15:59:48 <smcginnis> #startmeeting Cinder
15:59:49 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jan 20 15:59:48 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:59:50 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:59:52 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
15:59:53 <thingee> o/
15:59:53 <dulek_> o/
15:59:59 <diablo_rojo> Hello :)
15:59:59 <smcginnis> Hey everyone.
16:00:08 <geguileo> Hi!
16:00:09 <flip214> hi
16:00:13 <wilson_liu> hi
16:00:15 <xyang1> hi
16:00:21 <e0ne> hi
16:00:24 <janice> hi
16:00:27 <abhishekk> hi o/
16:00:37 <scottda> hey
16:00:55 <smcginnis> #topic Announcements
16:01:03 <eharney> hi
16:01:07 <smcginnis> Some general stuff first.
16:01:15 <smcginnis> N and O releases now have names!
16:01:44 <Swanson> hi
16:01:49 <smcginnis> Newton and Ocata
16:01:57 * dulek_ thinks Nameless and Om were best...
16:01:57 <Swanson> Wow, really?
16:02:04 <smcginnis> dulek_: ;)
16:02:10 <geguileo> dulek_: +1
16:02:15 <diablo_rojo> dulek_ +1
16:02:20 <Swanson> dulek_, +1
16:02:33 <e0ne> dulek_: :)
16:02:42 <smcginnis> M-2 is here. Just waiting for some things to make it through gate before officially cutting the release.
16:02:53 <smcginnis> At the current rate that should be some time in February.
16:02:54 <smcginnis> :)
16:03:05 <geguileo> XD
16:03:18 <dulek_> Gate is 20 hours queue now..
16:03:22 <smcginnis> Hopefully later today or tomorrow I can submit the patch for the release. :)
16:03:38 <smcginnis> Midcycle is next week.
16:03:46 <smcginnis> Looks like a big group!
16:03:50 <e0ne> will we have meeting next week?
16:04:02 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cinder-midcycle
16:04:09 <smcginnis> e0ne: Good point. No
16:04:15 <smcginnis> #info No meeting next week.
16:04:39 <smcginnis> We'll probably be wrapped up in discussion there, so no IRC meeting next week.
16:04:46 <smcginnis> I'll send out a notice to ML.
16:04:59 * mriedem sneaks in late
16:05:07 <jungleboyj> hi
16:05:28 <smcginnis> Our spec list has morphed into a review focus list:
16:05:29 <flip214> smcginnis: Nova meetup is next week, too, right?
16:05:32 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cinder-spec-review-tracking
16:05:38 <smcginnis> flip214: Yes, unfortunately.
16:05:51 <smcginnis> We will have a hangout or something between meetups Wednesday morning.
16:06:03 <smcginnis> We have a few topics to go over in our etherpad.
16:06:04 <flip214> that probably means that there's no Nova IRC meeting too, grmpf.
16:06:07 <flip214> thanks
16:06:12 <smcginnis> I know nova has a few things as well.
16:06:30 <smcginnis> Oh sure, now mriedem is hiding. :)
16:06:56 <smcginnis> If anyone has a link to the nova midcycle etherpad, feel free to post it here too.
16:07:31 * thingee has some announcements
16:07:38 <smcginnis> Just a note to warn folks, we will need to start cracking down on third party CI stuff very very soon.
16:07:41 <scottda> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-nova-midcycle
16:07:43 <thingee> or I could little diablo_rojo do it for cross-project specs
16:07:45 <smcginnis> scottda: Thanks!
16:07:54 <thingee> little = let
16:07:58 <thingee> sorry need more coffee
16:08:00 <smcginnis> thingee: I know she had a couple things. You too can arm wrestle for it.
16:08:03 <smcginnis> thingee: :)
16:08:06 <diablo_rojo> thingee: Yeah I have two to point out to people :)
16:08:09 <smcginnis> *two
16:08:10 * thingee kicks back
16:08:30 <smcginnis> thingee, diablo_rojo: Want to cover that now?
16:08:31 <diablo_rojo> The first is on backwards compatibility for libraries and clients and the second is about having a common policy scenario more complex than just admin/non-admin.
16:08:50 <diablo_rojo> #linlk https://review.openstack.org/#/c/226157/
16:09:00 <diablo_rojo> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/245629/ Common Policy Scenario more complex than admin or not admin
16:09:11 <smcginnis> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cinder-spec-review-tracking
16:09:16 <smcginnis> Doh
16:09:17 <smcginnis> #undo
16:09:18 <openstack> Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Link object at 0x981f390>
16:09:37 <smcginnis> Darn copy paste!!!
