic before the spec talk18:02
stevemar#topic api-ref sprint18:02
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:02
*** openstack changes topic to "api-ref sprint (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:02
stevemar#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-api-sprint18:02
stevemarall the details are there18:02
stevemarbasically, once https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337805/ merges, then http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref-identity-v3.html will pull from the keystone repo18:03
stevemaronly trouble is, those are out of date and don't match what we've been doing here: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/keystone-specs/ :(18:03
stevemarI wanted to have a day or two to sprint on getting the APIs from our specs repo migrated over to the API site in the keystone repo18:04
gyeeout-of-day?18:04
gyeev3 or v2?18:04
stevemargyee: out of day?18:04
gyees/day/date/18:04
*** Apoorva_ has quit IRC18:05
dstanekstevemar: a sprint is a good idea18:05
stevemargyee: yes, previously those APIs were maintained by the docs team, but that didn't scale18:05
*** Apoorva has joined #openstack-meeting18:05
stevemarso now each project is keeping an api-ref directory in their project repo18:05
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:05
stevemarsee: https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/master/api-ref/source18:05
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC18:06
*** phil_h has left #openstack-meeting18:06
stevemarthere is some content missing, i've outline what is missing in the TODO section of the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-api-sprint18:06
*** sudipto has quit IRC18:06
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting18:06
shalehstevemar: bug friday work?18:06
dstanekstevemar: when do you plan on sprinting?18:07
*** Chirag has quit IRC18:07
stevemardstanek: the dates are on the etherpad, july 13 and 14th18:07
gyeestevemar, we still care about WADLs and XSTs from V2 world?18:07
stevemargyee: there are no more WADLs or XSTs or any of that18:07
gyeeoh good!18:07
stevemargyee: the pieces that need to be filled are all v3 related18:07
dstanekstevemar: those dates work for me18:08
stevemardstanek: if you're interested, add your name to the volunteers list :)18:08
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:08
dstanekwill do18:08
stevemari'll publish a hangouts link as the day approaches18:09
*** maishsk has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
stevemarit'll be a quick way to get reviews and commits, i'll focus on those that day18:09
*** unicell has quit IRC18:09
stevemarif something doesn't make sense, then ask me in -keystone :)18:09
gyeesounds good18:09
stevemarnext topic! specs18:09
*** sdake_ has quit IRC18:10
stevemar#topic discuss open keystone specs for newton18:10
*** openstack changes topic to "discuss open keystone specs for newton (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:10
stevemarwe have the keystone feature proposal freeze happening next week: http://releases.openstack.org/newton/schedule.html18:10
*** jamesmca_ has quit IRC18:10
stevemarerr sorry18:10
stevemarwe have the spec freeze *THIS* week18:10
topolo/18:11
stevemarso specs have to be merged this week, or they are bumped to ocata18:11
stevemarstart bugging cores18:11
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC18:11
stevemar#topic specs related to federation18:11
*** openstack changes topic to "specs related to federation (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:11
stevemarenhance mapping (dolph) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/324055/18:11
stevemarfederated query API (ayoung) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/313604/18:12
stevemarspecify project id (amakarov) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323499/18:12
*** markstur_ has left #openstack-meeting18:12
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:12
stevemardolphm's spec has seen a lot of positive feedback18:12
*** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting18:12
stevemarideally i want only one of these to be approved, since i think they are trying to solve the same issue18:12
*** ivc_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:12
gyeeenhance mapping doesn't seem to solve custom project Id, as far as I can tell18:12
stevemarayoung and amakarov are not here to defend :(18:13
stevemardolphm: can you speak to that point? ^18:13
samueldmqit allows you specify a project name, and if that isn't created it does on dmeand18:13
gyeeI did a quick review this morning and had a few concerns18:13
samueldmqdemand18:13
samueldmqiirc18:13
samueldmqgyee:  ^18:13
stevemargyee: the custom project ID was (IIRC) so federating projects could happen18:13
stevemargyee: are your concerns blockers?18:14
shalehBut amarakov was interested in more than just federated, right?18:14
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:14
gyeesamueldmq, stevemar, that's for mirroring projects, same ID, same name, same everything18:14
*** unicell has joined #openstack-meeting18:14
gyeeshaleh, right, basically, replicating projects18:14
jamielennoxcreating with a custom project id was a cheap version of replication - i'm still not convinced we should allow that18:14
henrynashjamielennox: ++18:15
samueldmqgyee: If any of those projects or roles do not exist, they must be created by Keystone automatically.18:15
*** tonytan4ever has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
stevemargyee: what jamielennox said18:15
samueldmqgyee:  from the spec  ^18:15
gyeejamielennox, sure, but that's a different argument18:15
*** maeca1 has quit IRC18:15
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC18:15
jamielennoxgyee: why? if we don't need it then we don't need to cover the spec18:15
*** maeca1 has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
*** longxiongqiu has joined #openstack-meeting18:15
stevemargyee: the mapping enhancements that dolph proposed will create the project automatically if it's not there18:15
samueldmqstevemar: exactly18:16
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:16
*** maeca1 has quit IRC18:16
dolphm#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/324055/18:16
gyeestevemar, that's very different than asking for the same project ID :-)18:16
shalehas for dolphm's spec I like the idea of it but I share ayoung's concern over testability and maintainability18:16
gyeeso those specs are unrelated18:16
dstaneki really don't like the idea of supporting replication through the api18:16
dstanekthere be dragons there and i don't like dragons18:16
shalehthere is a lot of room for oops and not a lot of great ways to test it.18:16
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:16
shalehdstanek: agreed18:16
samueldmqdstanek: ++18:16
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting18:16
*** lixinhui_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:17
gyeeI am merely pointing out that the two are unrelated18:17
shalehdolphm: as an operator making map files how do you intend for them to ensure they are not over/under specing?18:17
stevemargyee: they are not as unrelated as you think18:17
gyeeso we are not confused18:17
dolphmdstanek: shaleh: which spec has dragons? all 3 result in some means of "replication"18:17
*** sdake has quit IRC18:17
stevemargyee: they are both trying to solve the case of federating keystones18:17
gyeestevemar, no, the replicate project one is very different18:18
shalehstevemar: amarakov was not necessarily using federation.18:18
*** longxiongqiu has quit IRC18:18
dolphmshaleh: "over / under speccing" as in granting or not granting enough authorization?18:18
shalehstevemar: he just has multiple datacenters trying to use the same data18:18
gyeedolphm, does mapping allowed replicating by ID?18:18
dstanekdolphm: 'specify project id (amakarov) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323499/' moreso than yours, but it's possible yours can be abused too?18:18
shalehdolphm: yes. or mistaking the projects named, etc.18:18
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:19
shalehdolphm: as you point out in the spec when an oops is found the clean up can be non-trivial.18:19
ayoungshaleh, question for you later...don't disappear18:19
dolphmgyee: i only specified it for project names, but you could extend it to project IDs if there was a use case18:19
*** toscalix has quit IRC18:19
shalehdolphm: while I do not 100% agree with ayoung's spec I like the problems he raises18:19
gyeedolphm, if we extend it to project IDs then we can close the other one18:19
stevemarayoung: welcome18:20
shalehayoung: k18:20
gyeethat's precisely what the other one wants18:20
jamielennoxand i'd still be -118:20
*** maeca1 has joined #openstack-meeting18:20
ayoungluddites.18:21
*** spzala has quit IRC18:21
ayoungmyself included18:21
gyee-1 for what?18:21
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
jamielennoxdon't specifiy project id!18:21
gyeeduuuude18:21
jamielennoxanywhere!18:21
shalehdolphm: I would be positive on your spec if we included some helping mechanism like ayoung proposes.18:21
ayoungjamielennox, I like that18:21
ayoungtreat ids like inodes18:21
ayounghow often do you specify anything by inode id18:22
*** lixinhui_ has quit IRC18:22
stevemargyee: do any other APIs allow to specify ids?18:22
gyeejamielennox, what we are offering is choice and flexibility, didn't ops said galera replication falls over after certain number of masters?18:22
jamielennoxanyway personal opinion, dolphm to fix spec to commit this cycle - others not18:22
ayoungTODO list: 1.  Kille domains.  2. Make projects hierarchical.  3.  Make project name a URL18:22
*** yamamoto has quit IRC18:23
shalehayoung: not there yet :-)18:23
ayoungshaleh, I've beeen *there* for 4+ years now18:23
*** TaylorHuang has joined #openstack-meeting18:23
gyeeayoung, unless you enjoying typing the entire url via cURL18:23
shalehayoung: no, I mean we are talking about other specs at the moment18:23
*** sarob has quit IRC18:23
ayounggyee, no problem18:23
ayoungits called a hyperlink18:23
*** aranjan has quit IRC18:24
ayoungnew fangled thing18:24
ayoungthink it is going to catch on18:24
gyeelets make ayoung type in his LDAP DN every time he authenticates18:24
stevemar:)18:24
ayounggyee, nah, I want LDAP to convert to using URLs too18:24
stevemarayoung: can the snark :P18:24
ayoungX500 notation is gah18:24
shalehdolphm: in classic ops there is a testing env before rolling a change out to prod. I do not see a sensible way to validate the mapping change in testing env.18:24
ayoungstevemar, all this is, strange to say, that I like and support dolphm's spec18:25
gyeeshaleh, if you don't validate mapping during testing, you are asking for trouble :-)18:25
stevemarayoung: \o/ hallelujah18:25
ayoungstevemar, I think that, however, we are going to need all those other things I posted only "seemingly" humorously18:25
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting18:26
ayoungwe need to kill, or at least, de-emphasize domains18:26
henrynashproposal: dolph’s speec gets the nod, the others are bumped18:26
ayoungwe need to have the ability to have users be self adminig for common tasks18:26
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:26
stevemarhenrynash: i was just writing that18:26
gyeeyou can self admin today, just tweak the policies18:26
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:26
henrynashesp, man, esp18:26
ayoungwe need to be able to ahve a project on keystone-over-there mirrored in this keystone for federation, but the unique namiong thing gets in the way18:26
stevemargyee: are your concerns about dolphm's spec blockers?18:26
topolayoung did you check with henrynash  on your domain bashing? I think he needs them for something18:26
*** TaylorH has quit IRC18:26
ayoungtopol, nah he is having them forced on him18:27
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:27
stevemargyee: ?18:27
ayoungto aboid the the strict naming thing18:27
gyeestevemar, no, if you guys added id mapping, I am happy18:27
henrynash(ducks)18:27
stevemarokay, done18:27
stevemardolphm's spec gets the nod, provided he does some clean up of the current iteration18:27
