15:01:12 <eglynn_> #startmeeting ceilometer
15:01:13 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jun  5 15:01:12 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is eglynn_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:14 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:01:16 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ceilometer'
15:01:22 <DinaBelova> o/
15:01:24 <ityaptin> Hi!
15:01:33 <jd__> o/
15:01:34 <vrovachev> hi all :)
15:01:36 <nsaje> o/
15:01:38 <llu-laptop> o/
15:01:40 <enikanorov_> DinaBelova: o/ \o
15:01:40 <rhochmuth> o/
15:01:41 <nealph> o/
15:01:47 <cmart> o/
15:01:49 <DinaBelova> enikanorov_ :D
15:01:54 <eglynn_> good afternoon / good morning / good night all!
15:02:05 <eglynn_> #topic Juno-1 blueprints status
15:02:16 <eglynn_> #link https://launchpad.net/ceilometer/+milestone/juno-1
15:03:08 <_nadya_> o/
15:03:21 <eglynn_> gordc: do you think we'll have enough in the v1 api removal & retry rationalization to declare victory on the sqla BP for juno-1?
15:03:23 <eglynn_> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/big-data-sql
15:03:50 <gordc> eglynn_: i was going to ask same thing...
15:03:50 <eglynn_> i.e. we could push the further improvements discussed with Mike Bayer out a 2nd dependent BP
15:04:02 <eglynn_> (and target that 2nd BP at juno-2)
15:04:05 <gordc> it's not fully realised but it's enough for testing to continue.
15:04:14 <gordc> eglynn_: sounds like good plan.
15:04:30 <gordc> i'm ok creating another bp and marking this one as complete
15:04:37 <eglynn_> gordc: yeah, it brought it from unviable to viable so I think that's good enough to put a stake in the ground for j1
15:04:39 <fabiog> o/
15:04:51 <eglynn_> gordc: ... thanks if you could file that second BP, it would be great!
15:04:54 <gordc> eglynn_: cool cool. i'll do that then.
15:05:04 <eglynn_> gordc: thank you!
15:05:27 <eglynn_> BTW folks we had a call yesterday evening with Mick Bayer, author of sqlalchemy
15:05:46 <eglynn_> gordc steps him thru' the current schema and got some good feedback and pointers
15:06:05 * cdent waves
15:06:08 <eglynn_> rough notes here ... https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-sqlalchemy-mike-bayer
15:06:10 <llu-laptop> great
15:06:26 <eglynn_> (... a bit of a scramble of my initial email conversations with Mike, gordc's comments, and a summary of the discussion on the call itself)
15:06:54 <gordc> i would hide my irc handle if i were Mike... i can see a lot of questions coming his way.
15:06:59 <DinaBelova> hehe :D My summary would be better if I had no connection issues :D
15:06:59 <_nadya_> just one plea from me is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87249/ . Review is very old but bp has juno-1 target. I'm still ready (and able) to answer all your comments
15:07:01 <eglynn_> _nadya_: are you confident of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/hbase-resource-rowkey-enhancement landing for juno-1?
15:07:18 <_nadya_> eglynn_: see my message above :)
15:07:34 <eglynn_> _nadya_: cool
15:08:14 <eglynn_> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/grenade-upgrade-testing is pending EmilienM's patch landing
15:08:20 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, and btw
15:08:27 <llu-laptop> _nadya_: I tried once looking at the patch before, but failed because I had zero knowledge of hbase
15:08:27 <DinaBelova> eglynn_ about _nadya_'s change
15:08:37 <DinaBelova> it improves hbase performance dramatically
15:08:50 <_nadya_> llu-laptop: yep, I understand, too specific change :(
15:09:00 <DinaBelova> so if we want to test performance of different backends, her change is vital
15:09:23 <eglynn_> DinaBelova, _nadya_: excellent, we definitely need to get it for j-1 in that case
15:10:00 <eglynn_> re. that grenade patch ... I discussed with Sean Dague on the -qa channel earlier
15:10:07 <eglynn_> ... should be no remaining blockers other than review bandwidth, so confident it will land for j1
15:10:34 <eglynn_> cdent will be proposing a corresponding BP spec also
15:10:44 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, yeah, already seen it - it's cool!
