16:01:28 <jgriffith> #startmeeting cinder
16:01:29 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jan  2 16:01:28 2013 UTC.  The chair is jgriffith. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:30 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:01:32 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
16:01:39 <jgriffith> Happy New Year folks!
16:01:55 <rushiagr> jgriffith: happy new year to you too! :)
16:01:55 <jgriffith> thingee: kmartin rushiagr bswartz around?
16:02:04 <thingee> o/
16:02:16 <rushiagr> o/
16:02:16 <kmartin> yep, Happy New Year!
16:02:35 <jgriffith> So this should be fairly short today as we're all just getting back at it
16:02:51 <jgriffith> rushiagr: I caught your comments on the clone patch this morning and updated
16:02:53 <bswartz> hi
16:03:06 <jgriffith> rushiagr: You were correct... sorry, I missed that global defs under the fake class there
16:03:20 <jgriffith> rushiagr: Regardless it needed some tweaking due to how folks chose to inherrit things
16:03:24 <jgriffith> bswartz: howdy
16:03:29 <rushiagr> jgriffith: okay..
16:03:43 <jgriffith> Alrighty... G2
16:03:49 <jgriffith> #topic Grizzly 2 status
16:04:13 <jgriffith> https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-2
16:04:22 <jgriffith> We're not looking too bad
16:04:34 <jgriffith> Set to close on Jan 10
16:04:47 <jgriffith> I'd like to be pretty solid on anything going in to review by the end of this week
16:05:16 <jgriffith> I think we'll drop "volume backups" and "multiple back-ends" (again)
16:05:56 <frankm> We're still working on volume backups John
16:06:17 <jgriffith> frankm: cool... I'll hold off if you think you'll have the patch in this week or soon after
16:06:27 <xyang> Hi John, I have a question.  Is there a place for checking in a ReadMe file on how to use a specific Cinder driver?
16:06:29 <frankm> Last update I had from Duncan was that he was still confident we could meet G2
16:06:41 <jgriffith> frankm: Well then... never mind :)
16:06:54 <jgriffith> xyang: Yes, it goes in the docs
16:07:10 <jgriffith> xyang: I'll catch up with you later and point you to the lcoation in the XML files
16:07:18 <xyang> Sure.  Thanks
16:07:36 <jgriffith> Ok... so that just leaves the multi backends and the delete volumes with snaps
16:08:07 <jgriffith> I started working on the delete volumes with snapshots but I think we'd be better to wait until we have capability reporting implemented
16:08:24 <jgriffith> I think that's the right way to go rather than hack it in now then change it afterwards
16:08:41 <jgriffith> so I'll move it out to G3
16:08:53 <jgriffith> anybody have any updates on G2 work they're doing?
16:09:20 <eharney> i would like to get this LIO support landed in G2
16:09:23 <bswartz> xyang: https://github.com/openstack/openstack-manuals/blob/master/doc/src/docbkx/openstack-compute-admin/computevolumes.xml
16:09:37 <jgriffith> eharney: noted
16:09:49 <jgriffith> eharney: I would like to see that as well :)
16:10:02 <eharney> i don't see any big problems, just need to figure out what you had run into
16:10:05 <jgriffith> eharney: did you get a chance to try it out on Precise?
16:10:08 <kmartin> jgriffith: Walt should have the 3PAR iSCSI driver fixed up today
16:10:17 <jgriffith> eharney: Ok... hopefully it was just a missing step on my part
16:10:25 <jgriffith> kmartin: cool
16:10:39 <eharney> jgriffith: yeah it seems to be working for me... can try to get more info from you in a bit and see what's up
16:10:46 <jgriffith> eharney: Other than testing the review seemed fine
16:11:01 <jgriffith> eharney: Yeah, and I'm going to try and set it up again and see if I just missed something silly
16:11:04 <kmartin> will the multi backend be done in G3?
16:11:12 <jgriffith> kmartin: YES
16:11:28 <jgriffith> kmartin: and only 10 months after we initially wanted it :)
16:11:35 <kmartin> cool, we'll need that :)
16:11:37 <jgriffith> kmartin: we need to make some decisions on how we want to implement it
16:11:44 <jgriffith> kmartin: that's the sticking point
16:12:14 <kmartin> ok, maybe we can help?
16:12:20 <jgriffith> kmartin: but I'm pretty much sold on trying to do multiple services on a single node even though rnirmal has code that works and is in production already.
16:12:46 <jgriffith> kmartin: and all... as a refresher:  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11192/
16:13:15 <kmartin> thanks, we'll take a look at it
16:13:19 <jgriffith> cool....