ayounghenrynash is a pragmatist, and working within the policies of the current Amdminstration18:27
stevemarothers are bumped for now18:27
stevemar#topic specs related to service-to-service communication18:27
ayoungstevemar, list of "opthers"18:27
*** openstack changes topic to "specs related to service-to-service communication (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:27
* ayoung had network issue18:28
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:28
stevemarayoung: federated query API (ayoung) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/313604/  and specify project id (amakarov) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323499/18:28
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:28
stevemarayoung: OK to continue to next topic?18:28
ayoungstevemar, yeah, I can live with that18:28
ayoungs2s is important18:28
stevemarayoung: ty18:28
*** johndperkins has joined #openstack-meeting18:28
stevemarjamielennox: you're on the hot seat18:28
gyeestevemar, no need to bump project id, we just need to merge it with dolphm's18:28
ayoungand I I think jamielennox 's approach is good18:28
*** sarob has quit IRC18:28
dstanekfg18:29
stevemargyee: do a follow on patch then18:29
gyeestevemar, yes sir18:29
jamielennoxso, i think the service users spec got nacked by the security group and i kind of agree with them18:29
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting18:29
jamielennoxthe reservations spec still needs a better name and a lot more work18:29
* topol me too :-)18:29
jamielennoxi'm hoping to get some time with people at the midcylce to hash out some more details and make sure everyone understands it18:30
ayoungjamielennox, operational tokens18:30
*** pnavarro has quit IRC18:30
jamielennoxhopefully have code examples too18:30
*** csomerville has quit IRC18:30
stevemarjamielennox: i left some comments there, i'm not sure if there's an operation that uses the token multiple times right now18:30
ayoungjamielennox, a reservation, as you origianlly described it, is a rule to transition18:30
samueldmqjamielennox: so you're aiming for Ocata ?18:30
ayoungfrom the token a user origianlly requests,18:31
ayoungto permissions for a specified operation.18:31
stevemarsamueldmq: i would think it's newton18:31
jamielennoxSo abandon one, and i want to work with people on the reservations one over the next few months and land early ocata18:31
*** Leo_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
stevemarokay18:31
*** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
jamielennoxi think of it as capability tokens but whatever, i've been trying to avoid saying token18:31
stevemarjamielennox: can you abandon the correct one18:31
ayoungthe idea of a "reservation" though, is that you go to glance and create the reservation.   Lets drop that word18:31
*** maeca1 has quit IRC18:31
* topol reservations always reminds me of Dave Cheritons famous paper on Leases. If anyone besides me and ayoung remember that work18:31
ayoungit really does not reflect your current design18:31
ayoungtopol, oooh18:31
ayoungLease....18:32
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:32
ayoungtopol, can you find a link?18:32
*** adrianofr has joined #openstack-meeting18:32
topolsure18:32
dolphm#link http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/89-leases.pdf18:32
gyeewe have trust, oauth, and now reservations, goody18:32
dolphmtopol: ^18:32
stevemarwell since one is abandoned and the other is targeting ocata, i don't see a reason to continue this topic18:32
ayoung198918:32
topolhttp://web.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/89-leases.pdf18:32
stevemarjamielennox: are you OK with that?18:33
topol2nd place18:33
samueldmqstevemar: ++18:33
jamielennoxstevemar: yep18:33
ayounggyee, this is why we wanted unified delegation18:33
ayoungthey are all different use cases18:33
stevemarokay, next topic, none of this is landing in newton18:33
*** csomerville has joined #openstack-meeting18:33
stevemar#topic specs related to HMT18:34
*** openstack changes topic to "specs related to HMT (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:34
stevemarhenrynash: where's the popcorn?18:34
topolgyee makes a good point listing all the options that makes our consumability difficult18:34
henrynashok, so https://review.openstack.org/#/c/332940/  is the key18:34
henrynashrequest last week was to get more feedback18:34
ayoungSo...while I think this review is 100% sane and something we should support, not allowing the nested naming under projects is criminal18:35
gyeehenrynash, lets do V4 and get it over with :-)18:35
henrynashso far have feedback from 2 operators in the the UK (once called datacentred,who host revenue and customs), plis one other18:35
ayounggyee, or just accept the relaxation of the rule in V3.  We are making people's lives difficult with no reason.18:35
ayoungBut...all that asid18:35
ayounge18:35
ayounglets get Henry's work going so we can continue to confuse people with domains...which are still not supported in any service other than Keystone18:36
topolcould we goto the TC and get the rule relaxed?18:36
*** cody-somerville has quit IRC18:36
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:36
ayoungtopol, no, because4 our local TC rep is one of the luddites keeping us here18:36
henrynashso far thefeedback is supportive of the concept, although I agree 2 feedbacks does not give us a lot of cover18:36
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:36
gyeetopol, afaik, TC's job is to cut ribbons18:36
jamielennoxi still think when combined with things like domain specific backends and domain specific roles this is going to get difficult18:36
stevemartopol: i see no reason they wouldn't say to keep API compat18:36
* topol one time mulligan?18:36
ayoungtopol, here's how I see it18:37
ayoungwe can punt and say "aok, diomains can be allowed to do this18:37
*** aranjan has joined #openstack-meeting18:37
ayoungand in doing so, we've kept the letter of the law18:37
*** asettle has quit IRC18:37
ayoungeffectively cr3eaing a feature that is unusable18:37
henrynashayoung: ?18:37
ayoungand we do that vbecause the fear of relasing the naming within "proejctes" which, as averyone know, are still usually called tenants18:38
ayoungwill break something18:38
ayounghenrynash, nested domains18:38
ayounghenrynash, nested domains are legal and useless18:38
ayounghenrynash, we should never have even included the conceopt of domains18:38
ayoungwe should have made projects hierarchical from the get go18:38
henrynashayoung: namespaces are needed18:39
ayoungwe should have made IdPs into domains18:39
henrynashayoung: agreed, we should have done that for projects18:39
ayoungwe did neither fo those things and made a mess18:39
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:39
ayounghenrynash, hierarchical projects *should* have been our namespaces18:39
ayoungajnd henrynash I won't hold this up18:39
ayoungbut, prcatically, these are not going to fit in with an tyhning today18:39
ayoungright now, it is  all about quota18:40
gyeeayoung, I disagree, that's a long argument we need to have over beers :-)18:40
ayoungand quoata is not a domain option18:40
samueldmqkk, let's just fix the "mess" if we can or leave with it18:40
ayounggyee, I blame you18:40
bretonindeed, we have a lot of simialar concepts sparsely used18:40
samueldmqwe can't rollback doamins ...18:40
ayounggyee, acatull;y, I blame me18:40
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:40
henrynashayoung: and sicne domains are projects, you DO get quotes here18:40
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting18:40
ayoungso...why do we want this?18:40
gyeethe reasons for domains are well stated18:40
ayounghenrynash, not really18:40
ayounghenrynash, quoats are assigned on projects *under* domains today18:41
ayoungso if I get a domain scoped token, and iti s under another domain it will not fit under current quota18:41
henrynashayoung: since they were designed before projects could ast as domains, now we have that, this can be repalces18:41
rodrigodsayoung, you can get a project scoped token18:41
rodrigodswith the is_domain on it18:41
*** thorst_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:41
*** aranjan has quit IRC18:41
ayounggyee, the reasons are solid, the fact that they were not done as projects was the mistake18:41
rodrigodsright?18:41
*** thorst_ has quit IRC18:41
dolphmayoung: ++18:41
henrynashrodigods: ++18:42
*** aranjan has joined #openstack-meeting18:42
*** thorst_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:42
rodrigodsso you can enforce this in the policy files18:42
*** lpetrut has quit IRC18:42
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting18:42
raildotoday, we can set quota for a "domain" using, the project acting as domain since mitaka18:42
ayoungwhat we need is a way to do openstack <operation> --user-domain-name=somedomain --proejct=name=test  and have that work when there are two projects named test18:42
rodrigodsand to set "domain" quotas, just need to add the is_domain in the policy rule18:43
ayoungthe rest of this is avoiduing that discussion18:43
gyeeyou can't get a project-scoped token with is_domain set to True today, can you?18:43
ayoungirrelevant18:43
ayoungdomains are not a concept we can have outside of Keystone today.  We need nested projects for the rest of the world, not for Keystone18:43
ayoungthis *is* namespaceing18:43
ayoungand we missed the opportunity to do it right...years agbo18:44
ayoungago18:44
ayounghell, we inherited it18:44
henrynashayoung: we;ve had that discussion. And teh concensus was it was too risky. WE are not green field any more. We have to work within the echos of our past deicsions18:44
*** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting18:44
ayounghenrynash, that does not mean making useless mechanism18:44
ayoungs18:44
ayoungand nested domains are going to be just that18:44
jamielennoxfrom a UX perspective to perform this will require a user to use --os-domain-name parent/project instead of --os-project-name which i feel is also weird18:44
jamielennox(and we should say "project acting as a domain" as little as possible to the rest of the world)18:44
ayoungjamielennox, that is what everything should be a URL18:45
dolphmjamielennox: ++18:45
ayoungwhen I get a scoped token, I should pass in a URL18:45
ayoungand only that URL, I might add18:45
stevemari don't see this being resolved any time soon, i am more than happy to give this a FFE after the midcycle, i'm thinking it'll be better discussed in person?18:45
ayoungseriaously, If I were doing this from scratch:  BASIC_AUTH <userid>/passwrod GET https://url/down/to/project and dopne18:45
henrynashstevemar: agreed18:45
ayoungbut..regardless...will nested domains buy us anything18:46
ayoung?18:46
henrynashayoung: yes, but lets defere to in-person18:46
ayoungcan anywon besides henrynash say that it will?18:46
henrynashayoung (it’s nice to be special)18:46
ayounghenrynash, sorry to do this to you, becuase I know you are trying to get things done18:46
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:46
henrynashayoung: but if I can’t convince more than myslef, then we shouldn’t do it18:47
stevemarayoung: it's fine, i appreciate your opinion on this18:47
dstanekayoung: henrynash: does this solve/hurt reseller?18:47
henrynashdstanek: it aids reseller big time18:47
henrynashdstanek: but I didn’t wnat to complicate the spec with that18:47
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:47
stevemardstanek: yeah, it would be essential for reseller18:47
raildodstanek, this help a lot the reseller use case, but I think we need a couple more of work on it18:47
raildobut it is a huge step18:48
dstanekhenrynash: i just asked because ayoung was asking what else it buys us18:48
ayounghenrynash, I think it limits reseller to one level, if I understand how things are going to be done.18:48
ayoungsay..Verizon to momandpop18:48
ayoungmom and pop need to be able to create domains under momandpop.18:48
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:48
henrynashayoung: no it can be multi-level (but again, a discssio for another day)18:48
henrynashstevemar: next18:48
ayoungand ther we run into the unique naming thing/information hiding issues that were so central to Reserller years ago18:48
