20:00:51 #startmeeting barbican 20:00:52 Meeting started Mon Mar 17 20:00:51 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is redrobot. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:00:53 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 20:00:57 The meeting name has been set to 'barbican' 20:01:30 Hi everybody! Who's here for the Barbican meeting? Let's see a show of hands 20:01:48 o/ 20:01:57 o/ 20:02:55 alright then... let's wait a couple of minutes to see if anyone else shows up. 20:02:56 o/ 20:03:00 o/ 20:04:02 o/ 20:04:32 cool, let's get started then. I've updated the agenda for today 20:04:35 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Barbican 20:04:48 #topic Remove RBAC from Version resource 20:05:19 First up on the agenda is removing RBAC from the version resource 20:05:23 chadlung any updates on that? 20:05:35 yes 20:05:58 I've been troubleshooting Arvind's CR. I think we've isolated the issue. 20:06:37 I also added a Blueprint to specify the overall direction of Versions: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/barbican/+spec/fix-version-api 20:06:55 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/barbican/+spec/fix-version-api 20:07:12 is this blueprint separate from arvind's CR? 20:07:28 arvind: your CR will answer the mail on removing RBAC from versions, Chad's bp will address providing version content for that version request 20:07:29 That would sync us up with how other OpenStack projects are handling versioning output (like Nova, Keystone, Manila) 20:07:54 redrobot: so yes, separate blueprint from arvind's CR 20:08:15 That being said, before we work on the versions we probably need to determine if we are sticking with Falcon or moving to Pecan to avoid more effort than needed. 20:08:15 woodster1, sorry I am late 20:08:19 which cr? 20:08:25 #agreed Blueprint will align our version resource with other OpenStack projects 20:08:30 your RBAC removal CR 20:08:39 on version? 20:08:44 woodster1: greetings, happy to be joining in 20:08:46 yes 20:08:53 ok 20:08:55 malini: welcome back 20:09:00 :-) 20:09:11 atiwari you didn't miss much. chadlung thinks he may have isolated the issue with the DevStack gate 20:09:26 atiwari: yes, probably just a devstack tweak needed to your CR to make it pass that gate job. Chad is looking at it 20:09:27 chadlung: sorry for the delay in getting our team's Pecan report out to the mailing list; the individual working on that has been swamped, but we are working hard to get that out today 20:09:28 #agreed We're glad to see malini is back :) 20:09:29 great 20:09:48 hi malini 20:10:20 #action chadlung to work with atiwari to fix gate job issue 20:10:23 kgriffs: no problem 20:10:27 hello! you guys are too nice. 20:11:08 kgriffs: thanks for helping with that 20:11:21 Any other concerns regarding RBAC and the Version resource or can we move on? 20:12:22 kgriffs looking forward to reading that report 20:12:38 guys, I want to introduce arunkant from my team, he is working on bug/1291073 and secret-isolation-at-user-level bp 20:12:39 ok moving on 20:12:39 atiwari: are you ok with approach on completing your RBAC CR? 20:12:46 sure 20:13:01 nice to e-meet you arunkant 20:13:24 #topic DogTag integration 20:13:59 :-) 20:14:06 I don't see alee here, so I'll update 20:14:35 Working through getting a DogTag plugin, we've decided that we need to change the Crypto plugin interface 20:14:39 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/barbican/+spec/update-crypto-plugin-interface 20:15:15 basically this boils down to remove the create() method 20:15:21 reading blueprint 20:15:24 and replace it with a generate() method 20:15:53 so generate is just combining create and encrypt 20:16:01 into a single call 20:16:03 ? 20:16:05 codekobe yes, that's right 20:16:14 so the secret creation/generation will be combined with the encrypt step…so the plain text of generated secret doesn't leave the plugin 20:16:36 as per of api-orders-add-more-types bp I may change the crypto plugin interface 20:16:37 that makes perfect sense 20:16:42 as part 20:17:00 woodster1 ^^^ 20:17:34 codekobe also, makes it easier for the DogTag plugin to generate secrets 20:17:49 atiwari do you know what changes are needed? 