15:11:01 <eglynn_> idegtiarov: how about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/hbase-events-feature ?
15:11:10 <cdent> Yeah, I was stubbing that in the start to that grenade spec just before this meeting.
15:11:41 <cdent> I'm sure it will require some judicious review as I only half know what I'm doing.
15:11:44 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, there is strange Jenkins error there.... gate is failing - one bug was fixed, so idegtiarov tried to recheck
15:11:45 <eglynn_> idegtiarov: will this patch suffice to declare vistory on it? ... https://review.openstack.org/#/c/91408/
15:11:49 <DinaBelova> we'll see what it was
15:11:59 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: k
15:11:59 <DinaBelova> change is ready to be reviewed
15:12:14 <_nadya_> eglynn_: idegtiarov is working on this. I hope it will be ready
15:12:22 <eglynn_> _nadya_: great!
15:12:26 <_nadya_> eglynn_: all tests passed locally
15:12:38 <eglynn_> prad: what about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/ceilometer-meter-lbaas ?
15:12:41 <DinaBelova> that's why Jenkins fail looks suspicious...
15:12:47 <_nadya_> eglynn_: we need several days for final version
15:12:54 <sileht> o/
15:12:54 <idegtiarov> I am working! Hope all will be done in time.
15:13:03 <DinaBelova> sileht, o/
15:13:05 <prad> eglynn_, started working on it
15:13:10 <eglynn_> _nadya_, idegtiarov: great, thanks!
15:13:15 <prad> o/
15:13:36 <eglynn_> prad: ... https://review.openstack.org/95784 is still WIP for now? (... worth getting eyes on?)
15:14:23 <prad> eglynn_, yes, worth taking a look.. i still need to incorporate the enum suggestion you had.. and working on unit tests and docs.. should have something by next week
15:15:01 <prad> eglynn_, yea left the sip as the spec was pending.. now that thats approved.. will have this for review by early next week
15:15:13 <prad> but early eyes wouldn't hurt if someone has time to look at it
15:15:28 <eglynn_> prad: so for juno-1, we need to have it landed by say Tuesday next week
15:15:45 <eglynn_> prad: (juno-1 tag to be cut on Thurs)
15:15:52 <prad> eglynn_, sure will try it get that in by then
15:15:59 <prad> to*
15:16:08 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, hehe, if gate will be ok :)
15:16:15 <DinaBelova> eglynn_ to the time of j1 :)
15:16:47 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: well, we trust in the powers of the QA folks! :)
15:17:04 <DinaBelova> yeah, exactly :)
15:17:31 <eglynn_> anyone anything else to add for j1?
15:17:40 <llu-laptop> have any one successfully reproduce the bug locally?
15:17:46 <llu-laptop> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1323524
15:17:47 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1323524 in ceilometer "tests.alarm.test_rpc.TestRPCAlarmPartitionCoordination.test_ordination_allocate failed for timeout" [Medium,Confirmed]
15:18:09 <eglynn_> llu-laptop: I couldn't, but didn't spend much time on it
15:18:47 <gordc> llu-laptop: me neither... i assume it's related to this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1321826
15:18:50 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1321826 in ceilometer "periodic notifier unit test failure" [Medium,In progress]
15:18:50 <eglynn_> llu-laptop: I was thinking we might have to bump it to j2 ... if it's one of those transient issues that may take unbounded time to track down
15:19:02 <llu-laptop> I couldn't either, thouh I run tox -e py27 quite lots of times these days due to another issue
15:19:11 <gordc> seems like some oslo.messaging quirk
15:19:19 <eglynn_> gordc: yeap, my thought also
15:19:19 <llu-laptop> eglynn_: agreed
15:19:26 <eglynn_> k, let's bump it
15:19:42 <eglynn_> #topic details of Juno mid-cycle meetup
15:19:58 <eglynn_> ... brought to you by your gracious host, jd__ ;)
15:20:11 <jd__> aye
15:20:20 <eglynn_> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints/ParisJuno2014
15:20:32 <jd__> so all details should be on that wiki page
15:20:36 <DinaBelova> last time we had no opportunity to learn the results :D
15:20:43 <jd__> if you got any question feel free to ask me as I'm organizing it mostly
15:20:47 <eglynn_> any advice on local hotels?