stevemaris amakarov here?18:48
stevemar#topci spec for RBAC support18:49
stevemar#topic spec for RBAC support18:49
*** openstack changes topic to "spec for RBAC support (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:49
bretonhe's not18:49
stevemar(amakarov) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/325326/18:49
*** aranjan has quit IRC18:49
stevemari haven't reviewed it yet, the title confuses me, i thought we already have rbac support :P18:49
ayoungstevemar, termie suggested this back in Vancouver18:49
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting18:50
henrynashthis is basically to have non-bearer tokens...18:50
ayoungmove policy enforcement into Keystone instead of "token validation" in Keystone, policy in middleware18:50
notmorganthis wont fly18:50
notmorganjst fyi18:50
notmorganother projects have to opt in/buy in. i am doubtful this will happen18:50
raildoon this spec, I like the idea to improve the oslo.policy support18:50
henrynash….by having keystone give the final say on whether user has sufficient roles at the point of policy enforcement18:50
notmorgannot that it would be good/bad18:50
shalehnotmorgan: agreed. I do not see Nova going for this after the work they have put in recently.18:51
jamielennoxfrom my understanding of it we need to discuss it a lot more first18:51
dstaneki don't see how this eliminates bearer tokens, but i've old just browsed the spec18:51
ayoungnotmorgan, so...it could actually be done without their support18:51
henrynashjamielennox: ++18:51
notmorgandstanek: it doesn't18:51
ayoungsince the call to validate a token is in Keystone middleware, it would jsut require adding more data into the call, which could, in theory, be validated later18:51
jamielennoxi was hoping he'd be at the midcycle but i don't thinks o18:51
henrynashisn’t that in the pre-amble?18:52
notmorganayoung: but enforcement has to happen based on results from the data in db.18:52
ayoungnotmorgan, it would be kindof like the suggesting that we split policy18:52
jamielennoxbecause it would tie into policy ideas for reservations18:52
*** aranjan_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:52
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:52
notmorganso, we can't enforce in middleware18:52
notmorganat the moment18:52
*** lpetrut has quit IRC18:52
ayoungnotmorgan, just hte "role" part would be in middleware18:52
ayoungnot the the "and the proejct matches" part18:52
henrynashstevemar: I can’t imagine we can apprive this for Newton…given the scope of this18:53
shalehhenrynash: +++++18:53
ayounginstead we say "assumign the proejct matches, would this be allowed"18:53
stevemarthis is certainly a large endeavor18:53
*** hogepodge has quit IRC18:53
dstaneki thought a tenant of the openstack architecture was to push out the policy on purpose so that identity wasn't hit when it didn't need to be18:53
ayoungand then policy would do "and the proejct matches" inside the code in the API call, aftermiddleware18:53
dstanekhenrynash: i thought i read that somewhere in the spec18:53
topoldstanek +++18:53
stevemarhenrynash: for sure not newton, but no reason we can't aim for ocata and start the work now18:53
ayoungdstanek, it is hit for token validation anyway18:53
notmorganayoung: current architecture does not work that way18:53
ayoungif you wanted to optimize, you could do this:18:53
stevemari'm going to ask for reviews to look at the spec, but i honestly don't think it can make newton18:54
ayoungcall keystone with token and proejct Id.  Response comes back with a list of operations that are allowed18:54
stevemarwe are cutting newton-2 in 7 days18:54
stevemarand this is moving a mountain18:54
ayoungit really is not18:54
raildostevemar, ++18:54
henrynashdstanek: line 89: The current architecture (with role assignment control and policy enforcement18:54
henrynashseparated) forces us to use bearer tokens18:54
gyeeso we are hitting keystone on every authz call? performance will be fun18:54
ayoungit might be triggering a landslide...18:54
*** baojg has quit IRC18:54
stevemarayoung: :)18:54
topoltsunami!18:55
henrynashwhere’s that boat I had handy18:55
shalehayoung: there is now a tool in oslo.policy which does what you ask18:55
stevemarayoung: something i'm not comfortable with in the middle of the cycle, things like this need to land *early*18:55
stevemarlike crazy early18:55
ayoungstevemar, I think all it would allow is adding in a flag to allow returing a list of allowed operations for the given endpoint18:55
ayoungshaleh, I know.  I wrote it.18:55
shalehstevemar: talking about it now, preparing for O is not a bad idea though. But the spec is still a little rough.18:55
*** dtrainor has quit IRC18:56
stevemarshaleh: yep, also why O is a better candidate here18:56
*** AJaeger has joined #openstack-meeting18:56
*** dtrainor has joined #openstack-meeting18:56
stevemarreally quickly, i want to talk about henry's last spec18:56
ayoungstevemar, I think we should discuss at the midcycle.  We might be able to do this with minimal impact.  WOuld be Beta quality whenver it lands18:56
stevemar#topic keystone-manage migration-complete step for rolling upgrades18:56
*** openstack changes topic to "keystone-manage migration-complete step for rolling upgrades (Meeting topic: keystone)"18:56
*** piet has quit IRC18:56
henrynashhttps://review.openstack.org/33768018:56
stevemarayoung: i'm OK with that18:56
ayounghenrynash, I think I was too harsh on nested domains18:56
henrynashayoung: np18:57
ayoungI think that I was conflating two issues18:57
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC18:57
henrynashThis is really to fix bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1596500 as well as prevent the same happening with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/328447/, but given questions about our rolling upgrade support, I wrote a short spec for it.18:57
openstackLaunchpad bug 1596500 in OpenStack Identity (keystone) "Passwords created_at attribute could remain unset during rolling upgrade" [Undecided,New] - Assigned to Henry Nash (henry-nash)18:57
ayoungand I think that nested domains, for reseller, while it would impose some limitations, is a legitimate way to work it18:57
shalehhenrynash: I like this. It sounds very reasonable.18:57
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting18:57
*** pabelanger has joined #openstack-meeting18:57
*** sarob has quit IRC18:58
henrynashdolphm: I think you had (many) concerns about rolling upgrdaes?18:58
ayounghenrynash, just so I have it here on the record...I am not opposed to nested domains, and support it for HMT.18:58
henrynashayoung: Ok!18:58
*** gagehugo has quit IRC18:58
*** M00nr41n has quit IRC18:58
dstanekayoung: that's a ringing endorsement if i've ever heard one18:59
stevemarhenrynash: i am wondering how other services (nova) does this18:59
henrynashany other comments of https://review.openstack.org/337680?18:59
topoldstanek +++.  Write that down18:59
gyeedstanek, he'll change his mind tomorrow :-)18:59
ayoungdstanek, I still think we messed up, and we're making henrynash the cleanup guy here.18:59
henrynashstevemar: so this is how they “say” they are going to do it!18:59
topolno. its set in stone now and we move fwd18:59
*** M00nr41n has joined #openstack-meeting19:00
stevemarhenrynash: include any refs to that statement :)19:00
henrynashstevemar; I can’t see andy cide, however19:00
ayoungOK...we need a block of time to talk rolling upgrades19:00
henrynashany code19:00
stevemarhenrynash: i don't want to confuse any ops with new db commands19:00
stevemar#endmeeting19:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"19:00
ayounghenrynash, I think I see what you are getting at.19:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 19:00:27 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)19:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2016/keystone.2016-07-05-18.00.html19:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2016/keystone.2016-07-05-18.00.txt19:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2016/keystone.2016-07-05-18.00.log.html19:00
topolayoung, we all are in this together. we all live with the consequences19:00
dolphmhenrynash: can we catchup on that bug tomorrow? rderose is afk today19:00
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting19:00
stevemarthanks for attending all!19:00
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:00
fungiwho wants to talk about infra things? and stuff?19:00
pleia2o/19:00
clarkbme19:01
Zarao/19:01
anteayaI am here19:01
fungitopics proposed by nibalizer, jhesketh, anteaya (with a request for zaro), and clarkb19:01
SotKo/19:01
jeblaironly thingies!19:01
AJaegero/19:01
bkeroo/19:01
*** bethwhite has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
*** shaleh has left #openstack-meeting19:01
*** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting19:01
*** jamielennox has left #openstack-meeting19:01
fungiclarkb: i say you have a topic on the agenda, but you haven't added it (yet)19:01
asselin__o/19:01
clarkbfungi: I did...19:01
jheskethMorning19:01
AJaegerfungi, it's there19:01
nibalizerohai19:02
nibalizeri don't actually need my topic, its stale19:02
fungiclarkb: oh, under priority efforts19:02
clarkbunder priority efforts since I think that was how we were going t oapproach it19:02
rcarrillocruzo/19:02
clarkbI just need to make a mini spec once we hvae a rough plan sorted out of all the bad ideas19:02
mordredo/19:02
fungiclarkb: fine by me19:02
fungi#startmeeting infra19:02
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 19:02:41 2016 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
fungi#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting19:02
fungi#topic Announcements19:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: infra)"19:02
fungi#info Reminder: late-cycle joint Infra/QA get together to be held September 19-21 (CW38) in at SAP offices in Walldorf, DE19:02
fungi#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints/QAInfraNewtonSprint19:03
fungialso, for those of you who missed last week's meeting due to travel/holiday/other, we have two new infra-core reviewers/infra-root sysadmins: rcarrillocruz (just back from holiday) and ianw (now on holiday himself, i believe)19:03
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting19:03
mordred\o/19:03
pleia2\o/19:03
rcarrillocruz\o/19:03
jeblaircongrats!19:03
rcarrillocruzthx folks :-)19:03
fungi#topic Actions from last meeting19:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Actions from last meeting (Meeting topic: infra)"19:03
fungi#link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-06-28-19.03.html19:03
fungiclarkb bring xenial default job transition discussion to the mailing list19:03
fungi#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2016-June/004479.html19:03
fungidiscussion underway!19:04
pabelangero/19:04
*** lennyb has quit IRC19:04
fungithat's all we had from last week's actions19:04
jeblairthank you for that -- i was much more able to participate in ml discussion on that last week than i would have otherwise19:04
fungiand there's a discussion topic proposed later in the meeting to go into detail19:04
*** nk2527 has quit IRC19:04
fungi#topic Specs approval19:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Specs approval (Meeting topic: infra)"19:04
fungi#info APPROVED Update Artifact Signing details19:04
fungi#link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/artifact-signing.html19:04
fungi#topic APPROVED Add wiki modernization spec19:05
*** openstack changes topic to "APPROVED Add wiki modernization spec (Meeting topic: infra)"19:05
Zara\o/19:05
fungi#link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/wiki_modernization.rst19:05
bkero\o/19:05
pleia2^^ which will be real the next time the specs jobs runs ;)19:05
fungii just ran it moments ago, so should be there now?19:05
pleia2404 here19:05
*** abregman|afk has joined #openstack-meeting19:05
bkero404s here too19:05
fungi(had to look up the trigger-job.py syntax since it was only in my history on the old zuul)19:05
notmorgano/19:06
anteayaI have http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/wiki_modernization.html19:06