16:09:39 <diablo_rojo> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/226157/
16:09:43 <smcginnis> diablo_rojo: Thank you!
16:09:44 <diablo_rojo> There :)
16:09:58 <smcginnis> thingee, diablo_rojo: Any other important CP stuff?
16:10:05 <thingee> yes
16:10:08 <thingee> hang on
16:10:15 <diablo_rojo> The other two mentioned last week were approved so thank you to smcginnis e0ne and hemna_ for looking at those
16:10:32 <diablo_rojo> Thats all :) Unless I am missing anything thingee?
16:10:53 <thingee> Yes, so it has been approved by the TC for deprecating individual CLI's
16:11:04 <thingee> #link https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/openstack-specs/specs/deprecate-cli.html Deprecate individual clis in favor of OSC
16:11:20 <smcginnis> I believe we also have this on the midcycle topic list.
16:11:23 <thingee> btw I learned that is a thing with the link command^
16:11:33 <e0ne> thingee: we have to discuss cinderclient CLI at midcycle
16:11:49 <smcginnis> I think this is something we will still need to discuss within the group, though it is approved.
16:11:51 <thingee> just putting it in people's mind that the TC has come to a decision :)
16:12:00 <smcginnis> thingee: Fancy link expert.
16:12:06 <thingee> that's all
16:12:10 <smcginnis> thingee: Thanks!
16:12:31 <smcginnis> OK, just a couple more announcement/bookkeeping things, then we can move on.
16:12:44 <smcginnis> For awareness:
16:12:49 <smcginnis> #info Bug counts: Cinder - 487 open bugs, Python-cinderclient - 39 open bugs, OS-Brick - 14 open bugs
16:12:50 <thingee> I will also miss you all at the midcycle.
16:12:52 <thingee> :(
16:13:05 <thingee> going to be at an offsite with the foundation that conflicts
16:13:09 <smcginnis> thingee: Yeah, that will be weird.
16:13:23 <smcginnis> Just so everyone has the right expectations - I will not be making coffee for you all.
16:13:25 <diablo_rojo> thingee: Don't abandon us to go to the Carribbean :P
16:13:39 <thingee> heh ;)
16:13:56 <kmartin> no thingee special brew this time :(
16:13:57 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: What!?!
16:14:03 * jungleboyj is out!
16:14:06 <jungleboyj> ;-)
16:14:07 <smcginnis> OK, one more thing re: bugs. Pulling in some nice purdu graphs here if anyone cares:
16:14:13 <smcginnis> #link http://cinderstats-dellstorage.rhcloud.com/ Bugstats
16:14:18 <smcginnis> jungleboyj: ;)
16:14:29 <smcginnis> #purdy
16:14:33 <smcginnis> Can't type today.
16:14:50 <smcginnis> And finally...
16:15:01 <smcginnis> Nova can always use our help with volume related bugs
16:15:08 <smcginnis> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.status:list=NEW&field.tag=volumes Nova volume bugs
16:15:11 <jungleboyj> Oooh purdy.
16:15:33 <smcginnis> So if you have some cycles, feel free to browse those for anything you can provide input on.
16:15:42 <smcginnis> Alright, I'm done.
16:15:54 <smcginnis> #topic Spes: Add-ServiceGroup-using-Tooz
16:16:17 <smcginnis> dongwenjuan, janice : That you two?
16:16:29 * smcginnis copy pasted spes, that wasn't my typo this time!
16:16:30 <dongwenjuan> yeah
16:16:35 <janice> ye
16:16:37 <janice> yes
16:16:56 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/258968/ Spec link
16:18:20 <smcginnis> dongwenjuan, janice: Was there something you wanted to discuss about this?
16:18:34 <janice> in this spec, we proposal a feature of CinderServiceGroup
16:19:40 <janice> but, according to Huang's Comments, we don't make sure if this feature has availible
16:19:55 <e0ne> I'm agree with DuncanT: use cases are not clear from the spec
16:20:56 <janice> could you give us some suggestions for use cases?
16:21:15 <tbarron> late hi
16:21:25 <dulek> e0ne, janice: +1, use cases would be fine.
