22:00:40 <adrian_otto> #startmeeting containers
22:00:41 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Dec 30 22:00:40 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:00:42 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:00:44 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'containers'
22:00:45 <adrian_otto> @link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2014-12-30_2200_UTC Our Agenda
22:00:54 <adrian_otto> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2014-12-30_2200_UTC our Agenda
22:00:59 <adrian_otto> #topic Roll Call
22:01:01 <adrian_otto> Adrian Otto
22:01:18 <hongbin> Hongbin Lu
22:01:39 <adrian_otto> welcome hongbin
22:01:49 <hongbin> :)
22:02:20 <adrian_otto> this is again a holiday week in the US, so I'm expecting thin attendance
22:02:21 <yuanying-alt> Yuanying OTSUKA
22:02:37 <adrian_otto> welcome yuanying-alt
22:05:29 <adrian_otto> #topic Announements
22:06:00 <adrian_otto> This week I proposed ootsuka as a core reviewers
22:06:17 <adrian_otto> a majority of cores voted +1, and none aganst.
22:06:21 <yuanying-alt> Thank you very much!
22:06:38 <adrian_otto> I will be closing that thread and formally adding you as a core today.
22:07:10 <adrian_otto> other contributors also interested in this role may contact me, and I would be happy to offer guidance.
22:07:31 <adrian_otto> so thank you yuanying-alt for your work
22:07:42 <yuanying-alt> Will do my best
22:07:54 <adrian_otto> any other announcements from team members?
22:08:14 <adrian_otto> #topic Blueprint/Bug Review
22:08:43 <adrian_otto> I have prepared a set of topics for discussion. I'd like to get some input here, and follow up on ML threads for any that seem like they may be controversial at all
22:08:55 <adrian_otto> FIrst: Should we open a bug ticket for a refactor of context handling?
22:09:02 <adrian_otto> #link https://review.openstack.org/142682 Fix context is not set correctly at pod controller
22:09:31 <yuanying-alt> yes i agree
22:09:59 <adrian_otto> so should we open a bug against this for refactoring, or should we simply move on
22:10:35 <adrian_otto> I have been opening a number of bugs against reviews for the purpose of keeping commit velocity up, while keeping track of areas where we can improve later (technical debt)
22:10:58 <adrian_otto> my question is if we want to include this in the debt backlog or not. yuanying-alt, your thoughts?
22:11:50 <yuanying-alt> I think we should report a bug for these purpose.
22:12:21 <adrian_otto> ok, would you be willing to open a bug at http://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum for this purpose?
22:12:54 <yuanying-alt> yes
22:12:58 <adrian_otto> it should simply include a pointer to the code we want to draw attention to, state our reason for wanting an improvement, and optionally ideas for how to implement.
22:13:20 <adrian_otto> implementation details are not required for a bug to be accepted.
22:13:35 <adrian_otto> ok, thanks. I'll look forward to seeing that when you have time to work on it.
22:14:04 <adrian_otto> Next example in this topic is:
22:14:05 <adrian_otto> Should we open a bug ticket for a refactor of rpcapi attribute in request objects for access by controllers?
22:14:12 <adrian_otto> #link https://review.openstack.org/143935 Add hooks to obtain conductor api
22:15:00 <adrian_otto> sdake indicated that there is a better way to do this that was less like a hack
22:15:35 <adrian_otto> if you agree, perhaps you can open a bug against this as well. I don't feel strongly about it, so I'm simply raising this for discussion purposes.
22:16:22 <adrian_otto> I think what sdake meant was that piling more things into the request object is inefficient, but he did not say exactly what his objection was.
22:16:52 <adrian_otto> and without considering any alternative options, I refrain from taking a position on the subject.
22:17:14 <adrian_otto> yuanying-alt: ideas on this?
22:18:22 <yuanying-alt> In this case, If he suggest simply way to handle request in review page,
22:18:49 <yuanying-alt> I fixed it.
22:19:18 <adrian_otto> ok
22:20:01 <yuanying-alt> Generally, refactor needs bug report I think.
22:20:54 <adrian_otto> we also have two use cases on the agenda today
22:21:06 <adrian_otto> #link https://review.openstack.org/144209 Added container network use case to specs
22:21:44 <adrian_otto> this one got comments from me and sdake supporting the addition, with some discussion about further refinement.
22:22:21 <adrian_otto> does anyone feel that this is too ambitious, or that it should be excluded as a use case for any reason?
22:23:28 <adrian_otto> hongbin, I think the rewording I asked for is a minor thing. Did you see it that way?
22:23:43 <hongbin> yes I do
22:23:47 <hongbin> I will fix that
22:24:09 <adrian_otto> ok, thanks, I gave this one lots of consideration, and I think it's a good addition.
22:24:14 <adrian_otto> the next one:
22:24:24 <adrian_otto> #link https://review.openstack.org/144210 Added multi-region/multi-cloud use case to specs
22:24:42 <adrian_otto> this use case is a real big one, and both sdake and I coughed a bit
22:24:56 <adrian_otto> because it is certainly ambitious
22:25:19 <adrian_otto> we each suggested that we could accept is as a directional statement, but not a form project commitment
22:25:25 <adrian_otto> s/form/firm/
22:25:34 <hongbin> yes, I am fine with that
22:25:43 <adrian_otto> this means that to the extent possible we would design Magnum so that it could be later adapted to suit this use case
22:26:36 <adrian_otto> but if we were faced with a hard decision that might become a problem for this use case, that we might decide to depart from this
22:26:46 <adrian_otto> but having it in the spec at all gives us a discussion point
22:27:12 <adrian_otto> so we would be encouraged to discuss the matter if we ever come to a point of conflict
22:27:43 <hongbin> fair enough
22:27:46 <adrian_otto> ok, so hongbin, I think we can resolve this by just creating a new section in the spec as part of this proposal for future direction.
22:27:55 <adrian_otto> and it could merge that way
22:28:08 <hongbin> ok
22:28:21 <hongbin> I will modify it accordingly
22:28:28 <adrian_otto> and when we reach a point of maturity where we feel more confident about addressing it as a real use case, we can revisit it again.
22:28:50 <adrian_otto> thanks!
22:29:09 <adrian_otto> any other work items (Blueprints or bugs/tasks) that require team discussion?
22:29:30 <adrian_otto> #topic Open Discussion
22:29:52 <adrian_otto> we are also free to adjourn early if there is nothing to discuss
22:30:36 <yuanying-alt> I have nothing
22:30:46 <hongbin> me either
22:31:21 <adrian_otto> ok, thanks! Our next meeting it 2015-01-06 at 1600 UTC
22:31:24 <yuanying-alt> I will add a bug report for implementation of heat-show.
22:31:32 <yuanying-alt> but later work.
22:31:38 <adrian_otto> have a Happy New year, and I'll see you then.
22:31:44 <adrian_otto> #endmeeting