abregman|afk\o19:06
fungioh19:06
fungi#undo19:06
openstackRemoving item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Link object at 0x7f2b35c722d0>19:06
anteayathe .rst file 404s19:06
fungi#link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/wiki_modernization.html19:06
anteayathanks19:06
pleia2aha thanks anteaya19:06
anteayawelcome19:06
fungii formed the link incorrectly since i wrote the notes before that job ran ;)19:06
anteayaah19:06
fungi#topic Specs approval: EXTENDED Finglonger (nibalizer)19:06
*** openstack changes topic to "Specs approval: EXTENDED Finglonger (nibalizer) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:06
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/31094819:06
fungilooks like this needed a little more time to bake in review19:06
*** bethwhite has quit IRC19:07
funginibalizer: do you want to shoot for council voting on it this week, or does it need more work still?19:07
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:07
*** jaugustine has quit IRC19:07
fungii'm guessing we have no nibalizer19:07
*** s3wong has quit IRC19:07
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting19:08
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting19:08
fungiit can be reproposed for voting when he's ready to bring it back up19:08
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:08
nibalizerno im here19:08
fungiahh, cool!19:08
nibalizerbut yea we're having conversation in the spec19:08
nibalizerso lets just shelve this until we're ready to bring it back to the council19:08
fungiwe can put it back to proposed for next week if you want, sure19:08
fungii'll pull it from the agenda in the interim19:09
nibalizerthanks clarkb rcarrillocruz ianw_pto an jhesketh for feedback19:09
*** bethwhite has joined #openstack-meeting19:09
nibalizeryes pull it, i can add it back when it is time19:09
rcarrillocruz++19:09
fungi#topic (Proposed) Priority Effort: Newton on Xenial (clarkb)19:10
*** openstack changes topic to "(Proposed) Priority Effort: Newton on Xenial (clarkb) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:10
fungion the agenda you wrote: "Need to decide on Gearman strategy then we can work up a small spec."19:10
clarkbya so I sent mail to the infra list with a few options19:11
clarkbthe two basic ideas are go with what we did last time which no one seems to like much. Make every test job in JJB have a specific node type then zuul can run different tests for old and new branches19:11
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting19:12
*** clenimar has quit IRC19:12
clarkbif we don't change zuul at all then the first option will result in ~1.5X the number of jobs we have right now. The second will result in ~2X19:12
fungi#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2016-June/004479.html19:12
clarkbif we use https://review.openstack.org/#/c/336311/ then we can keep the job registrations roughly equivalent to what we hvae now19:12
fungi(same thread linked in the action items topic earlier)19:12
anteayathanks19:12
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/33631119:12
clarkbConsidering previous feedback I think we should go with the explicit job per image type with change 336311 in use with zuul19:13
clarkbif there isn't strong opposition I will throw that into a spec this afternoon so we can make it official like. Also open to other ideas that people like more19:13
jeblairi don't know what our current job registration max is -- i think/hope the mass_do change made things better there -- but i'd rather not find out this way, so i like 336311.19:13
fungii haven't reviewed the diff, but the suggestion in the commit message is at least very compelling19:14
clarkbjeblair: we have also cleaned out about 1300ish unused jobs19:14
clarkbwhich should help keep us in a more reasonable place19:14
jeblairnice!19:14
fungiby gettign a little more judicious about what jobs are included in some of the more common job-groups19:15
clarkbyes thank you AJaeger for pushing on that19:15
jhesketh+119:15
AJaegerkeep in mind that python-jobs has fewer jobs now...19:16
*** MeganR has quit IRC19:17
clarkbanyways I don't hear dissent or more better ideas so will go with explicit image type jobs and the zuul change as th eplan19:17
fungi#agreed Newton on Xenial spec will propose distro-specific job names with zuul-launcher improvement to make node labels optional in registrations19:17
*** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting19:17
fungithat look right?19:17
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:17
anteayait does to me19:17
clarkblftm19:18
clarkb*lgtm19:18
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:18
* fungi read that as "looks fine to me" ;)19:18
anteayaI thought you were going with 'looks fine to me'19:18
fungi#topic Barcelona summit talk submissions (jhesketh)19:18
*** openstack changes topic to "Barcelona summit talk submissions (jhesketh) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:18
anteayaand I was thinking clarkb you trendsetter you19:18
jheskethThis was just a reminder the deadline is coming up if anybody wants to work on a proposal19:18
fungi#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2016-June/004416.html19:18
rcarrillocruzyep, thx for reminding19:18
jheskethPossibly the easiest way is to start a new etherpad and share on the list19:19
pleia2jhesketh: newer than this? https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/barcelona-upstream-openstack-infa19:19
pabelangeri think we can use the same etherpad, just reorg it better19:19
pleia2I think we're doing ok with this one from pabelanger's initial email19:19
pleia2pabelanger: yeah19:19
*** julim has quit IRC19:19
pabelangerthat's what we did last time around19:19
pabelangerworked well I think19:19
pleia2did anyone reach out to thingee to see if lightning talks are a thing this time around?19:20
fungimtreinish and i are putting in one to the upstream dev track for the "firehose" spec (whereby i actually mean mtreinish has done all the work so far and i've been slacking, so i need to put something together on my end asap)19:20
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:20
mtreinishfungi: heh19:20
pleia2fungi: great19:20
thingeepleia2: yes, session is in19:20
pabelangerI'm interested to get some feedback from crinkle, rcarrillocruz on infracloud. See if there is interest to do a talk on that19:20
jheskethSure I didn't realise the intention was to put abstracts in there but that works  (rather than  talk ideas)19:20
mtreinishfungi: to be fair everything I've done has been incomplete too :)19:20
rcarrillocruzpabelanger: yup, just wrote it down my insterest19:20
pleia2thingee: cool, how should we submit proposals for that?19:20
thingeepleia2: I should send that email. was distracted with leadership training then fourth of july stuffs19:20
fungimtreinish: story of my life19:20
pleia2thingee: yes, thank you :)19:21
rcarrillocruzi'm cool working with you crinkle and whoever on writing it down19:21
* thingee makes to do item now19:21
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-meeting19:21
pabelangerrcarrillocruz: sure19:21
fungiokay, so was this a good sync-up/redirect to the thread and etherpad, or do we need to go deeper in th emeeting?19:22
fungijhesketh: ^ ?19:22
*** maeca1 has joined #openstack-meeting19:22
pabelangerI'm happy to work on it this week19:22
fungi#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/barcelona-upstream-openstack-infa19:22
jheskethfungi: I think let's work on it in the pad and on the list19:23
*** piet has quit IRC19:23
fungijhesketh: great--thanks for bringing it up!19:23
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting19:23
pleia2pabelanger: I'll come up with a title for the infra beginners talk and we can collaborate on that over the next few days19:23
fungi#topic What is the current status of the gerrit its-storyboard plugin? (anteaya)19:23
*** openstack changes topic to "What is the current status of the gerrit its-storyboard plugin? (anteaya) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:23
*** dimtruck is now known as zz_dimtruck19:24
anteayafungi: well zaro isn't here that I can see19:24
anteayaso perhaps we can skip to the next item?19:24
*** lennyb has joined #openstack-meeting19:24
fungiwell, one thing i can tell you is that puppet probably accidentally reverted his alterations on review-dev again back on june 30 because of a bug we have where groups weren't getting expanded19:24
anteayafungi: I saw that yeah, I'll remind him to reconfigure when he returns19:25
anteayahe might still be on holiday19:25
fungii added mordred's recommended workaround yesterday (adding everything from the disabled group in git to our emergency file for now)19:25
anteayaoh nice19:25
fungibut mordred is working on a more properish solution19:25
ZaraI think https://review.openstack.org/#/c/330925/ is safe to be un-WIP'd, btw19:25
pabelangerpleia2: thanks19:25
anteayawonderful19:25
ZaraI'm on holiday for the next few days but I've merged the patch that was waiting for19:25
*** sheel has quit IRC19:25
Zaraso if anyone needs to pass that on... there you go :)19:26
anteayaZara: thanks for that update, I'll share that with zaro upon his return19:26
mordredfungi: yah. I will write that up soonish19:26
anteayathank you, will pass it along19:26
fungii guess we can just move on to the other sb topic you've proposed?19:26
anteayasure19:26
fungi#topic StoryBoard comments, editing/deleting allowed or no? (anteaya)19:26
*** openstack changes topic to "StoryBoard comments, editing/deleting allowed or no? (anteaya) (Meeting topic: infra)"19:26
fungi#link http://docs.openstack.org/infra/storyboard/webapi/v1.html#put--v1-stories--story_id--comments currently the StoryBoard api allows for editing and deleting comments19:26
anteayaso the api allows one to edit or delete a comment19:26
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/33341819:26
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/33220819:27
*** hogepodge has quit IRC19:27
anteayathe description says update for both, but the second one is the delete action19:27
fungi#link https://review.openstack.org/33340919:27
anteayaI wanted to hear folks opinion on this19:27
anteayapersonally I'm not a fan of being able to edit or delete a comment19:27
anteayacreate yes, not other actions19:27
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:27
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC19:27
anteayaanyone else care to share their thoughts?19:27
mordredwe do not allow deleting comments in gerrit19:27
SotKI don't think we should allow deletion19:28
mordredI am in general agreement that for us deleting things like that is bad19:28
jeblairi agree.  if anything, it should be admin only.19:28
fungii'd like it to at least be configurable so that we can disable that behavior (except maybe for admins)19:28
mordredalthough I could certainly see other sb users having a different point of view on that19:28
ZaraI think editing comments was originally requested on the nova bugs team etherpad19:28
bkeroIt would be confusing to post something to StoryBoard then delete it, only to have it replicated to Gerrit.19:28
mordredyah - what fungi said19:28
reedadmin only, yes19:28
SotKZara: indeed19:28
reedsometimes you just need to delete stuff19:28
pabelangerhave we ever had to delete with spam or disrespectful comments?19:28
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:28
SotKis there any intention to duplicate StoryBoard comments to Gerrit?19:29
fungimy concern is that altering comments (the historical record) bifurcates discussion between those who have previously read them and those who are reading them for the first time19:29
* SotK doesn't think that would be hugely useful19:29
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting19:29
mordredfungi: ++19:29
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting19:29
anteayaSotK: we don't do that with launchpad19:29
mordredSotK: not to my knowledge, no - I was mostly mentioning as a point of "we have a ton of comments over there and don't allow deletion"19:29
pabelangerokay, now I understand19:29
Zarathe suggested implementation allows comment history to be retrieved19:29
fungii don't think we need sb to echo gerrit comments or vice versa19:30