16:21:47 * smcginnis notes tbarron's name on his list
16:22:07 <janice> oh
16:22:07 <jungleboyj> janice: I think that is what you need to provide us use cases so we know why we would want this in Cinder.
16:22:24 * tbarron hides head in shame
16:22:27 <winston-d_> jungleboyj: +1
16:22:29 <e0ne> jungleboyj: +1
16:22:35 <dulek> In Nova ZooKeeper was used to know of services that gone down faster
16:22:42 <diablo_rojo> tbarron: You can get off his list buy buing him a shot of fireball
16:22:54 <smcginnis> janice: So maybe this would be good to follow up in the cinder channel if there's not a specific issue to go over at the moment.
16:23:04 <smcginnis> Only so much time in the meeting. ;)
16:23:05 <dulek> If I recall correctly dongwenjuan's use case was connected with use of some external monitoring tool?
16:23:24 <dongwenjuan> the benfits of using servicegroup is to get the service state immediately
16:23:28 <jungleboyj> diablo_rojo:  :-)
16:23:32 <janice> OK
16:23:53 <DuncanT> dongwenjuan: what circumstances does that help? '
16:24:12 <smcginnis> dongwenjuan, janice: OK if we move this to our channel? Or we can discuss more after we get through the other agenda items.
16:24:28 <winston-d_> smcginnis: +1
16:24:29 <jungleboyj> DuncanT: It looks to me like they are trying to reduce the failed creates when a service is temporarily down?  Not clear though.
16:24:45 <janice> ok, let mova the cinder channel.
16:24:52 <dongwenjuan> OK
16:24:58 <smcginnis> janice, dongwenjuan: Thanks
16:25:00 <smcginnis> #topic Review requests
16:25:06 <smcginnis> abhishekk: Hey
16:25:12 <abhishekk> hey
16:25:15 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/257170/
16:25:25 <abhishekk> yes this is against, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-cinderclient/+spec/return-request-id-to-caller
16:25:28 <smcginnis> abhishekk: Anything specific here, or just looking for visibility?
16:25:37 <abhishekk> I need reviews
16:25:54 <DuncanT> abhishekk: If you can answer my question in the review, I'm happy to +2
16:26:05 <abhishekk> I have submitted 5 patches to implement these ans reviews are welcom
16:26:19 <smcginnis> abhishekk: OK, unless there's some point to discuss about it, I think we can move on.
16:26:19 <abhishekk> DuncanT: sure, I will do that
16:26:40 <abhishekk> sure, smcginnis thank you
16:26:42 <smcginnis> abhishekk: Captured in meeting notes, so hopefully that helps.
16:26:51 <abhishekk> DuncanT: thank you
16:26:53 <smcginnis> DuncanT: You had one too?
16:26:58 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251843/
16:27:11 <DuncanT> yeah
16:27:21 <smcginnis> Oh, Default=None
16:27:30 <smcginnis> That probably is worth discussin.
16:27:34 <DuncanT> I don't like this change, personally, but we should go one way or the other
16:27:35 <smcginnis> ggggg!!!
16:27:52 <e0ne> :)
16:27:57 <DuncanT> Probably with a hacking check too
16:28:09 <smcginnis> Personally, I don't mind it being explicit.
16:28:19 * jungleboyj perks up
16:28:26 <smcginnis> It's loaded at module load time, so there's not really a bug performance impact.
16:28:48 <smcginnis> But I agree, if we want to enforce that, we should have a hacking check too.
16:28:52 <DuncanT> I prefer explicit too, that means reverting to other change...
16:28:56 <winston-d_> smcginnis: i'd prefer being explicit
16:28:57 <tbarron> smcginnis: +1
16:29:05 <tbarron> to explicit
16:29:18 <smcginnis> DuncanT: Which other change?
16:29:50 <jungleboyj> I wouldn't think a hacking check for that would be too bad.
16:30:02 <DuncanT> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239704/
16:30:08 <smcginnis> DuncanT: Thanks!
16:30:09 <winston-d_> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239704/
16:30:33 <smcginnis> Ooops. :]
16:30:55 <DuncanT> I'd vote for reverting that
16:31:07 <winston-d_> DuncanT: +1
16:31:07 <guitarza1> indeed, let's pull out the ballots
16:31:14 <patrickeast> DuncanT: +1
16:31:23 <jungleboyj> Wait, I am confused.
16:31:34 <jungleboyj> So we want default=None or we don't want it?
