22:00:39 #startmeeting containers 22:00:40 Meeting started Tue Mar 24 22:00:39 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:00:41 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 22:00:44 The meeting name has been set to 'containers' 22:00:49 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2015-03-24_2200_UTC Our Agenda 22:00:55 #topic Roll Call 22:01:00 o/ 22:01:01 Adrian Otto 22:01:07 Digambar Patil 22:01:09 yuanying 22:01:10 Thomas Maddox 22:01:11 o/ 22:01:21 o/ 22:01:27 o/ 22:02:00 hello sdake__ diga yuanying-alt thomasem hongbin Tango|2 apmelton 22:02:14 Hello adrian_otto 22:02:20 we will begin in just a moment. 22:02:32 madhuri 22:02:34 thanks diga for attending at this most inconvenient hour 22:02:37 Please pardon my and apmelton's absence last week. We had our remote team at our main office and were pretty much booked all day Tuesday-Thursday. 22:02:46 hi madhuri_ 22:02:49 meetings fun :) 22:02:49 NP :) 22:02:55 thomasem: welcome back. We have some great news 22:03:05 What's that? :) 22:03:14 #topic Announcements 22:03:33 1) Magnum has officially joined the OpenStack project list upon approval by a unanimous vote by the Technical Committee. 22:03:40 #link https://review.openstack.org/161080 OpenStack Governance Update 22:03:42 congrats!!! 22:03:46 woot! 22:03:47 !! 22:03:48 yuanying-alt: Error: "!" is not a valid command. 22:03:54 great! 22:03:56 Thats greate! 22:04:16 thanks to all of our diligent efforts, we have shown that we have what it takes to be a part of this community 22:04:18 Grats! :D 22:04:37 we still have a lot of ground to cover to get all the tags we will want 22:05:07 there is more good news 22:05:09 for those that dont know, tags are the new way operators will select projects to use 22:05:27 gotcha 22:05:27 2) Magnum has an approves Session at the OpenStack Summit in Vancouver 22:05:30 Yeah, to help operators understand what works well together and all that, right? 22:05:51 one example tag is "team_diversity" 22:05:53 sweet, that's great to hear, adrian_otto 22:05:55 "6mo_release_cycle" 22:05:56 etc 22:06:00 #link http://sched.co/2qdw https://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/ec3936678ef22681408088ec52a4e80b# 22:06:02 sdake__: ohhhhhh gotcha 22:06:03 we rock on team_diversity 22:06:03 Congrats adrian_otto, sdake__ 22:06:16 #undo 22:06:17 Removing item from minutes: 22:06:54 #link http://sched.co/2qdw Magnum - Containers-as-a-Service for OpenStack 22:06:59 that's a bit better 22:07:26 Page not found 22:07:30 ok, so if you plan on attending in Vancouver, get there early. There will not be an open seat in the house. I can guarantee that based on attendance in Paris 22:07:43 http://sched.co/2qdw does not work??? 22:07:58 it is at 9am, some people may be on a bender the night before and forget to show up ;) 22:07:58 works for me, madhuri_ 22:08:03 This one works 22:08:11 sdake__: we can only hope ;-) 22:08:15 I had issues, but I think it's the https everywhere plugin mucking it up 22:08:29 so I put both of those news items on our Wiki page 22:08:53 apmelton: what plugin? 22:09:04 chrome's https everywhere 22:09:22 that sounds draconian. 22:09:43 get the anestaphine in the medlocker plz 22:09:44 especially considering how weak HTTPS is from a security perspective 22:09:51 sometimes just as weak as HTTP 22:10:13 I should not criticize the Internet. 22:10:16 Sometimes even more-so given the illusion of security. :P 22:10:24 oh really? might just uninstall it then 22:10:48 #topic Review Action Items 22:10:50 all your computers are belong to us 22:10:51 (none) 22:11:03 #topic Blueprint/Task Review 22:11:13 (1) Discussion of bay_type and cluster_type 22:11:27 #link https://review.openstack.org/165346 Add cluster_type field in baymodel. 22:11:46 now, I can't speak for all of you, but it took me a good long time of thinking about this to get what I thought was clarity on the situation 22:12:00 I did my best to express that in the comment stream of the link provided above. 22:12:13 I'll pause for a moment to allow those of you to take a look 22:12:18 let me know when you are done 22:12:35 Here only concern remaining about bay_type 22:12:38 I dont care as long as it works for hte 3 layers of cases we have (platform, os, coe) 22:13:16 we can rely on glance image properties for distro name 22:13:21 good, so setting aside the question about detecting the instance type (we will revisit this) 22:13:24 but I dont think we want to rely on the image name itself for the type of distro 22:13:30 I think other things are already there - image_id: OS, flavor_id: platform 22:13:32 how much alignment do we have on the rest? 22:14:13 well the patch adds the "os" layer 22:14:17 which we didn't have choices for previously 22:14:24 so it should probably be "os_type" 22:14:34 or none at all as you suggest (and select from glance property) 22:15:05 I have mentioned in the comment about the Sahara solution for a similar problem 22:15:16 which was? 22:15:29 They tag images with plugin, os, version ... 22:15:30 so, my only concern was relying on the user to provide those values, it will probably be a good idea to cache them in our database so we're not going out to glance/nova each time we need to do something with a bay 22:16:19 In Sahara, users don't specify image. They specify flavor and plugin instead 22:16:38 And Sahara choose the image based on provided plugin 22:16:44 what does it mean to specify a plugin in Sahara? Can you elaborate a bit? 22:16:44 apmelton sounds like a premature optimization 22:17:01 plugin is Hadoop distr, like bay_type 22:17:31 In magnum, it could be kubernetes, swarm... 