anteayaZara: if you know to retrive it19:30
* SotK should've mentioned bkero in that19:30
anteayaZara: I think not knowing where to look would again lead to the bifurcation fungi mentions19:30
mordredI'm fine with editing if the old version remains (so that edit doesn't become "you delete it by replacing the comment with an empty string")19:30
bkeroSotK: I didn't know if that was a desired feature or not. I could see it being, so I thought I would comment.19:30
fungiwell, more "not knowing to look"19:30
anteayafungi: fair19:30
SotKanteaya: the WIP UI patch I sent allows anyone to see the full history of an edited comment19:30
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:31
*** gyee has quit IRC19:31
Zara#link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333418/19:31
anteayaSotK: I think as fungi said that at the very least it should be configurable to have that as the default, or disable the editing features19:31
SotKand we now keep history of any comments that are edited via the API, which is better than it was a couple of weeks back19:31
reedfungi, author's remorse, spam, legal requests all are good reasons to allow deletion19:31
*** coolsvap has quit IRC19:32
anteayawell if an admin needs to delete spam comments I would hope the history can be cleared too19:32
bkeroreed: there are non-regular-user ways of handling those in extreme cases19:32
*** Leo_ has quit IRC19:32
anteayaotherwise we are in the same problem with the wiki spam continually picked up by search engines even after it is deleted19:32
fungireed: yes, though it's currently by request on lp, so i don't see lack of general deletion support for users as something which would block our adopting storyboard19:32
mordred++19:32
reed++19:32
*** Leom has joined #openstack-meeting19:33
pleia2yeah, we do still have access to the database, after all19:33
SotKby request seems like the most sensible way to do deletion, if it is done at all19:33
fungiand the goal at this phase is to only identify things which prevent us from moving projects to storyboard, not poll them for ideas on how to make storyboard superior to what they're currently using19:33
anteayaright now I am leaning admin only on edit and delete on comments and if so then I don't think having a history is helping19:34
SotKit will be trivial for a DB admin to delete the history of a comment incidentally, and easy to write a patch to make the API do it if that is the intended behaviour19:34
anteayaunless all the history says is "deleted by admin"19:34
pleia2SotK: yeah, that's what I gathered from looking at the schema19:34
fungiyeah, i'm not particularly concerned about occasional deletion requests being handled with a mysql query. we already do that for, e.g., paste.o.o19:34
*** kebray has quit IRC19:35
jeblairyes, in my experience, the main reason to allow deletion for admins in a case like this is for legal reasons.  and in that case, we would not want to make history available.19:35
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:35
*** yamamoto has quit IRC19:35
Zaraas a user, I like being able to edit things.19:35
SotKZara: +119:36
bkeroAs a user I like being able to see that a message was edited though, especially if I am reviewing a thread19:36
anteayaas a consumer of a long standing comment stream, I like to have an accurate history19:36
bkeroNot that I need to see the content of that history. Just edited=119:36
rcarrillocruzthat is a good compromise ^19:36
*** nisha_ has quit IRC19:36
mordredI think it's important to continue our policy that once it's public, it's public, and there are no take-backs19:36
bkeroOtherwise I will review an old thread and might think I've gone crazy from mis-remembering because someone altered history silently19:36
anteayamordred: +!19:36
mordredbecause that is true whether you think it is or not19:36
anteayaand +119:36
fungithough if you're following stories via e-mail update, you would need some indication that had happened (especially in a particularly long story)19:36
jeblairdoes anyone think editing is important?19:37
rcarrillocruzi believe editing should be a thing, thinking of a user accidentally putting creds or something when pasting errors, logs, etc19:37
*** nisha_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:37
anteayajeblair: I do not19:37
SotKthis is the WIP UI btw: http://docs-draft.openstack.org/18/333418/3/check/gate-storyboard-webclient-js-draft/808fe8a//dist/19:37
fungii do not. the arguments i've seen so far are "it makes some users feel good that they can correct their typos" and "people who use popular web forums are used to being able to edit comments:19:37
mordredrcarrillocruz: we have actually explicitly refused to delete such mistakes in the past19:37
jeblairrcarrillocruz: that's the thing -- it's a false sense of security there.  people will have already received those in email.19:37
anteayarcarrillocruz: well it is the same situation if you do that in gerrit or launchpad or paste or etherpad now19:38
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:38
mordredyah19:38
mordredwhat jeblair said19:38
Zarathis is a story that has been edited via the wip if anyone wants an example:  http://docs-draft.openstack.org/18/333418/3/check/gate-storyboard-webclient-js-draft/808fe8a//dist/#!/story/2419:38
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:38
bkeroI think that editing is an important feature for admins to have, but I generally like the idea that discussion pieces are immutable19:38
bkeros/editing/removal/19:38
jeblairas an admin, i don't want editing.  i want, at most, deleting19:38
jeblair(and i'm okay if the way to do that is a database)19:38
anteayabkero: well as has been pointed out admins have access to the db19:38
clarkbjeblair: as long as its a simple db edit19:39
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting19:39
fungiand the schema is cleanly designed to make it safe and easy to delete a comment19:39
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting19:39
bkeroSo we're only discussing the ability for a user to edit posts then19:39
jeblairbut i don't think user self-editing should be a thing -- it doesn't do what people will think it does, and it encourages confusion in messages19:39
*** Teresita-Warrior has joined #openstack-meeting19:39
anteayabkero: I'm dicussing the api19:39
anteayabkero: right now the api allows any registered user to edit and delete comments19:39
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC19:40
bkerookay19:40
anteayabkero: thanks for clarifying19:40
bkeroSo is the proposal a toggle to remove 'UD' from the API's CRUD?19:40
rcarrillocruzif notifications by email send the whole comment, then yeah, mistake has already shipped19:40
anteayabkero: well I hadn't gotten as far as proposing, mostly I wanted to hear others opinions and I'm glad folks are offering them19:41
anteayarcarrillocruz: right19:41
bkeroanteaya: I hope you can interpret them into something useful :)19:41
* SotK still thinks we should talk to markus_z about this, given he was the one who initially expressed a desire for this :)19:41
Zaraagreed.19:42
rcarrillocruzso i see your point jeblair19:42
anteayawell I'm hoping fungi comes up with something by meeting's end19:42
anteayabkero: but he is patient to his credit, and conversation is still underway19:42
*** tbh has quit IRC19:42
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC19:43
anteayaSotK: I think gathering infra opinons at this point is useful, as infra has to maintain it as well as already has policy in place with other tools19:43
*** hogepodge has quit IRC19:43
anteayano sense offering a project an option that goes against what already exists as infra policy19:43
*** zz_dimtruck is now known as dimtruck19:43
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting19:44
*** nisha_ has quit IRC19:44
fungiyes, so markus_z was proposing this as something that would prevent moving nova off lp? (given that lp lacks this feature too)19:44
ZaraI don't think so; this was some time ago19:44
anteayafungi: noone knows, this was an artifact in an etherpad19:44
fungiokay19:44
anteayahe was away then I was away19:44
Zarait was more a list of features that a preferred task-tracker would have.19:45
anteayaso I haven't talked to him about it yet19:45
SotKthere were IRC logs too, I'll see if I can find them19:45
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting19:45
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:45
*** amitgandhinz has quit IRC19:45
fungimoving storyboard migration along is very important, and we have no other topics proposed this week, so as far as i'm concerned we can take the remaining 15 minutes to continue discussing this if needed19:46
anteayafungi: thanks19:46
anteayaZara: have you a link to the etherpad?19:46
*** amitgandhinz has joined #openstack-meeting19:46
Zarabut I'd take it as more representative of a viewpoint of various potential users, and I don't know how big that group is yet19:47
anteayaumm, I'm hesitating to go that far19:47
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting19:47
anteayait could just be one person and end up as a note in an etherpad19:47
SotKetherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-bugs-team19:47
*** roxanagh_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:48
anteayaline 11919:48
fungi#link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-bugs-team19:48
Zara:) well we know it's at least 3 of us. so I'd want to be clear on the reasons behind policy, if it goes that way19:48
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
*** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting19:48
anteayaby the same token I'm not a fan of rating comments either19:49
SotKiirc the list came from the nova bugs team's discussions about desired features in a task tracker19:49
* SotK isn't a fan of that either19:49
anteayaa comment is a comment, if folks want to disagree with me, say so in a comment19:49
fungiyeah, so the definition of "requirement" there must differ from what i think is commonly accepted as its meaning19:49
anteayaokay so this is useful, thank you19:49
fungiit looks like a feature wishlist19:49
SotKline 127 is markus_z's order of priorities for it19:49
ttxfungi: yeah19:49
anteayawell wishlist is nice19:50
*** Galitz has joined #openstack-meeting19:50
anteayaand it is great markus took the time to offer some feedback and put some thought into it19:50
*** baojg has joined #openstack-meeting19:50
fungiwhat we need is for markus_z to put together a list of missing features in sb that need to be implemented to avoid a regression for his (and nova's in general) use of lp bug tracking19:50
*** dprince has quit IRC19:50
anteayamy question once the api docs all have examples is, if we move to storyboard tomorrow would you be able to get work done19:51
anteayaand I'll be paying attention to anyone who says they can't get their work done on storyboard as it is right now and find out what more they need19:51
fungiwhile i appreciate the ideas and suggestions about what else a task tracker _could_ do, at this phase we need to focus on what it _must_ do for us to switch to it and not muddy that discussion with arbitrary wishlist items19:51
Zarayeah, that etherpad was created before the last summit. it wasn't intended as a list of storyboard requirements19:51
anteayafungi: yeah, thank you19:51
anteayaokay great19:52
anteayagiven that19:52
SotKhttp://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/%23openstack-infra.2016-03-02.log.html#t2016-03-02T11:38:09 is the IRC discussion from around that list19:52
anteayacan we come to agreement on how to address the current api comment features?19:52
*** roxanagh_ has quit IRC19:52
fungiwe have devs willing to help implement what we'll absolutely need in sb, and i really don't want to end up with conflicting directives from our end making it harder for them19:52
anteayaI am in the disable edit and delete and see how far we get with db queries by admins when requested to do so19:52
fungiyes, so i think from the "can openstack use sb now?" perspective, being _able_ to edit/delete comments beyond admin database queries is not relevant for us19:53
