17:00:14 #startmeeting app-catalog 17:00:19 Meeting started Thu Jul 7 17:00:14 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is docaedo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:20 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:22 The meeting name has been set to 'app_catalog' 17:00:28 courtesy ping: kzaitsev_mb mfedosin olaph sskripnick1 igormarnat_ ddovbii__ 17:01:09 I figure we should have a *few* people today considering all the work that's been going on during the last week :) 17:01:56 o/ 17:01:59 o/ 17:02:07 ршнщ 17:02:11 hiyo =) 17:02:38 Hello! Looks like we have enough folks today 17:02:43 #topic Status updates 17:03:02 I'll give a quick one 17:03:12 I had an action item to talk to infra about swift 17:03:49 It will not be a problem, they will manually create the swift bucket (or whatever the proper term is) and the access secrets will be kept in hiera 17:04:23 the puppet manifest to deploy glare on the app catalog server will have a spot for auth in the config template and puppet will make it all work right 17:04:40 same goes for DB via trove, so we'll get access credentials and it'll just be plugged into the template 17:05:20 OK that's it for my updates, kzaitsev_mb do you want to go next? 17:06:03 I don't have much apart from the letter I've written yesterday on the layout of dahsboards 17:06:27 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/098907.html 17:06:32 saw that letter, looked really good - I'll respond today as well to hopefully keep some attention on it 17:06:46 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/apps-dashboard-structure 17:07:01 I'm planning to continue working on the patches, to make them green 17:07:07 excellent 17:07:27 meanwhile we can start throwing some ideas about the layout 17:08:02 planning to do so myself too =) 17:08:33 I still have an AI to go ask around the infra team about possibility to reuse gerrit groups though 17:08:58 yep, that could have an impact on sskripnick1 work (which is also the next topic) 17:09:30 I started working on glare 1.0 api #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337633/ 17:09:41 #topic Glare 0.1 API status (sskripnick) 17:09:50 all yours sskripnick1 17:10:15 And I'd like to ask about experimental 0.1 glare API 17:10:28 sskripnick1: shoot 17:11:10 mfedosin: what do you mean? =) 17:11:35 so are we going to merge it? or we about to wait for 1.0? 17:11:43 sskripnick1: it means "go ahead" 17:11:56 mfedosin: oh, ok) 17:12:20 I mean we can skip glare 0.1 at all 17:12:24 one unpleasant thing I want to mention after today glance community meeting... 17:12:51 glance ptl wants to postpone code merging 17:13:04 because he has no time for review 17:13:34 that's unfortunate, but not a huge deal I think for us 17:13:51 does it mean that we should finish 0.1? 17:13:53 I think there are 2 possibilities 17:14:16 to take unmerged code 17:14:26 and use it in app-catalog 17:14:41 now it's pretty stable and code coverage is good 17:15:13 or wait till it's merged, but I can't predict now when it happens 17:15:28 also we can discuss moving glare to separate project 17:16:25 so we have 3 options: use 1.0 right now, finish 0.1, or do nothing =) 17:16:38 I think for our purposes, we can start my putting the glare code right in app-catalog as long as it's sitting in a way that will be easy to replace with upstream repo at a later date 17:16:41 I choose first 17:17:25 we would have to have a ML conversation to get consensus on that decision 17:17:28 docaedo: do you want to merge the whole glare's code in app-catalog? 17:18:12 mfedosin: I am just thinking about it :) Maybe it'd be better to have a new repo to hold a fork of glance just for the glare stuff 17:18:30 mfedosin: then when glare is merged, we only have to chance the origin 17:19:21 docaedo: frankly speaking it's the best suggestion 17:19:22 mfedosin: best idea though is to start a mailing list thread about this, and I would say (considering the history of glare resistance we sometimes see) we make it clear that we're talking about a fork just for the purposes of running it for the app catalog 17:19:34 mfedosin: I agree too 17:19:56 I like it more then working on 0.1 and then migrating to 1.0 17:20:06 sskripnick1: ++ 17:20:10 we need to implement 1.0 anyways 17:20:17 sskripnick1: sounds fair =) 17:20:42 and in this case we don't need to think about migrations 17:21:53 ok. so I will be working on 1.0 17:21:53 my only question is how to do this in a way that keeps all the work and reviews in glance, but gives us a stable commit to point at for the app-catalog deployment? 