15:21:04 <jd__> eglynn_: good point, I can ask for that
15:21:15 <eglynn_> jd__: cool, thanks!
15:21:17 <gordc> jd__: how much to couchsurf at your place?
15:21:56 <DinaBelova> gordc, hehe :D
15:22:05 <llu-laptop> gordc: LoL
15:22:14 <_nadya_> doh :( guys, you are too cruel
15:22:17 <jd__> lol
15:22:18 <eglynn_> AirBnB Paris stylee ... LOL :)
15:22:31 <gordc> good business model.
15:22:47 <jd__> I'm sorry gordc you're not hot enough
15:23:02 <gordc> jd__: hahah fair enough
15:23:05 <DinaBelova> jd__, probably some nice girl will be better :D
15:23:17 * jd__ high fives DinaBelova
15:23:31 <jd__> anyway we alredy are 3 for Ceilometer on this sprint so that's cool
15:23:36 <jd__> sadly sileht won't be able to join
15:23:50 <eglynn_> really, that's a pity!
15:23:55 <jd__> yep
15:24:02 <jd__> he knows!
15:24:04 * sileht is sad
15:24:09 <_nadya_> +1
15:24:22 <jd__> if you plan to come don't forget to update the wiki :)
15:24:28 * eglynn_ sad also :(
15:24:54 <nealph> update the wiki so jd__ will know how many to make room for on his couch?
15:25:02 <jd__> exactly
15:25:09 <nealph> :
15:26:04 <eglynn_> jd__: closer to the time, we could discuss a concrete agenda/goals etc.?
15:26:15 <jd__> eglynn_: sounds like a good idea
15:26:27 <eglynn_> jd__: cool
15:26:37 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, offtopic - idegtiarov change is failing due to https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1323524
15:26:39 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1323524 in ceilometer "tests.alarm.test_rpc.TestRPCAlarmPartitionCoordination.test_ordination_allocate failed for timeout" [Medium,Confirmed]
15:26:43 <DinaBelova> just checked it
15:27:02 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: a-ha, that's the hard to reproduce bug mentioned above
15:27:08 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: ... failing consistently?
15:27:08 <DinaBelova> yeah...
15:27:16 <DinaBelova> two times
15:27:28 <DinaBelova> lemme check it one more time if it is about this bug
15:27:38 <DinaBelova> yeah, it's it
15:27:41 <sileht> eglynn_, DinaBelova I have introduced this bug
15:27:42 <DinaBelova> :(
15:27:55 <eglynn_> k, we'll need to look into that ... let's move on for now tho'
15:27:59 <DinaBelova> ok
15:28:11 <eglynn_> #topic Tempest integration - branchless Tempest: skipping testcases against stable/icehouse
15:28:32 <eglynn_> so we'd some further discussions with mtreinish to clarify this
15:28:46 <vrovachev> yeah, exactly
15:29:00 <eglynn_> turns out that *both* a capabilities API *and* static test-skipping config are required
15:29:20 <DinaBelova> api change is trying to be merged
15:29:21 <DinaBelova> ...
15:29:25 <DinaBelova> 22 hours
15:29:42 <vrovachev> as for the devstack change it's almost merged
15:29:55 <vrovachev> and there is tempest change - alsoalmost reviewed
15:30:12 <eglynn_> vrovachev: ... do you mean the static test-skipping config?
15:30:33 <vrovachev> eglynn_, yes, it's for the config
15:30:45 <vrovachev> I mean devstack change
15:30:58 <vrovachev> it sets needed flag - as Sean proposed to
15:31:25 <eglynn_> summary/explanation of the test skipping approach for anyone interested is in http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-qa/%23openstack-qa.2014-06-03.log
15:31:32 <vrovachev> and after it'll be merged it'll be physical capability not to skip these tests
15:31:40 <eglynn_> "we need *both* a discoverable API and config-driven test exclusion"
15:31:44 <eglynn_> "... with the former used (indirectly) for public cloud testing, but *only* the latter relied upon in branchless tempest runs"
15:31:57 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, heh, yes :)
15:32:18 <eglynn_> cool enough, sounds like all will be well once the gating Gods smile upon us :)
15:32:24 <DinaBelova> so I'll catch dtroyer to grab second +2 today
15:32:33 <DinaBelova> yes, exactly :)
15:32:39 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: cool, thanks!