20:17:58 Where will the dogtag plugin code live? 20:18:09 I will let you gus know in next meeting 20:18:18 atiwari: it would be better to keep as separate CR from the bp I think 20:18:30 #action atiwari may need to change the interface further. He'll update next week 20:19:10 codekobe currently the idea is that the DogTag plugin will live in the Barbican codebase 20:19:12 atiwari: the crypto plugin change is relatively simple. The bp will be more involved I think 20:19:12 is this for adding the "type"attribute to the orders resource? 20:19:34 codekobe: yes 20:19:42 woodster1, so you want api-orders-add-more-types and change crypto plugin interface for api-orders-add-more-types in two cr? 20:19:51 correct 20:20:13 the plugin interface change is one CR by itself I'd think 20:20:19 redrobot any chance there is a chef cookbook for dogtag 20:20:24 the new orders types work is separate work 20:20:30 ok 20:20:44 so far I was trying add in one 20:20:46 codekobe I haven't found any, so I started one. Haven't pushed it out to GitHub yet 20:21:06 ok, might be useful for integration testing 20:21:14 codekobe haven't made much progress on it either, so if you're interested I can push up what I have and we can collaborate 20:21:23 yes, please do 20:21:37 atiwari: yeah, the crypto interface change is simple. Teh orders one will be a little more involved I think 20:21:43 #action redrobot will add a chef-dogtag repository to cloudkeep-ops for a DogTag cookbook 20:22:25 woodster1 , that is true but so far I have made changes in one for all 20:22:32 I have to separate them 20:23:06 futture topic suggestion - chef cookbook sin stackforge 20:23:13 atiwari: let's explore that after the meeting in the barbican channel if that's ok 20:23:29 ok 20:23:58 codekobe we can talk about that next. This is the last topic I have in the agenda 20:24:09 ok redrobot 20:24:19 ok, any other comments/concerns regarding DogTag integration? 20:24:27 gyee, did you push the barbican client v3 sync for review? 20:24:46 atiwari, not yet, need to finishup the tests today 20:24:55 should be in gerrit later today 20:25:35 ok 20:25:50 ok moving on... 20:26:02 #topic Chef cookbooks in Stackforge 20:26:13 codekobe you wanna talk about this? 20:26:32 So I have noticed there are quite a bit of mature chef cookbooks for deploying openstack services living in stackforge 20:26:54 Is this something that we are expected to do? 20:27:20 good question. I don't have an answer for that 20:27:37 I was browsing the wiki last night and noticed there's an #openstack-chef channel 20:27:47 i don;t think it would be an urgent action, but it may help get support for allowing these cookbooks to deploy to different platforms 20:27:57 other than just centos 20:28:17 seems like it would make sense to head that way for sure 20:28:47 #agreed We should aim to provide Barbican cookbooks as part of Stackforge Cookbook effort 20:28:49 I don't see any harm in moving to the stackforge org. 20:29:14 codekobe do you want to look into what would be required on our part? 20:29:32 sure, I can look into how the current cookbooks are structured 20:30:13 you could also contact a committer or two on the existing repos to see if they have suggestions 20:30:14 I would like to find some of the other cookbooks building on zuul 20:30:15 #action codekobe will investigate what we will need to contribute to stackforge cookbooks 20:30:36 codekobe cool, I would also join #openstack-chef and see what those guys are up too 20:30:44 I am not sure how they are doing that because i don't see Rakefiles 20:30:51 but I do see spec tests 20:31:12 sounds good redrobot 20:32:43 alrighty... anything else on this topic? 20:32:47 yes 20:32:55 all, I also want to introduce gyee in this forum, he is finishing up #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/barbican/+spec/barbican-client-has-to-be-keystone-v3.0-complaint. 