16:31:37 <guitarza1> we want it
16:31:41 <guitarza1> explicit is better than implicit
16:31:44 <patrickeast> i don't like that change... the code was probably written expecting None, what happens if the config module decides to change the default?
16:32:07 <jungleboyj> patrickeast: ++  Good point.
16:32:08 <patrickeast> seems like there isn't anything gained by removing it except lowering the file size
16:32:12 <smcginnis> OK...
16:32:14 <geguileo> patrickeast: They can't just change it like that, backward compatibility
16:32:16 <eharney> i think it's a pretty solid contract from oslo.config that the default isn't going to just change
16:32:16 <DuncanT> jungleboyj: We want it
16:32:20 <jungleboyj> I am all for being explicit.
16:32:29 <jungleboyj> DuncanT  Good.
16:32:31 <jungleboyj> :-)
16:32:39 <hemna> so if you remove default=None, does it set it to None as a default ?
16:32:43 <smcginnis> #startvote Should we enforce explicitly setting Default=None in config options? Yes, No, Meh
16:32:44 <openstack> Begin voting on: Should we enforce explicitly setting Default=None in config options? Valid vote options are Yes, No, Meh.
16:32:45 <openstack> Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.
16:32:57 <DuncanT> hemna: Yes
16:33:01 <smcginnis> hemna: Yes, I believe so.
16:33:05 <mriedem> #vote no
16:33:09 <e0ne> yes
16:33:09 <hemna> ok, well I like having it there, but that's just me
16:33:09 <mriedem> oslo.config defaults to None
16:33:11 <DuncanT> #vote yes
16:33:13 <eharney> #vote no
16:33:16 <winston-d_> #vote yes
16:33:16 <geguileo> #vote Meh
16:33:18 <diablo_rojo> #vote yes
16:33:21 <mriedem> oslo.config isn't going to change that default
16:33:21 <patrickeast> #vote no
16:33:23 <mriedem> w/o breaking the world
16:33:29 <dulek> #vote meh
16:33:30 <jgregor> #vote yes
16:33:31 <smcginnis> mriedem: No, we shouldn't enforce because that's the default anyway?
16:33:32 <hemna> #vote meh
16:33:32 <guitarza1> wait... enforce?
16:33:34 <jungleboyj> #vote yes
16:33:35 <kmartin> #vote Meh
16:33:37 <tbarron> #vote meh
16:33:41 <mriedem> smcginnis: default=None is redundant
16:33:41 <hemna> what does it mean to enforce ?
16:33:46 <hemna> I don't understand the question actually
16:33:47 <abhishekk> #vote no
16:33:58 <patrickeast> so like... was meh the option for leave them alone and don't churn code removing/adding them?
16:33:59 <guitarza1> we just prefer to not mess with the code that is explicit
16:34:02 <eharney> requiring this as a hacking change is just saying that we aren't leveraging what oslo.config is providing as a library, which seems... odd
16:34:11 <winston-d_> guitarza1: +100
16:34:14 <hemna> I honestly don't see the point in that patch to remove the default=None
16:34:20 <smcginnis> hemna: I'm fine if it's there or not, but given that the default is None anyway it is redundant.
16:34:24 <hemna> other than someone wanting a code commit stat.
16:34:24 <smcginnis> But more explicit.
16:34:30 <patrickeast> hemna: +1
16:34:31 <hemna> it's pointless really.
16:34:32 <jungleboyj> hemna: Exactly.
16:34:39 <e0ne> hemna: agree
16:34:46 <smcginnis> But I don't think we need to revert or do any extra enforcement personally.
16:34:48 * DuncanT wants consistency at a minimum
16:34:50 <hemna> ok -2 on that patch
16:34:51 <hemna> done
16:34:52 <hemna> next
16:34:58 <smcginnis> If someone wants to be explicit, fine. If they don't, oh well.
16:35:06 <guitarza1> DuncanT: so a proposed hacking check for "you must specify a default"?
16:35:14 <eharney> smcginnis: that's my opinion too
16:35:15 <smcginnis> DuncanT: That is the only think leaning me slightly toward doing anything.
16:35:20 <jungleboyj> DuncanT: ++
16:35:24 <smcginnis> *thing!!!
16:35:27 <smcginnis> Dang it.
16:35:37 <smcginnis> #vote Meh
16:35:39 <mriedem> you know sqlalchemy defaults nullable too right?
16:35:42 <smcginnis> OK, last call.