fungiand if sb is going to expose that ability for some deployments, we would very much like to be able to disable it in our deployment19:54
*** baojg has quit IRC19:55
fungiwhich of course means disabling that part of the api since the web interface is just an api client19:55
*** lblanchard has quit IRC19:55
anteayaI agree with that assessment19:55
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC19:55
* SotK will send a patch to that effect soon-ish then19:56
fungianyone here disagree with that position?19:56
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:56
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
rcarrillocruzthat sounds reasonable to me19:56
fungiit's just my opinion, though i feel like it reflects the opinions of others on the team who have opinions on it19:56
jeblairfungi: i agree with that position19:56
ttxagreed19:56
fungi#agreed OpenStack should not need the ability for task tracker users to edit and delete comments, but would like the ability to disable that if it becomes a feature19:57
anteayathank you19:57
fungi#topic Open discussion19:57
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: infra)"19:57
anteayathanks to everyone who participated in the discussion19:57
*** brnelson has joined #openstack-meeting19:57
fungiwe have two minutes and change19:57
anteayaanyone know the status of ipsilon?19:57
anteayastoryboard migration depends on it being in place19:58
anteayais anyone working on it?19:58
fungismarcet should be back from his honeymoon now, so we wanted to pick that topic back up19:58
pabelangerany changes to our mid-cycle?19:58
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC19:58
pabelangerseems pretty quiet19:58
*** asettle has joined #openstack-meeting19:58
*** asettle has quit IRC19:58
fungipabelanger: what sort of changes are you anticipating?19:59
rcarrillocruzi don't think dates will change19:59
notmorgandelete/edit comments shouldnt be allowed IMHO.19:59
rcarrillocruzagenda there was an etherpad from nibalizer iirc19:59
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting19:59
notmorgansorry was a bit late there.19:59
anteayanotmorgan: thanks for reading the backscroll19:59
pabelangerfungi: nothing, wanted to see if zuulv3 and infracloud were the topics of choice19:59
fungiokay, we're out of time. thanks everyone!20:00
anteayathank you20:00
fungi#endmeeting20:00
notmorgan(so was just agreeing with fungi's view)20:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings"20:00
openstackMeeting ended Tue Jul  5 20:00:08 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)20:00
openstackMinutes:        http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-07-05-19.02.html20:00
*** AJaeger has left #openstack-meeting20:00
openstackMinutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-07-05-19.02.txt20:00
openstackLog:            http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-07-05-19.02.log.html20:00
fungiall yours, tc!20:00
flaper87o/20:00
dhellmanno/20:00
ttxo/20:00
*** mickeys has quit IRC20:00
abregman|afko/20:00
*** korzen has joined #openstack-meeting20:00
* fungi had to make sure he typed "all" and not "up"20:00
*** abregman|afk is now known as abregman20:00
ttxhow many do we have20:00
dhellmannttx: russellb will join us when he gets to 10k feet20:00
annegentleo/ here20:00
dimso/20:00
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting20:00
johnthetubaguyo/20:00
* edleafe- hides behind annegentle 20:00
* jroll pokes his head in20:01
dimsfungi : LOL20:01
*** stanchan has joined #openstack-meeting20:01
ttxmtreinish, mordred, sdague: around ?20:01
* annegentle jumps up20:01
ttx#startmeeting tc20:01
openstackMeeting started Tue Jul  5 20:01:31 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.20:01
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.20:01
annegentlehey jroll20:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)"20:01
*** flwang1 has quit IRC20:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'20:01
edleafe-damn you annegentle!20:01
ttxjroll: o/20:01
flaper87o/20:01
mtreinisho/20:01
amrith\./20:01
ttxHi everyone... Short agenda for today, should be plenty of time for open discussion at the end20:01
devanandao/20:01
*** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting20:01
dimso/20:02
ttx#link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee20:02
ttx#topic Add project Bilean to OpenStack big-tent20:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Add project Bilean to OpenStack big-tent (Meeting topic: tc)"20:02
ttx#link https://review.openstack.org/33435020:02
ttxSo... Bilean implements trigger-type billing, which is reactive to events rather than usage20:02
ttxThis is pretty close to the CloudKitty/Ceilometer/Gnocchi combination in scope, but different20:02
*** pabelanger has left #openstack-meeting20:02
ttxThat is in itself fine, it may well be different enough to justify a separate project20:02
ttxBut the path of developing the missing features in existing projects should be explored first20:02
ttxSince otherwise we may end up with separate projects both dying of not reaching critical mass (instead of one successful project)20:03
ttxsheeprine (CloudKitty PTL) opened a thread to discuss that on the ML20:03
flaper87yeah20:03
ttx#link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/098640.html20:03
annegentleyeah20:03
flaper87I've put my thoughts on the review20:03
*** russellb_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
ttxno answer yet20:03
flaper87and I still think it makes sense to wait before adding Bilean20:03
ttx(and I really think that should have happened before this was ever presented to us)20:03
mordredo/20:03
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting20:03
ttxAlso, quick glance at Bilean shows that most changes are massive and self-approved20:04
dhellmannit looks like this repo was imported from a bunch of existing code?20:04
dimsthey had one meeting (http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/bilean/2016/) - 2 emails to openstack-dev. that's it20:04
ttxSo even ignoring the scope issue I'm not convinced we would approve it as it stands20:04
flaper87dhellmann: yup, that's my understanding20:04
russellb_Seems premature20:04
russellb_(Here via mobile until take off)20:04
flaper87russellb_: safe travels20:04
johnthetubaguyyeah, seems premature right now to add it, regardless20:05
ttxOK, I'll draft careful rejection pointing at the started thread, the Project Team Guide and the need for more core reviewers20:05
dimsone person committing code - http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/bilean/log/ (mostly)20:05
ttxdims:  same person +2/W+1 ing too20:05
*** lixinhui_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:05
flaper87is this perhaps one of those cases where the contributor thinks being in the big tent is a requirement ?20:05
russellb_Thanks ttx20:05
flaper87I honestly didn't dive much into the list of contributors20:05
dimsflaper87 : yea, possibly20:05
ttxflaper87: I don't think so. Looks more like a case of an internal development that they thought they would propose to us20:06
flaper87sure but given the state of the project, it feels like the former20:06
dimsttx : ah20:06
ttxI'm not convinced they are interested in converging with CK. They have something and use it the way it stands20:06
johnthetubaguyin many ways, the process worked, they proposed it, and we have told them who they should talk to first20:06
dhellmanngood point, johnthetubaguy20:06
ttxBut we'll see where the discussion goes. Could be good news and additional contributors to CK20:07
flaper87anway, without THE contributor around (I don't know his/her IRC nick) it'll be a bit hard to clarify these things20:07
dhellmannthere's some evidence that the company here has worked with other teams already20:07
dhellmannhttp://stackalytics.com/?user_id=&project_type=all&release=all&metric=marks&company=Kylin%20Cloud&module=bilean20:07
*** Apoorva has quit IRC20:07
dhellmannoops, try http://stackalytics.com/?project_type=all&release=all&metric=marks&company=Kylin%20Cloud20:07
dimsflaper87 : 3 people nicks are listed in meeting - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/bilean/2016/bilean.2016-06-23-14.00.html20:08
russellb_I just want to encourage collaboration wherever we can. I haven't taken a close look yet. The lack of discussion or analysis was enough for me to start with.20:08
amrithflaper87, his irc name is lvdongbing, I think.20:08
dhellmannflaper87 : looks like a chinese company, so this may be a bad time for synchronous discussion20:08
ttxOK, I think we can move on, I'll write up something on the review. If you have other points you can file them there20:08
annegentleokay.20:08
dhellmannrussellb_ : ++20:08
dims++ ttx20:08
flaper87let's move on and I'd love to see more collaboration too20:08
flaper87amrith: thanks20:08
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC20:08
russellb_Cheers.20:08
ttx#topic Exclude inactive core reviewers from core metrics20:08
*** openstack changes topic to "Exclude inactive core reviewers from core metrics (Meeting topic: tc)"20:08
ttx#link https://review.openstack.org/33275120:09
*** dimtruck is now known as zz_dimtruck20:09
ttxThis proposes that we ignore *inactive* core reviewers from the 'core reviewers %' and 'core reviews %' metrics used in diversity tags20:09
russellb_+1 to the idea of this.20:09
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting20:09
ttxMy initial reaction to this one was that the "core reviews %" metric already takes activity into account, so I didn't think we'd capture additional issues using this adjustment20:09
*** Apoorva has joined #openstack-meeting20:09
ttxBut then I agree that inactive core reviewers should just be considered as leftover entries rather than real core reviewers20:09
dhellmannwhile this doesn't actually encourage folks to clean up their core teams, it closes a whole where we were rewarding them for not doing so20:09
*** lixinhui_ has quit IRC20:09
dhellmann*hole20:09
flaper87yeah20:09
dimsdhellmann : right20:09
ttxI'm not sure the '30' threshold is the best one to capture that, but we can nitpick that in the tools by looking at the effect of the change20:10
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC20:10
dhellmannyes, I think we should definitely have that separate discussion20:10
ttxSo I agree that we can add the word 'active' to the tag definition, and then adjust the tools.20:10
johnthetubaguyyeah, I like how its nice and explicit, and simple20:10
flaper87Also, note the goal of this patch is not to discuss what active/inactive is. It also doesn't define what the right threshold should be. I'm working on a follow-up patch for that20:10
flaper87we should stick to the current definition and threshold20:10
annegentleflaper87: and I added (just now) a request to put the definition of "active" in the text itsefl20:10
annegentleitself20:10
annegentleflaper87: ah ok.20:10
mtreinishI understand the motivation here, but it seems kinda arbitrary to me without the second part flaper87 just mentioned20:11
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC20:11
mtreinishI think we should have the definition first before applying it to things20:11
annegentleflaper87: so you don't mind updating the patch after discussing here? So the text and code are synched?20:11
dims++ mtreinish20:11
flaper87mtreinish: fwiw, we already do this for the diverse-affiliation tag. We're adopting it in the single-vendor one20:11
dhellmannannegentle : yeah, we use it elsewhere in the repo both in text and code, but I agree we should move the definition to text somewhere and have the tool refer to that (as ttx said)20:11
russellb_Doesn't one of the tools already check this?20:11
ttxflaper87: I'm good with how it stands right now20:11
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:11
russellb_And we just didn't document it?20:11
flaper87annegentle: there was one and I just removed it20:11
dhellmannmtreinish : we do have a definition already, it's just documented as code20:11
ttxrussellb_: no, we only used the threshold for "reviewers"20:12
fungiso this is at least 6 commits merged and at least 30 reviews posted in a 6-month period?20:12
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting20:12
russellb_Ah ok20:12