17:23:00 just keep glare 1.0 patches on review, and "backport" changes to fork 17:23:59 sskripnick1: correct 17:24:14 and we'll be able to use glance ci 17:24:15 * olaph forgot to wave 17:24:22 ok that makes sense - I also have an expectation that we only backport critical/security changes 17:25:04 the way the app-catalog server works right now is that it watches the app-catalog repo for changes, and if/when it finds something new in the repo it's checked out and immediately live 17:25:11 seems so, v1 api won't change anyway 17:25:43 It would be best to follow that same continuous delivery approach for the glare work, just means we have to be thoughtful about anything that impacts existing data, etc. 17:26:02 but if we can do that, we'll be able to keep it up to date without having to schedule downtime or service interruptions with the infra team 17:28:40 do we have some time on testing app-catalog+glare v1? 17:29:00 we need some time to implement it first =) 17:29:13 mfedosin: do you mean will with have time to test? We can set our own schedule so we can do lots of testing 17:29:17 for example a week, when we'll test it and everything 17:29:43 mfedosin: yeah I think we'll have to do this in two phases 17:30:20 I would suggest phase 1) we test on a VM that is prepared to act like an infra node managed by puppet, but the puppet runs are triggered by cron to happen locally every 15 minutes 17:30:34 That would copy the way things work when managed by infra's puppet-master 17:30:51 and would be happening in a VM that we can get into to fix things/reset things when they break 17:31:20 when we are comfortable with that, we can request phase 2 - infra setting up a testing VM (test.apps.openstack.org or something) 17:31:32 Actual infra resources may be used. Like staging.apps.openstack.org 17:31:42 and we validate that works properly for a week or however long before switching DNS 17:32:01 sskripnick1: yes that's true, but the problem is when something goes wrong with that, we can't SSH into it to look at what went wrong 17:32:31 sskripnick1: if you guys are confident it'll be solid and not require much trouble-shooting or debugging, we can jump right to asking infra to set up a staging instance for us 17:34:01 docaedo: setting own vm is good,but im not sure how much time we need to this 17:34:46 docaedo: vm is good 17:34:49 docaedo: I hope it will not take much time 17:35:28 sskripnick1: we'll work together to make it done asap 17:35:41 afaik v0.1 code is almost done 17:35:45 sskripnick1: I have a feeling we will need some more work once there's a full instance running - like making sure previous asset owners can still modify their entries (if possible) 17:35:58 so we just need rewrite it to v1 17:36:16 and the admin interface for app-catalog cores to be the only ones who can enable assets (but maybe that's done and I missed it?) 17:37:00 docaedo: it is done, I can launch a demo instance 17:37:00 docaedo the auth part has that partially 17:37:24 we have some UI things, but those would need some refining I guess 17:37:40 kzaitsev_mb: the partially part has to do with where the group information comes from right? (i.e.launchpad or gerrit) 17:37:54 sskripnick1: I think docaedo was asking for the UI available for some group of users ) 17:37:54 launchpad 17:38:33 right that's the part :) 17:38:34 kzaitsev_mb: "drafts list" available only for admin groups 17:38:54 sskripnick1: the UI you mean? 17:38:58 yes 17:39:10 ok, I might have missed that commit then ) 17:39:25 what's "drafts list"? 17:39:35 a list of queued artifacts? 17:39:36 there is a tab like "drafted assets" 17:39:53 this tab isn't available to non admin user 17:40:33 asset is an artifact type in terms of glare, right? 