16:35:48 <winston-d_> for the sake of consistency, shall we vote for wether to revert Nate's change?
16:35:57 <kmartin> looks like someone wants to run up their -2 stats :)
16:36:00 <mriedem> there's probably lots on your sqlalchemy model code that is being explicit and redundant
16:36:01 <hemna> :)
16:36:08 <smcginnis> #endvote
16:36:08 <openstack> Voted on "Should we enforce explicitly setting Default=None in config options?" Results are
16:36:09 <openstack> Yes (5): DuncanT, winston-d_, jungleboyj, jgregor, diablo_rojo
16:36:10 <openstack> Meh (6): hemna, smcginnis, kmartin, tbarron, geguileo, dulek
16:36:11 <smcginnis> mriedem: True
16:36:12 <openstack> No (4): mriedem, abhishekk, patrickeast, eharney
16:36:18 <hemna> kmartin, I don't get to use it often, but this is as good as spiking the football.
16:36:22 <eharney> so this hacking check would also enforce things like setting [] for ListOpt?
16:36:23 <smcginnis> Apathy for the win!
16:36:28 <hemna> smcginnis, :)
16:36:33 <kmartin> lol
16:36:35 <geguileo> XD
16:36:54 <DuncanT> eharney: If that's a good thing to have, sure
16:37:03 <eharney> DuncanT: I don't think it's a good thing to have
16:37:22 <eharney> just wondering for the sake of completeness
16:37:36 <DuncanT> eharney: I thing being consistent with the default is important. I've never noticed the []  thing
16:38:18 <mriedem> ListOpt defaults to None
16:38:21 <DuncanT> I'd prefer is be explict, I find it more readable, but certainly I want consistency
16:39:05 <mriedem> everything defaults to None
16:39:44 <DuncanT> mriedem: but you need to know that reading the code... explicit stating means one less thing to remember
16:39:59 <mriedem> ...
16:40:02 <jungleboyj> DuncanT: +1
16:40:17 <eharney> the whole point of libraries like oslo.config is that it does the right thing and you don't have to explicitly do everything yourself
16:40:24 <eharney> otherwise why use libraries for these things anyway
16:40:24 <mriedem> eharney: right
16:40:28 <Swanson> eharney, +1
16:40:43 <geguileo> eharney: +1
16:40:53 <DuncanT> eharney: 'the right thing' is rather subjective. What should the default of an int option be? 0? None? What abotu a boolean?
16:41:13 <guitarza1> eharney: that is absolutely the problem with libraries
16:41:21 <guitarza1> people assume they do the right thing
16:41:28 <smcginnis> Are we bike shedding too much?
16:41:31 <mriedem> never
16:41:33 <guitarza1> smcginnis: absolutely
16:42:10 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: Probably.
16:42:14 <scottda> Discuss this at the bike-shedding meeting during the mid-cycle?
16:42:19 <DuncanT> smcginnis: I'll put up the patch, people can fight there...
16:42:30 <guitarza1> there's a specified bike shedding meeting? :)
16:42:31 <smcginnis> DuncanT: That sounds good. Thanks!
16:42:34 <winston-d_> DuncanT: you have my +2 :)
16:42:49 <smcginnis> guitarza1: Almost always ends up on the meetup agenda. ;)
16:42:53 <DuncanT> winston-d_: :-)
16:43:05 <smcginnis> Let's move on then...
16:43:08 <smcginnis> #topic api-microversions is ready for review and testing
16:43:11 <smcginnis> scottda: Hey
16:43:15 <scottda> hi
16:43:18 <smcginnis> I'd rather spend more time on this one. ;)
16:43:32 <scottda> I think it would be good for folks to have a look before the mid-cycle...
16:43:41 <e0ne> scottda: +1
16:43:50 <scottda> It can be complex when you first try to understand the whole microversion thing
16:43:57 <e0ne> scottda: do you have a plan to have it tested via CI?
16:43:57 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223803/ Spec
16:44:08 <scottda> And I can go over issues and questions at the mid-cycle
16:44:09 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224910 Implementation
16:44:19 <smcginnis> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/248163/ Client
16:44:26 <scottda> e0ne: not with CI, but Nova is testing (or will soon) in Tempest
16:44:39 <smcginnis> scottda: I agree. If we can go in to the midcycle with at least some foundation on this, that would help.