mtreinishdhellmann: is it, flaper87 just said we're not defining 'active' in the code patch. That it'll be a follow up change20:12
amrithto ttx's point here though, I'm not certain what this change would actually accomplish. If a core reviewer is not active (i.e. not a lot of reviews) then the other metric (core reviews by company) would trip. So, what really is the change? So I tried to run flavio's code and noticed nothing really changed in terms of tags. So, is it worth it? Should we figure out what metrics we want to measure first and then decide20:12
amriththe metrics?20:12
flaper87fungi: it currently just uses the reviews number20:12
mtreinishthe 30 in there feels kinda random to me, and just a starting point20:12
dhellmannmtreinish : we're going to propose moving that definition to prose and possibly changing the value20:12
flaper87amrith: it does change if you print the values of the metric20:12
dhellmannbah, this is exactly what we were trying to avoid20:12
mtreinishdhellmann: and I'm saying that should come first20:12
flaper87several projects get close to the threshold20:13
*** russellb_ has quit IRC20:13
dhellmannwe have 2 things to do: fix this tag and fix the active definition. they're orthogonal. let's focus on this patch.20:13
ttxmtreinish: why ? I'm fine giving us some flexibility there20:13
ttxfor example, 30 might be too large for smallish projects20:13
ttxbut 2 too small for largish projects20:13
notmorganmtreinish: i am -1 unless we have a clear definition at least proposed on what is active20:13
dhellmannmordred proposed looking at standard deviations, too20:13
notmorgani'm also ok with a "scaling" 'active' standard20:13
dhellmannnotmorgan : the existing script is the definition of active.20:14
notmorganbut we need some level of metric (or range?)20:14
*** zz_dimtruck is now known as dimtruck20:14
notmorgandhellmann: that is not sufficient imo, it needs to be in the text.20:14
notmorgannot digging into python code20:14
ttxnotmorgan: why ?20:14
notmorganit should be clearly published in the same place we define activity is required20:14
flaper87whether it is in text or not, I don't think we should block this patch on that.20:14
notmorgannot "oh go find it here in the python ->>>>"20:15
jrollpresumably, not everyone reading tag definitions can read python20:15
notmorganor wherver, or at least *linked* to the place in the code20:15
notmorganjroll: ++20:15
ttxnotmorgan: we could let it be slightly subjective20:15
dhellmannwe are going to do both20:15
flaper87I've some text written (Actual text) to define this but I was not happy with the wording so I decided not to publish it yet20:15
dhellmannwe are trying to close a loophole first20:15
notmorganttx: i'm fine with it being subjective, but define "active"20:15
notmorgannot say "active is needed" without definition20:15
ttxnotmorgan: "not dead" ?20:15
mtreinishnotmorgan: ++20:15
dimsttx : dhellmann : which repo? (python code)20:16
flaper87dims: governance: teamstats.py20:16
dhellmanndims : the script in the governance repo that is used to apply this tag to projects20:16
ttxnotmorgan, mtreinish: (I don't really disagree with you, playing devil's advocate to get to the bottom of your objection)20:16
notmorgana minimal definition of "what is active"20:16
ttxI also think we can do it in two steps20:17
notmorganeven if ti claims it is subjective20:17
notmorganthat is fine20:17
flaper87notmorgan: FWIW, I don't think it's not defined. The way I see it is that we need to make the definition more explicit (the follow-up patch). But that won't change the fact that we should be excluding inactive core reviewers. We've a definition that we're using already and this proposes sticking to that definition until the next discussion happens20:17
notmorganjust be clear what the current definition is before we add it20:17
notmorganalso, a followup patch is fine.20:17
notmorganjust have it proposed.20:17
ttxnotmorgan: we use the wording "active reviewer" in the other tag definition, without defining it. That just proposes to make the "core reviewers" side of the equation catch up20:17
notmorgani'm -1 code review, but wont -1 Rollcall20:17
notmorgani also wont +1 either way.20:17
ttxthen we can refine20:17
notmorganjust my view.20:17
annegentleflaper87: what's interesting then is the definition of core reviewer, right? each project will have a different set of criteria / activity and some may have written those down. then what?20:17
mtreinishnotmorgan: I did the same20:17
*** penick has joined #openstack-meeting20:18
*** piet has joined #openstack-meeting20:18
ttxcould be done the other way around though, I agree20:18
notmorganso, feel free to override me, i'll support. my -1 is a voice of i dislike this change w/o some level of definition20:18
dhellmannannegentle : we don't usually get into that in terms of stats. We look at members of the team with +2 rights.20:18
notmorgansince we're leaning on it. but i'm also not wanting to block this.20:18
annegentleflaper87: do we encode what projects have already written down as "here's how you get to core?"20:18
notmorganif that makes sense.20:18
johnthetubaguyannegentle: its always someone who can +2 though, which I think is OK20:18
annegentlejohnthetubaguy: yeah, that definition is true any given query20:18
notmorganit's "good", just should have a minimal level of refinement so if we lean on this at all before we change the definition we have something to point at20:19
ttxannegentle: that's subjective rather than quantitative20:19
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC20:19
notmorganthats all.20:19
flaper87annegentle: this metric and definition is for use in the governance repo. I don't think we should get into the business of defining what active/core means for project teams20:19
annegentleflaper87: but some teams already do... I think. I may be wrong.20:19
annegentleflaper87: I looked into this for docs. Lana then wrote down a definition.20:19
johnthetubaguyannegentle: all I mean is, projects define who they trust to have +2, and thats fine, largely20:19
ttxflaper87: looks like you won't get enough votes to do it in two steps20:19
notmorganeven just linking to a previous definition of active (fwiw, it should be central)20:19
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC20:19
notmorganis fine20:19
notmorgannot "every doc re-defines" active20:20
mtreinishflaper87: yeah I agree, we just should make that point clear. This is for governane purposes and project teams still define who has +2 etc...20:20
flaper87I could publish my draft for the second patch now, I've it written down but I don't see why having the second patch up will change some of the votes20:20
ttxHrm. this is not about defining core reviewers anyway20:20
dimsi am ok with 2 step tango20:20
fungiit might make more sense to avoid using the term "active" in the prose in that case, and just indicate what is actually being measured objectively rather than using a subjective term for it20:21
notmorganfungi: that would work for me too.20:21
dhellmannfungi : that's like using a constant instead of a variable. if we end up changing the definition of active, we have to go change it here, too.20:21
*** karthikp_ has quit IRC20:21
dimsfungi : I like it20:21
annegentlettx: hm, true... it's about a metric20:21
fungidhellmann: yep, i'm saying don't have a definition for "active"20:21
notmorgani just worry that we're going to lean on this verbiage and then need to justify it AND then change it after the fact20:22
notmorganwhich could make people who are affected unhappyu20:22
johnthetubaguyI would rather the rule was subjective, and we note we estimate that with this objective measure, as I think thats closer to the reality here20:22
notmorganand it can be defined as subjective20:22
notmorganjust be clear what we're looking at20:22
mtreinishjohnthetubaguy: yeah, I'm leaning that way too20:22
fungijust say the tag applies to reviewers with +2 on at least one repo and who have left n comments in 6 months instead of making up a word that it's a definition for20:22
notmorgan"active" is VERY uncertain.20:22
johnthetubaguynotmorgan: true20:23
notmorganbecause it could be lots and lots of things.20:23
notmorgani reviewed 3 things in two days, i am currently active.20:23
russellbsurely we can agree that someone who hasn't done anything in 3 years isn't worth counting?20:23
notmorganis that "Active"?20:23
dhellmannthis is one of the most objective we have because there's a script written specifically to generate the output for applying it. We're leaning on that existing, well trod, definition of "active"20:23
russellband if so, we can draw some sane line?20:23
*** gordc has joined #openstack-meeting20:23
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting20:24
*** mrmartin has quit IRC20:24
russellbit doesn't have to be perfect20:24
johnthetubaguyso exclude inactive reviewers, then estimate that somehow?20:24
notmorganlike i said, my concern is a bait and switch feel from folks affected20:24
notmorganthats all.20:24
fungiagain, which existing, well trod, definition of "active?"20:24
dimsflaper87 : do you have a list of projects that will switch tags based on this?20:24
flaper87notmorgan: so, you want it all in a single patch. Is that correct?20:24
dhellmannfungi : the script that flaper87 referenced above that's used to update the yaml file with this tag20:24
notmorganflaper87: or proposed as a followup20:24
ttxOK -- SO... We already have a de-facto definition of active, used in the reviews % metric and reviewers % metric20:24
*** samueldmq has quit IRC20:24
notmorganttx: if we have that, we should lean on it for now or link to it.20:24
ttxThis just proposes to apply the same definition to core reviews20:25
russellbwhich i made up when first writing that script20:25
*** xinli has joined #openstack-meeting20:25
russellband folks said "shrug, seems like a reasonable starting point"20:25
dimsrussellb :)20:25
notmorganand it can be adjusted20:25
flaper87notmorgan: I could propose the follow-up *now* but I'm curious to know how/why would that change your mind? It'd still be a 2-steps change20:25
fungiand it was previously called "active" in another tag (but not this one). so i guess that counts as it being a sort of definition of the term20:25
*** xinli has left #openstack-meeting20:25
ttxnotmorgan: That's what the proposed patch does. THEN we need to extract it from code to governance, I guess20:25
ttxBut this patch doesn't make anything worse20:25
notmorganflaper87: it means it is in work. i have seen a LOT of things fall off the radar (and I'm guilty of this too), it just keeps the convo active [or ML topic?]20:25
annegentleflaper87: I'd can get behind a second patch that follows on20:26
russellbi'd also like to paint it green20:26
mtreinishttx: except it silentyl changes what we're enforcing, without any outward indication. You have to look at the script to figure it out20:26
notmorganit's a continuity, so if someone complains we can say "lok here in XXXX review and comment"20:26
flaper87ok, proposing it now20:26
notmorganwe have a clear place to point folks vs "oh ... in the future"20:26
dimsttx : if we end up changing definition of active, then some projects will flip flop20:26
*** sindhu has joined #openstack-meeting20:26
notmorganflaper87: i prefer it a single patch, but also understand the defnition may need work20:26
annegentledims: amrith (who's better than me!) tested it though and no projects get different tags because of it (Right?)20:27
amrithI'm trying it again annegentle20:27
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting20:27
amrithI've used this tool in the past20:27
amrithand am somewhat familiar with it20:27
amrithbut the threshold that flaper87 proposed doesn't cause it to generate any warnings like "XYZ shouldn't have this tag" or "XYZ should have this tag"20:27
notmorgansorry, just trying to make sure we're not causing flip-flopping of project status etc.20:27
amrithwhich is what I expected.20:27
*** tellesnobrega is now known as tellesnobrega_af20:27
ttxOh well, I guess we could continue that one on the review. It's sad that those opposing it did not read it before20:28
amrithnotmorgan, that was my concern as well.20:28
notmorganwithout at least a place for those affected to comment after this lands.20:28