16:13:36 <jgriffith> alright.. other than that all I really have to say about G2 is please keep an eye on reviews
16:13:51 <jgriffith> They're starting to pile up a bit once again
16:13:56 <rnirmal> jgriffith: yeah I haven't updated that in a while
16:14:24 <jgriffith> rnirmal: No worries, we kinda got stuck on how we wanted to proceed with that one anyway
16:14:43 <rnirmal> jgriffith: yup
16:14:44 <jgriffith> Anybody have anything else WRT G2?
16:15:16 <jgriffith> Ok... should probably mention what I'm envisioning for G3 priorities:
16:15:19 <jgriffith> #topic G3
16:15:32 <jgriffith> Just a quick run down of what's on my mind so far....
16:15:37 <jgriffith> 1. Multi-backend
16:15:45 <jgriffith> 2. States
16:15:53 <jgriffith> 3. capability reporting from drivers
16:16:01 <jgriffith> 4. Fibre
16:16:33 <jgriffith> Those are my top 4 at any rate
16:16:37 <bswartz> 5. cinder-nas
16:16:45 <jgriffith> bswartz: :)
16:17:02 <kmartin> bswartz: top "1" :)
16:17:11 <jgriffith> bswartz: how's that coming along?
16:17:24 <bswartz> jgriffith: we're pretty confident
16:17:51 <bswartz> we can structure it as a separate service within cinder
16:17:53 <jgriffith> bswartz: The earlier you share the code the better :)
16:18:01 <jgriffith> bswartz: awesome
16:18:12 <bswartz> it's just a lot of work to do to get from our current design to the design with less overlap
16:18:16 <jgriffith> alrighty....  anything else on G3?
16:18:40 <jgriffith> bswartz: understood :(
16:18:49 <jgriffith> bswartz: sorry about that...
16:18:55 <kmartin> FC is on track, maybe even ahead of schedule, should get the review in at the very start of G3 iif not before
16:18:56 <jgriffith> bswartz: but I still think it's the *right* way to do it
16:18:57 <thingee> I'd also like to see the code sooner even if not finished just to get a head start on it.
16:19:24 <bswartz> thingee: understood
16:19:37 <jgriffith> bswartz: It will help all of us as I imagine the patch will be quite large and take quite a bit of reviewing
16:19:48 <jgriffith> Oh.... one other thing for G3.. DOCS!!!!!!!
16:20:11 <jgriffith> We REALLY need to fix our documentation this time around
16:20:31 <jgriffith> alright...  moving on
16:20:49 <bswartz> let's make a G4 milestone that includes docs
16:20:49 <bswartz> well before the final deadline
16:21:10 <thingee> bswartz: +1 I wanna get docs for our restful api v1 and v2
16:21:10 <jgriffith> bswartz: Yeah, probably a good plan
16:21:39 <jgriffith> bswartz: The only thing I'd want to be sure is people don't avoid working on it in G3 just because it's slated G4 :)
16:22:16 <jgriffith> We kinda ran into that in Folsom
16:22:16 <kmartin> jgriffith: We'll need to add some info to the docs for 3PAR drivers and FC support, we actually have a doc person that starts this week or next to start working on this.
16:22:16 <jgriffith> kmartin: Nice
16:22:43 <jgriffith> For those that haven't fought the docs battle yet, we do have OpenStack licenses for Oxygen
16:22:54 <jgriffith> depending on how much editing you want to do
16:23:22 <kmartin> so we are intertested in the you reply to xyang above on the location and stuff for the changes
16:23:30 <jgriffith> cool
16:23:30 <jgriffith> alrighty...
16:23:31 <jgriffith> #topic meeting frequency
16:23:48 <jgriffith> My next question is do folks feel that we should maybe meet every other week?
16:24:01 <jgriffith> Or general thoughts on the usefulness of this weekly meeting?
16:25:21 <jgriffith> I don't want to meet just for the sake of meeting
16:25:21 <jgriffith> and to be honest I'd like to see more discussion in openstack-cinder rather than here
16:25:21 <bswartz> I think weekly is still appropriate given that we still manage to use up the whole hour quite frequently
16:25:21 <jgriffith> here == this meeting
16:25:21 <kmartin> agree with weekly
16:25:31 <jgriffith> Ok.. that's +2 for keeping weekly
16:25:43 <xyang> +1
16:25:55 <jgriffith> alright, let's keep it but I'm going to try and be a bit more disciplined with the conversations/topics going forward
16:26:31 <jgriffith> I'd also really like to encourage more folks to hang out in openstack-dev/cinder and keep up to date with each other on a regular basis
16:26:47 <jgriffith> Some of you I only catch on IRC once a week and it's at this meeting :(
16:26:53 * jgriffith feels bad that folks don't want to hang out with him
16:27:02 <xyang> How does openstack-cinder work? Can you just ask question any time, and someone may respond?