16:44:42 <e0ne> scottda: tempest on gates == CI
16:44:46 <scottda> mriedem: Does NOva have microversion testing in Tempest going yet?
16:45:14 <scottda> e0ne: Anyway, not yet for cinder microversions, but I'll work on that next.
16:45:24 <mriedem> scottda: i don't think so
16:45:30 <mriedem> oomichi:  was working on that
16:45:35 <e0ne> scottda: sounds good
16:45:46 <scottda> Tempest tests only become usefull when we actually bump the microversion with a change.
16:46:06 <mriedem> nova has functional testing for the microversion boundaries
16:46:08 <mriedem> in tree
16:46:25 <mtreinish> scottda: the code for microversion support has landed in tempest
16:46:32 <scottda> OK, I'll look at adding some functional tests as well.
16:46:46 <mtreinish> the first test using it has been approved but bounced off the gate a couple times
16:46:52 <mtreinish> pip 8 didn't help there
16:47:05 <scottda> Anyway, please start looking at the code. It takes some time to soak it all in.
16:47:23 <scottda> I'll put something on the mid-cycle agenda for microversions
16:47:31 <scottda> That's all I've got.
16:47:36 <smcginnis> scottda: Thanks!
16:47:47 <mtreinish> scottda: fwiw: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/branch:master+topic:bp/api-microversions-testing-support
16:47:59 <scottda> mriedem: thanks!
16:48:01 <smcginnis> Definitely look into things before the midcycle if folks can.
16:48:32 <smcginnis> #topic Open Discussion
16:48:44 <smcginnis> OK, bike shedding time!
16:49:24 <scottda> paint it black
16:49:46 <DuncanT> Burn it down and get some more parking spaces
16:50:47 <jungleboyj> Put it in the reactor containment vessel
16:50:49 <smcginnis> Nothing to discuss!?
16:51:01 <patrickeast> did we decide if something was going on monday night?
16:51:03 <jungleboyj> Color doesn't matter there.  Battleship grey will do!
16:51:08 <dulek> patrickeast: +1 :D
16:51:17 <vincent_hou> When will you folks arrive?
16:51:19 <smcginnis> patrickeast: I get in Monday afternoon. I'd love to meet up with everyone.
16:51:20 <jungleboyj> patrickeast: Beer
16:51:32 <vincent_hou> Anyone needs a ride?
16:51:37 <patrickeast> yea i'm in the afternoon too
16:51:43 <patrickeast> plenty of beer time
16:51:46 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: I will be aorund
16:51:46 <smcginnis> Should we meet in the "official" hotel lobby at a certain time and head somewhere?
16:51:47 <scottda> locals have a good monday night recommendation?
16:51:49 <dulek> Me and e0ne will be there around 7 PM, any pointers where we should head?
16:52:04 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: +2
16:52:08 <winston-d_> vincent_hou: your shiny new car can't wait to be loaded? ;)
16:52:09 <scottda> smcginnis: +1
16:52:15 <smcginnis> jungleboyj: You can scout out the good places. :)
16:52:25 <vincent_hou> right. I got a red car.
16:52:25 <kmartin> monday night at 11 PM, I'm sure I'll run into scottda or patrickeast out and about
16:52:36 <diablo_rojo> jungleboyj: 'aorund' ? Have you started drinking already? ;)
16:52:39 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: Yes sir!  Right on it sir!
16:52:47 <scottda> dulek: We'll post in IRC and on the etherpad when we decide
16:52:47 <jungleboyj> diablo_rojo: :-p
16:52:53 <smcginnis> e0ne, dulek: Will you have a mobile here, or would email be the best way to contact you?
16:53:03 <smcginnis> scottda: Oh, good plan!
16:53:08 <hemna> start drinking....dinner Monday
16:53:24 <smcginnis> Meet in the lobby around 6:30-7?
16:53:42 <patrickeast> sounds good to me
16:53:47 <vincent_hou> scittda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cinder-midcycle you mean put here?
16:53:50 <hemna> create a Cinder google hangout ?
16:53:51 <e0ne> smcginnis: I'll send you may cell no
16:53:59 <scottda> vincent_hou: yup
16:54:05 <smcginnis> e0ne: Cool
16:54:14 <scottda> hemna: good idea
16:54:44 <smcginnis> OK, guess we're done here. Thanks everyone.
16:54:49 <jungleboyj> smcginnis: Sounds good to me.
16:55:03 <smcginnis> #endmeeting