17:41:07 asset is artifact, not type 17:41:23 ah, okay 17:41:40 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/332911/8/openstack_catalog/templates/index.html 17:41:44 display:none 17:42:03 it becomes display:block if user is member of admin group 17:42:09 docaedo: btw, Igor Marnat told me that app-catalog needs data validation and conversion 17:42:41 for example, if user upload some Heat template, glare should check if this template is valid 17:42:53 the same story for images 17:43:02 mfedosin: oh that would be nice but that is definitely not a requirement for switching to glare 17:43:09 I see =) cool. We would probably give it a round of UI testing. Like see how well does it go from uploading a draft, to editing, to approving. To see if we missed anything in the UI flow 17:43:10 mfedosin: so this should be done at app-catalog level? no validation done by glare itself? 17:43:13 that's a slightly different longer term plan 17:43:48 kzaitsev_mb: about editing: it seems it not done at all... 17:43:53 mfedosin sskripnick1 that's a thread he started around the last summit time, to consider how the app catalog could help with a sort of CI check for assets 17:44:10 sskripnick1: it will be done in glare - now glare supports this functionality on artifact type level 17:44:21 sskripnick1: the very last commit in the queue attemted at that 17:44:30 s/last/top/ 17:45:18 docaedo: so, if data validation is required we can add it easily 17:45:51 mfedosin: ok good to hear, I think that's something that will need more conversation before implementation 17:46:16 but definitely if it's really easy for glare to validate whether or not a heat template is syntactically correct, that's great 17:46:17 docaedo: agree, just wanted to clarify it :) 17:46:47 how would it validate a glance image though? It's pretty easy to make an image that works on some hypervisor architecture but does not boot on others 17:47:00 s/glance/machine image/ 17:47:21 same question 17:47:49 I think there are some validators for this 17:48:16 going to run now, really happy to see new faces from the glare helping us with the, well glare stuff =) 17:48:51 have fun) 17:48:57 kzaitsev_mb: sounds good, thanks for the updates 17:49:13 we can check if image is valid qcow2 or iso etc 17:49:22 ah that makes sense 17:49:32 but we need to actually boot in on hypervisor if we want to be sure 17:49:40 and convert them to required format if it's needed 17:49:58 oh that I would object to 17:50:26 unless the user has an option - because the user sharing should be able to compare/validate the hash 17:51:07 and if the app catalog does things to the images after a user submits, it's impossible for the user to know whether or not someone elses SSH key was injected, etc. 17:51:16 but not somethign we have to debate today :) 17:51:31 I think I have an action here, just let me verify with you guys first- 17:51:44 we can start with heat template first 17:52:13 should I request a new repository as a clone of glare? 17:52:23 actually now that I type this out, I realize I have a better action item 17:53:02 #action Aedo to discuss with infra best way forward for us to carry a fork of glare or else deploy with a squashed patch chain from glance repo 17:53:25 I've had some conversation with other people around this kind of stuff (olaph you know what I'm saying) 17:54:00 and it might be possible for us to specify a chain of reviews we want to carry, and use them together - without having to fork glance and backport stuff 17:54:27 I even think we might be able to manage that list of reviews/commits in a single file in app-catalog which we could review and maintain that way 17:54:36 cool 17:55:07 so I'll discuss more and share details next week - I *think* that might be the best. It sounds complicated, but it will probably be less complicated than trying to manage our own new fork/repo and set of reviews there 17:55:29 docaedo: you're right 17:56:06 oh my we're almost out of time! 17:56:18 this was a good discussion and meeting you guys, thanks for it! 17:56:37 thank you for your proposal 17:56:50 it absolutely makes sense 17:57:20 no prob - I'm excited to make this happen and still (after allllll this time!) I think it will be a nice showcase for glare and all the work you and ativelkov and everyone else has put into it 17:58:40 talk to you next week (probably - though I might be on a plane? I need to check my schedule...) 17:58:45 #endmeeting