20:33:08 welcome gyee 20:33:11 gyee: thanks! 20:33:25 hi, look forward to party with your cool guys 20:33:39 all: please note that the devstack gate check is enabled now on CRs 20:33:48 :D 20:33:51 * redrobot likes to party 20:33:56 lol party time 20:34:06 yes! 20:34:15 oh yes... thanks for bringing that up woodster1 20:34:26 Barbican has two new voting gates now 20:34:30 gyee, glad to see you on barbican and welcome to arunkant 20:34:39 Python 2.6 and the DevStack gate (previously non-voting) 20:34:40 this summit big birthday party for barbican 20:34:40 atiwari is familiar with that now :) 20:34:55 chadlung I will ping you after the meeting 20:35:01 #topic New Gerrit gates 20:35:14 #note Gerrit now has a Pyhton 2.6 gate 20:35:25 #note DevStack gate is now a voting gate 20:35:31 Actually they haven't enabled the voting dsvm gate yet: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80686/2 20:35:41 is the python 2.6 also a voting gate? 20:36:06 #note oops... DevStack gate will *soon* be a voting gate 20:36:16 lisaclark1: they all vote now 20:36:16 lisaclark1 yes, Python 2.6 is a voting gate 20:36:53 lisaclark1: technically the dsvm one is still non-voting until the CR is approved 20:37:06 dstufft: thanks for getting python 2.6 working 20:37:30 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80686/2 is the CR that will make the DevStack gate a voting gate 20:37:38 all these gates and their opinions! 20:37:49 #agreed gates are opinionated 20:38:07 codekobe just wait til we turn Hacking on 20:38:18 gates = control 20:38:31 barbican is growing up :) 20:38:33 gates = green goodness! 20:39:01 redrobot, I didn't realize hacking was off! 20:39:47 codekobe https://github.com/stackforge/barbican/blob/master/tox.ini#L21,L22 20:40:36 Ok guys, anything else we would like to talk about for this meeting? 20:40:50 i'm all out of ideas 20:40:59 I have one 20:41:07 atiwari shoot 20:41:24 how to add topic for summit discussion ? 20:41:38 #topic Summit Discussions 20:41:42 Barbican is not an option in http://summit.openstack.org/ 20:42:14 atiwari I would guess that no actions have been taken to add Barbican now that we're incubated 20:42:31 ok 20:43:00 atiwari: add to keystone for the time being 20:43:03 I think jraim is working on getting Design Sessions scheduled 20:43:12 jraim had reached out to openstack coordinators to see about adding design sessions for barbican 20:43:18 redrobot, what is the procedure or time line for Barbican to be main line project 20:43:22 lisaclark1 jinx! 20:43:44 atiwari now that we're incubated we have to wait two cycles before applying for graduation 20:43:52 atiwari so at least a year...? 20:44:02 hmm 20:44:45 ok 20:45:23 (thinks to himself out loud: …maybe if the masses clamor for it sooner…) 20:45:37 ha! 20:46:34 we still have a few minutes in this channel. Any other questions/concerns/comments before we finish this meeting? 20:47:19 I'm good 20:47:23 redrobot: need to add a chapter on key manager to openstack-security-guide 20:47:46 version-1 had a reference to it, now it is time to flesh it out 20:47:47 #topic Add Barbican to OpenStack Security Guide 20:48:01 malini is this something you would like to look into? 20:48:20 redrobot: yes, would feel honored to handle it 20:49:04 #action malini will look into adding a Barbican chapter to the OpenStack security guide 20:49:35 malini if we can help in any way let us know 20:49:55 i'm not very familiar with the security guide... I probably need to read up on it. 20:50:14 also, I'm sure jraim will have some input on that. 20:50:25 redrobot, will ping for help, editting etc, you are drafted! 20:50:34 malini :D 20:51:10 malini: thanks for the help (again) 20:51:32 Hey, thanks for building barbican, we need it 20:51:42 and waiting to see you all at Atlanta! 20:51:53 for sure 20:52:42 alrighty guys, any last minute comments or concerns? 20:54:22 ok then, thanks everyone for coming to the meeting. See you guys here again next week. 20:54:28 #endmeeting