russellbit's just a cleanup to be more explicit about something ...20:28
ttxbecause this is not very constructive20:28
russellbttx: ++20:28
annegentleI read it, but didn't test it.20:28
*** enriquetaso has quit IRC20:28
dimsttx : i am not opposed, just looking for some additional info20:28
ttxThe meeting is not the best placve to discover opposition20:28
*** spzala has quit IRC20:28
ttxplace*20:28
*** korzen has quit IRC20:29
flaper87annegentle: fwiw, I tested it too and no projects would be tagged as a sinle vendor just yet. Some of them get close, though.20:29
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC20:29
*** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** hogepodge has quit IRC20:29
ttxflaper87: do you think we should continue to discuss it here, or on the review ?20:29
amriththx flaper87 I concur with that assessment.20:29
dimsflaper87 : fair enough.20:29
dhellmannthe projects with this tag are going to change over time, whether we change its definition or not20:29
annegentleflaper87: ok, thanks20:29
flaper87notmorgan: mtreinish https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337853/20:29
flaper87That's the follow-up20:29
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
flaper87I've marked as WIP but that's the draft I have20:30
flaper87I'm not super happy with it, I'll be super honest and say I had a bit of a hard time writing that down and finding the "right" wording.20:30
ttxOh, this one is a bikeshed magnet20:30
notmorganflaper87: thats fine20:30
flaper87but I hope the review would be a good place for people to go crazy over the text20:30
flaper87(go crazy in a good sense)20:30
mtreinishflaper87: yeah, that's what I'm looking for20:30
notmorganflaper87: removed my -1 on the original one with a link so we can continue the convo20:30
dimsflaper87 : "minimum number of gerrit reviews"20:30
ttx"This metric is not used (but will be used) to evaluate reviewers"20:31
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-meeting20:31
fungithis is what i meant about avoiding the word "active"20:31
flaper87I'm done now. I hope we can get the first one in while we discuss the second one20:31
flaper87we can move on20:31
flaper87I don't expect us to fine the perfect definition for what we really mean in this meeting20:31
ttxme neither20:32
dhellmannfungi : we're trying to define "active" in one place so we can use the same definition in more than one place without having to update it everywhere when that definition changes. Why do you consider that a bad practice?20:32
fungidhellmann: the word itself is charged20:32
flaper87s/fine/find/20:32
ttxok, moving on20:32
dhellmannfungi : ok, we can pick a new word.20:32
fungibut we can take that discussion off-meetiong20:32
dhellmannttx: yes, please20:32
ttx#topic remove release:managed tag20:32
*** openstack changes topic to "remove release:managed tag (Meeting topic: tc)"20:32
*** eharney has quit IRC20:32
* dhellmann stops beating his head on his desk20:32
ttx#link https://review.openstack.org/33544020:33
ttxdhellmann: care to introduce this one ?20:33
ttx(or I can if you prefer)20:33
dhellmannthis tag is no longer used by the release team. I think it's no longer useful to the TC either. Folks have been trying to add it to their project, and I don't want us to spend time on it since no one is using it.20:33
*** spzala has quit IRC20:34
ttxStill missing a couple of votes20:34
russellbvote added20:34
*** abregman has quit IRC20:34
notmorganvote added20:34
russellbstill 1 down20:35
*** dimtruck is now known as zz_dimtruck20:35
notmorgani already looked at it, and hadn't scored it20:35
ttxalright, a winner we have20:35
notmorganlgtm20:35
amrithgood to go, this is (yoda)20:35
ttxdie, useless tag, die20:35
annegentleit's deliverables not projects... but I didn't vote...20:35
notmorganlol20:35
ttxannegentle: heh20:35
annegentleI like the spirit! :)20:35
ttx#topic Open discussion20:36
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: tc)"20:36
ttxSome early feedback from the leadership training that some of us attended last week20:36
ttxI think we were all surprised how useful it was20:36
* dims perks up20:36
* notmorgan is super sad to have missed it20:36
ttxPersonally I think the main value was in having us locked in a room for 2/3 days without distraction with some training/inspiration/tooling to learn from and open our minds20:37
notmorgani... also am just now feeling closer to 100%. stupid flu.20:37
* devananda perks up, too20:37
ttxThis was extremely well selected and prepared by gothicmindfood20:37
dhellmann++20:37
* amrith very honored to have been there. wrote a blog post about it http://www.tesora.com/openstack-tc-will-not-opening-deli/20:37
jroll++20:37
devananda++20:37
notmorgani am also very glad to not have shared the flu with the TC20:37
notmorganand other folks.20:37
flaper87o/20:37
dhellmannnotmorgan : thank you for that20:37
flaper872 things20:37
*** karthikp_ has joined #openstack-meeting20:37
flaper87The first is a more general question to other TC members. How do people in the TC feel about the tc-chair delegating some of his duties when he/she is away? This doesn't happen frequently but there are occations when those delegations would help moving things forward in the absence of the tc-chair. We've never talked about this and a quick show hands would be great.20:37
annegentlenotmorgan: yeah, thanks, no time for that!20:38
notmorgani think it's fine. it's the same as a PTL delegating imo20:38
dhellmannflaper87 : we've delegated chairing meetings before. What else did you have in mind?20:38
ttxthat would include delegation of the tc-chair +2 rights over the repo20:38
flaper87dhellmann: formal votes20:38
mtreinishflaper87: ttx takes time off?20:38
notmorganthe responsibility is the chair's but delegation is within those rights20:38
ttxmtreinish: no20:38
flaper87mtreinish: secretly20:38
dhellmannmtreinish : not enough20:38
flaper87dhellmann: ++20:38
annegentlethat's a good idea for sanity and stewardship in combination20:39
*** shaohe_feng has quit IRC20:39
flaper87just wanted to make sure there weren't strong oppositions to encouraging ttx to take some proper time off20:39
flaper87:P20:39
johnthetubaguyyeah, seems sound to me, to allow that20:39
notmorgani have zero issue. and ttx should totally take time off.20:39
mtreinishflaper87: heh20:39
ttxI'll be explicit anyway, like posting a warning on the tc list20:39
dhellmannI think it would be fine. We have a good level of trust with each other and it'd be wise to have multiple folks with the experience.20:39
* flaper87 calls ttx's ISP and asks them to shut his internet connection DOWN20:40
ttxwhenever I adjust the gerrit group20:40
flaper87ok, I've one more thing20:40
flaper87The second thing is a, hopefully, improvement to the way we communicate TC matters to the rest of the community. I'd like to start sending TC meeting logs to the mailing list (again?). This would not replace the communications posted on the foundation blog but it'd give more immediate feedback of what's going on in the TC.20:40
ttxflaper87: you don't need to call, that happens regularly20:40
flaper87The format of the email would include the agenda and quick (short) notes from the discussion. I'd love for us to start using meetbot's notes/infos more agressively as that would help writing this summary. Ideally, this would go out in the 24h that follow every TC meeting.20:40
*** shaohe_feng has joined #openstack-meeting20:40
flaper87ttx: LOOOOOOL20:40
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC20:40
ttxew, yeah, we'd need to behave again20:40
ttxand #info and #do things20:41
annegentleflaper87: like more info tags?20:41
annegentlettx: yeah20:41
dhellmannflaper87 : in the car on the way to the airport last week we identified meeting announcements and summaries as things that could be dropped from the ML to cut down traffic20:41
dimsi was thinking the same thing dhellmann20:41
johnthetubaguydhellmann: I have similar feelings, honestly20:41
annegentleflaper87: do we have input that people want meeting notes?20:41
ttxfeels like a step backward20:41
dhellmannanyone can use those commands, right?20:41
johnthetubaguythat being said, I do like the idea of the notes being better20:41
mtreinishdhellmann: yeah I know I normally skip the meeting log ml posts20:41
ttxdhellmann: yes20:42
dhellmannso we could have a volunteer to add them, so ttx doesn't have to20:42
flaper87dhellmann: most of those have been dropped, I forgot already when I sent one the last time as PTL. However, the TC being such a cross-project/cross-community thing, it feels like those summaries would be useful20:42
jrollI'd almost rather a newsletter "what's the TC been up to?"20:42
dhellmannand then we would still have the results, but skip the email20:42
johnthetubaguyflaper87: so would just better notes be a reasonable middle ground?20:42
jrollsimilar to the "what's up doc" thing20:42
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting20:42
ttxyeah, agree that we should #info more things -- not sure yet another post to the ML helps20:42
flaper87dhellmann: anyone can run those commands, yes20:42
flaper87more notes would definitely help20:42
dhellmannjroll : yeah, annegentle and flaper87 have been doing those as blog posts20:42
notmorganjroll: and the infra thing.20:42
mtreinishjroll: isn't that the foundation blog post?20:42
jrollthen it could include things like summaries of threads on the tc mailing list or side conversations20:42
jrollmtreinish: not sure, how often is that published?20:43
dhellmann"as needed"20:43
johnthetubaguyjroll: I do like that general idea, maybe once per milestone ish20:43
johnthetubaguydhellmann: as needed is a little dangerous, in terms of it not happening20:43
flaper87jroll: every time we feel there's enough info to publish20:43
jrollah20:43
flaper87which is one of the reasons I'd like to make this summaries a routine20:43
flaper87let me rephrase the intent20:43
johnthetubaguydhellmann: basing that purely on python-novaclient releases while I was PTL20:43
jrolljohnthetubaguy: I was thinking 1-4 times per month20:43
dhellmannjohnthetubaguy : they've been mostly doing OK at doing it every few meetings, esp. when there are big topics20:43
annegentleflaper87: yeah state the outcome you're looking for if you can20:44
flaper87One thing I'd like to improve is the request for input from the community on ongoing discussions20:44
ttxflaper87: you should write a vision for it20:44
*** raildo is now known as raildo-afk20:44
dhellmannflaper87 : I agree that turning it into a routine would be good. I don't think we want to post a log from every meeting just because20:44
flaper87And to provide quick updates of what has been discussed20:44
flaper87ttx: jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez20:44
dhellmannthe logs aren't that useful without the context you and annegentle have been adding to the blog post20:44
annegentleyeah and the context is the hardest part to write :)20:45
flaper87I can work on a sample format for that email20:45
flaper87just posting logs is not what I want20:45
dhellmannannegentle : right. maybe we should go back to rotating that duty20:45
annegentleflaper87: I agree with wanting more input on discussions.20:45
flaper87I'd send the agenda with notes on the topics that were discussed20:45
*** jungleboyj has quit IRC20:45
flaper87with links to the logs at the bottom20:45
*** hogepodge has quit IRC20:45
ttxfact is, most weeks we just process boring stuff, so there isn't so much to learn from that20:45
jrollvision: the community is up to speed with the happenings in the TC, and regularly giving feedback on those happenings :)20:45
johnthetubaguyso... on that note, how do we get more of our work done async?20:46
flaper87ttx: that's cool! Making it a routine would avoid thinking whether it's needed or not20:46
jrollflaper87: I wonder if a better one is publish topics the TC wants input on before they're discussed in the meeting20:46
jrollwith a brief summary20:46
flaper87jroll: sometimes we don't know that in advance :/20:46
amrithjroll, I thought that was generally the case (generally ...)20:46
jrollyeah20:46
johnthetubaguyso the agenda post could go to the dev list?20:46
flaper87I mean, some discussions evolve in unexpected ways20:46