15:32:51 <eglynn_> move on?
15:32:55 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, +
15:32:59 <vrovachev> ok
15:32:59 <eglynn_> #topic TSDaaS/gnocchi update
15:33:08 <eglynn_> jd__: the floor is yours ...
15:33:16 <jd__> thanks
15:33:27 <jd__> so we've made good progress on the indexing part
15:33:41 <eglynn_> cool
15:33:46 <jd__> to the point you're now able to create, update, list and search for resources
15:34:00 <jd__> the CI is in place too and working
15:34:06 <jd__> gating against py27/py33 and postgresql
15:34:11 <jd__> mysql is on its way
15:34:22 <eglynn_> *cough*, *cough*, py26?
15:34:27 <jd__> py26 too :)
15:34:36 <DinaBelova> jd__, please use more self-describing commit messages, btw ;)
15:34:36 <eglynn_> thank you sir! :)
15:34:43 <jd__> next steps would be:
15:34:44 <_nadya_> jd__: do we have an api spec? Maybe I've missed that
15:34:54 <jd__> - start working in Ceilometer pushing things into Gnocchi
15:35:06 <jd__> - dig a bit in the pandas usage and entity API to provide more features
15:35:24 <eglynn_> amalagon: might be able to jump in there ^^^
15:35:27 <jd__> _nadya_: no, we should be able to generate it somehow from the code I would hope
15:35:39 <jd__> but we can write it by hands for now if needed
15:35:56 <eglynn_> (... to look into exponential smoothing and other black statistical arts)
15:36:00 <DinaBelova> jd__, well, good spec will help to write good code
15:36:01 <jd__> so yeah anyone wanting to jump in welcome
15:36:03 <amalagon> right
15:36:15 <jd__> eglynn_: definitely
15:36:36 <eglynn_> excellent!
15:36:45 <_nadya_> jd__: I guess that if we start working on gnocchi we need to have a strong plan
15:36:48 <eglynn_> BTW does the API feel like it converging on something relatively stable?
15:36:59 <eglynn_> ... or still very much in flux?
15:37:05 <_nadya_> jd__: I mean we need to be sure that all customer needs will be covered
15:37:09 <jd__> _nadya_: oh we need more people than a plan right now
15:37:21 <jd__> eglynn_: so far it's converging as I'm not seeing any design issue
15:37:26 <jd__> eglynn_: more eyes would help though
15:37:37 <jd__> _nadya_: yeah my point about more eyes :)
15:37:59 <jd__> but having API users will help toward that too
15:38:22 <eglynn_> jd__: cool :) ... BTW I was also thinking of amalagon working on python-gnocchiclient
15:38:40 <eglynn_> jd__: ... i,e, prolly best for her to concentrate on the most stable part of the API
15:38:58 <amalagon> yeah I was starting to look at python-ceilometerclient as a template
15:39:04 <jd__> sounds good to me
15:39:09 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, if so, we definitely need API spec
15:39:15 <DinaBelova> to write the client
15:39:25 <DinaBelova> and keep it somehow stable
15:39:52 <cdent> I think it would be a bad idea to stablize the api before having some significant use
15:39:54 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: well the basic API interactions can be just derived from the code/wiki etc.