16:27:10 <jgriffith> xyang: yup
16:27:17 <xyang> cool
16:27:44 <jgriffith> xyang: It's just like openstack-dev but specific to cinder
16:27:47 <bswartz> jgriffith: we chould get an IRC operator to help us get operator control of our channel
16:27:52 <jgriffith> xyang: either channel is good and personally I monitor both
16:27:58 <thingee> xyang: I make a point to being on all the time (aside from recent holiday which is over)
16:28:12 <thingee> I think core is expected to be around anyways
16:28:14 <jgriffith> bswartz: not sure it's needed, but maybe you have something in mind?
16:28:19 <jgriffith> thingee: +1
16:28:19 <xyang> I'll give a try next time.  thanks
16:28:24 <bswartz> just so we can change the asinine topic
16:28:33 <jgriffith> bswartz: LOL
16:28:55 <jgriffith> I think that was thingee wasn't it?
16:29:20 <jgriffith> anyway... if it's that offensive we can figure it out later
16:29:26 <jgriffith> But.. more importantly
16:29:33 <bswartz> is the topic supposed to be a blocks-related joke?
16:29:47 <jgriffith> bswartz: yep.. that was actually a proposed project name
16:29:54 <bswartz> I thought it was just a reference to a bad band from the 90s
16:29:58 <jgriffith> LOL
16:30:17 <jgriffith> Ok... so something about core
16:30:27 <jgriffith> #topic core responsbilities
16:33:03 <jgriffith> so just a reminder being core team member has some responsbilities associated with it
16:33:03 <jgriffith> as thingee mentioned being available on IRC is one
16:33:03 <jgriffith> reviews is another
16:33:03 <thingee> jgriffith, bswartz: that was one of the proposed names for the project back at the summit
16:33:03 <jgriffith> thingee: Oh I remember :)
16:33:03 <bswartz> I'm glad that one wasn't chosen
16:33:03 <jgriffith> bswartz: Yeah, too long to type
16:33:03 <jgriffith> haha
16:33:03 <jgriffith> Ok... so back to core
16:33:03 <jgriffith> bug triage and fixing etc
16:33:51 <jgriffith> The biggest thing is reviews
16:34:23 <jgriffith> Just a heads up after Grizzly we'll probably disband the existing core team and start over with nominations etc
16:34:42 * jgriffith figures if he has to go through the process again everybody else can too :)
16:35:47 <jgriffith> Any thoughts/questions on the topic of core team?
16:35:47 <thingee> jgriffith: sounds good to me
16:36:01 <jgriffith> excellent
16:36:05 <jgriffith> alrighty...
16:36:11 <jgriffith> #topic open discussion
16:36:18 <jgriffith> anybody have anything?
16:36:41 <rushiagr> when we start nominations, will there be a maximum limit on number of core members? i am a bit new to nominations thingy at OpenStack
16:36:54 <jgriffith> rushiagr: Nope
16:37:10 <jgriffith> rushiagr: we can use all the core folks we can get
16:37:17 <rushiagr> jgriffith: okay, cool
16:37:24 <jgriffith> rushiagr: It's just a matter of core members doing the job of core
16:37:44 <rushiagr> jgriffith: hmm...got it
16:37:46 <thingee> just fyi everyone, core nomination rules as of now http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Approved/CoreDevProcess
16:37:55 <jgriffith> thingee: :)
16:37:58 <jgriffith> beat me to it
16:38:29 <jgriffith> So just to add some more info to that and what it means to me inparticular...
16:38:33 <jgriffith> Reviews is one of the biggest things
16:38:40 <jgriffith> but also... contributions to the project
16:39:04 <jgriffith> and contributions outside of vendor specific drivers
16:39:13 <jgriffith> in other words "core contributions"
16:39:23 <jgriffith> thus the term 'core' :)
16:40:09 <kmartin> jgriffith: we at HP better start greasing the skids with HP mgmt on this now :)
16:40:17 <jgriffith> kmartin: LOL... get the lawyers primed :)
16:40:25 <kmartin> no kidding
16:40:46 <jgriffith> kmartin: Just create a gmail account and sign up as an individual contributor :)
16:41:24 * jgriffith better shut up before some companies lawyer sees what he's typing
16:41:57 <creiht> lol
16:41:57 <kmartin> jgriffith: one just walked over to my desk and would like to talk to you
16:41:57 <jgriffith> lol
16:42:14 <jgriffith> alright... well I guess that's it from my side
16:42:22 <jgriffith> anybody have anything else?
16:43:06 <jgriffith> Ok...
16:43:06 <jgriffith> thanks everyone!!!
16:43:06 <kmartin> thanks
16:43:10 <jgriffith> and Happy New Year!!!
16:43:15 <jgriffith> #endmeeting