15:39:55 <DinaBelova> probably it's a good idea to start with it here before starting client work
15:39:58 <cdent> otherwise we back ourselves into a corner
15:40:05 <_nadya_> yep, and to understand the direction and roadmap actually
15:40:26 <jd__> well the API spec is the code
15:40:36 <eglynn_> cdent: yep, we don't want to lock this down too early IMO
15:40:47 <DinaBelova> jd__, eglynn_, well, ok :)
15:40:57 <llu-laptop> eglynn_: yes, we shouldn't
15:41:13 <jd__> I mean the code is pretty short and using pecan so it's pretty straightforward to have the spec from that
15:41:14 <eglynn_> ... almost certain some API changes/requirements will only become clear once we start integrating it into ceilo core
15:41:22 <jd__> and probably to auto generate it later
15:41:24 <eglynn_> jd__: +1
15:42:01 <_nadya_> eglynn_: please correct m if I'm wrong, but am I right that v3api will be mostly for gnocchi?
15:42:39 <eglynn_> _nadya_: yep my assumption is that the gnocchi will form the core of the v3 ceilometer API
15:43:32 <_nadya_> eglynn_: it's very big change and imho we need some poc, specs, glossary before implementing that
15:43:45 <eglynn_> ... that said, we've yet to work out the details of bringing the gnocchi code into ceilo
15:44:06 <eglynn_> ... issues like v2/v3 co-existence, migration of legacy data etc.
15:44:33 <jd__> right now we need to start using it by feeding data from Ceilometer
15:44:48 <jd__> then we'll be able to figure the rest out
15:45:12 <eglynn_> jd__: yeah ... maybe some or all of those questions ^^^ would be relevant to discuss at the Paris sprint?
15:45:24 <jd__> eglynn_: sure
15:45:37 <_nadya_> eglynn_, jd__, ok, and what's the plan? Who is working on this? only jd__?
15:45:38 <jd__> I'd love to spend time on that during the sprint :)
15:45:50 <eglynn_> cool ... depends also on the rate of progress before then, I guess
15:45:54 <jd__> yes
15:46:04 <jd__> _nadya_: for now, mostly me and DinaBelova's helping too
15:46:30 <eglynn_> also ildikov has expressed an interest in working on the ceilo core integration part
15:46:33 <jd__> and amalagon should do some stuff too
15:46:38 <eglynn_> yep
15:46:43 <amalagon> :) yes!
15:46:46 <_nadya_> eglynn_, jd__, I'm just trying to figure out, sorry for noise :)
15:46:51 <jd__> _nadya_: np
15:46:52 <eglynn_> np!
15:47:11 <jd__> anyway I've a long list of things to do etc wrt gnocchi so if you want to help and are bored, just come to me
15:47:18 <jd__> :-)
15:47:21 <eglynn_> jd__: cool :)
15:47:31 <eglynn_> anything else on TSD?
15:47:42 <jd__> that's all for me
15:47:42 <cdent> jd__: is that list on the web anywhere?
15:47:45 <_nadya_> jd__: maybe you show us the list?
15:47:57 <eglynn_> cdent: it is now :)
15:48:01 <jd__> _nadya_, cdent: I had a gist but it's already outdated
15:48:12 <jd__> I don't maintain a list nobody's going to read :D
15:48:32 <DinaBelova> jd__, you had https://gist.github.com/jd/229ab8211aa9a6b547de
15:48:40 <jd__> thanks DinaBelova
15:48:49 <jd__> and most of that is implemented actually
15:49:00 <_nadya_> jd__: am I right that first step is POC and it has 2 items: 1. Gnocchi code itself, 2. Integration with Ceilometer
15:49:37 <jd__> _nadya_: 1. is pretty covered now I'd think but 2. is the most interesting one
15:50:47 <_nadya_> jd__: after 2. you we may be able to create API spec, discuss that?
15:50:47 <eglynn_> _nadya_: there's also a third step ... 3. Migration of legacy data / deprecation path for v3
15:51:09 <_nadya_> jd__: *we may :)
15:51:25 <eglynn_> _nadya_: but some or all of that step #3 may be pushed out to the Kepler cycle
15:51:26 <jd__> _nadya_: the API is already there
15:51:42 * eglynn_ makes assumptions on the outcome of the K* naming poll
15:51:49 <jd__> haha Kepler
15:52:29 <vrovachev> at what step we write integration tests?
15:52:37 <_nadya_> eglynn_, jd__, are you gonna merge smth into Ceilometer master before api spec and all these conservative stuff?
15:53:03 <jd__> _nadya_: dunnow yet
15:53:14 <_nadya_> eglynn_, jd__, it's still not clear for me, is this POC or...?
15:53:14 <eglynn_> _nadya_: what format do you expect the API spec in?
15:53:34 <eglynn_> _nadya_: we could easily derive something basic from the code
15:53:37 <jd__> _nadya_: it's not POC, it's code that works and that's going to be production ready at some point
15:53:45 <jd__> where the code will belong is another issue
15:53:58 <jd__> but not very important anyway
15:54:03 <_nadya_> jd__: ok, I see your point
15:54:06 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, well the thing here is about the fact that just created API probably can't satisfy the all use cases
15:54:09 <DinaBelova> and all needs
15:54:26 <eglynn_> jd__: my initial thought was to bring it into the ceilo repo once the initial rapid iteration/innovation phase is done
15:54:29 <jd__> DinaBelova: well then someone should tell us why :)
15:54:47 <eglynn_> jd__: ... are you thinking otherwise?
15:55:16 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: so let's identify the missing use-cases
15:55:18 <jd__> eglynn_: yeah that's a possibility, I'm also thinking that since it has no use of any part of the current Ceilometer code base it should stay autonomous as it can be used without the rest of ceilometer too
15:55:28 <jd__> eglynn_: I think it's something to discuss in a month around beers
15:55:44 <eglynn_> jd__: fair nuffski :)
15:56:19 <eglynn_> DinaBelova: ... my feeling is that many of the missing usecases will be shaken out during the ceilo core integration phase
15:56:39 <_nadya_> eglynn_: about format. I expect examples at least
15:57:03 <jd__> _nadya_: do you want to try to write the specs and the examples?
15:57:03 <eglynn_> jd__: ... but either way, will need at least to be under the Telemetry program umbrella, right?
15:57:11 <jd__> eglynn_: definitely!
15:57:20 <eglynn_> jd__: cool
15:57:36 <_nadya_> jd__: honestly, I wish I could :(
15:57:40 <DinaBelova> eglynn_, I just think that or other backends (and probably use cases, etc) it might not be ready - and that't why I think some additional planning and at least more community noise about this will be cool
15:57:43 <DinaBelova> heh
15:58:16 <eglynn_> _nadya_, DinaBelova: folks with misgivings about this approach, let's try to gather some *specific* concerns on an etherpad before next week's meeting
15:58:20 <jd__> _nadya_: haaaa I knew you were just doing your wishlist for your next birthday or something! ;)
15:58:50 <jd__> I agree with eglynn_, "thinking that it might not be ok" is not gonna help
15:58:56 <jd__> I want facts and use cases.
15:59:17 <eglynn_> _nadya_, DinaBelova: that way we can structure the discussion, and knock down any issues that we have answers for already
15:59:29 <DinaBelova> well, ok, let's close this discussion for now
15:59:30 <_nadya_> jd__: yep, for my baby birthday:)
15:59:35 <cdent> hour's up
15:59:57 <eglynn_> #topic Discussion about Alarm Management design for Horizon
16:00:05 <fabiog> eglynn_ can you post the etherpad link for the discussion, please
16:00:06 <eglynn_> not much more to say than ...
16:00:08 <jd__> _nadya_: :-)
16:00:11 <eglynn_> discussed in detail on the ML http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-June/036627.html : Liz Blanchard to come back with another iteration next week
16:00:21 <eglynn_> #link  https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/alarm-management-page-design-discussion
16:00:44 <cmart> I'll be working on the horizon side so any comments/feedback will be appreciated.
16:00:50 <eglynn_> ^^^ further discussion should probably wait on Liz Blancard's next version of the wireframes
16:00:58 <eglynn_> cmart: cool
16:01:09 <eglynn_> k, we're over-time here
16:01:17 <eglynn_> cmart: happy to punt this on to next week?
16:01:30 <cmart> eglynn_: sure! no problem!
16:01:38 <eglynn_> cmart: thank you sir!
16:01:49 <eglynn_> thanks all for a productive discussion!
16:01:55 <jd__> thanks!
16:01:56 <eglynn_> #endmeeting ceilometer