22:17:32 in sahara, they have seperate plugins for hadoop, spark etc 22:17:49 sdake__: that's fair 22:18:00 ok, so that's in line with what I'm proposing 22:18:04 how about opposing points of view 22:18:18 apmelton openstack is a-ok with fat code - its written in python for example ;) 22:18:29 if it was supposed to be fast, itd be in c:) 22:19:00 sorry, had to get off my corporate VPN… network trouble there. 22:19:13 what's the last thing that made it to the channel? 22:19:22 I do suppose an image-show or a flavor-show should be relatively quick calls 22:19:44 I think there is a specific api for retrieving propertie sbut I am not certain 22:20:21 but if we use that, the patch has to change to not store os_type and instead retreive tehglance property 22:20:35 or it could store it after treiving it for the first time wfm too 22:20:36 ping 22:20:42 sdake__: agree 22:20:52 hey adrian_otto 22:20:57 oh, I see you again 22:21:43 i htink for this cae a glance image property is the right answer 22:22:07 neighbor redoing roof 22:22:13 hammering about to drive me nutty! 22:22:46 wonder how much of a pain it would be to get people behind a standard extra-spec for ironic/vm 22:22:47 ok, so do we have any controversy to address on this topic of bay_type? 22:23:30 though, I was wondering what the actual differences were between our ironic and vm template 22:24:05 then sdake__ where do we tag bay_type, in glance only 22:24:07 yuanying-alt could answer apmelton 22:24:23 diga, just use an os tag in glance 22:24:31 ok 22:24:34 the quickstart needs to be updated to set the porperty 22:24:38 and devstack as well 22:24:38 sdake__: diga: bay_type isn't coe, right? just os? 22:24:45 bay_type belongs to Bay, but cluster_type can be auto-detected from glance. 22:24:45 right os 22:24:51 that is why bay_type is such a bad name :) 22:25:02 ok 22:25:07 yes :) 22:25:21 at minimum it should be os_type 22:25:25 but it really belongs in glance 22:25:37 Got it 22:25:42 apmelton: VM template doesn't work because of Neutron Port issue 22:25:48 for Ironic 22:25:50 ahhhh gotcha 22:26:17 what's the issue? 22:26:23 i wonder if it would work if you were running a l3 agent on the node 22:26:38 I'm gonna hit a similar issue when I get to a template that'll work with rackspace 22:27:10 Ironic instance has original mac address because it is bare metal, so Neutron Port doesn't connect to ironic instance 22:27:36 Oh 22:27:39 hmmmm 22:27:47 ironic/neutron should be able to fix that 22:27:55 Yeah, that seems do-able. 22:28:57 so, this is a bit of a tangent, is the model of using floating IPs and manually creating ports a standard model many people are using? 22:29:01 cool, so diga, do you feeel that this is specific enough? 22:29:08 I think we should record this into a blueprint 22:29:15 Yes adrian_otto 22:29:25 I will work with you on that 22:29:33 sure 22:30:06 apmelton apparently best practice ;) 22:30:48 but ironic template can't it. 22:31:26 ok, any other work items that need team discussion today? 22:31:49 just wanted to say thanks for all the testing on the fedora-atomic-21-2 image 22:32:04 I need to discss about k8s-client 22:32:08 Can we? 22:32:29 madhuri_: we can in Open Discussion 22:32:40 if ther eare no specific work items, then we can do that 22:32:43 Ok. Sure 22:32:48 #topic Open Discussion 22:32:55 madhuri_: you are up. Proceed. 22:33:20 I tried generating pep8 compliant code yesterday using swagger 22:34:00 And I think it would be hard to push it upstream because that code would be magnum specific 22:34:20 madhuri_ maybe a manual modification of the patch set would work out 22:34:24 So I want some opinion here how to proceed further? 22:34:28 my quetion would be, does the code work as generated? 22:34:39 pep8 is not magnum specific. it's python specific. 22:34:51 No, it failed 22:35:08 how did it fail 22:35:17 Yes I agree but the rules defined can't be applied to all projects using swagger 22:35:22 so the code generator is busted, spectacular 22:35:31 Every project must have their own set of rules 22:35:49 sdake__: Yes, it doesn't work at all 22:36:03 Due to syntax error 22:36:20 not inspiring 22:36:21 I tried fixing that 22:36:25 i'd complain on google-containers 22:36:28 Technical debt? 22:36:36 and tell them to write a proper python language binding :) 22:37:04 :) 22:37:10 So, what do you think sdake__ ? 22:37:18 Should we carry on with this? 22:37:23 madhuri_ can you get it to work 22:37:32 Yes. I can try 22:37:35 I'd prefer to use the generator in the short term 22:37:47 writing a language binding is a monumental task 22:38:00 maybe not monumental 22:38:00 Ok. So I will try to fix that issues and try it out with magnum 22:38:03 bit big in scope atleast 22:38:11 Agree 22:38:14 keep a diff of your work 22:38:20 i'm interested t o see how the code generator fails 22:38:21 pls 22:38:26 Sure 22:38:49 that is something the swagger upstream needs to fix 22:39:06 Agree 22:39:08 A question for the pep8 22:39:23 Is that possible to disable pep8 for generated code? 22:39:26 yeah is swagger upstream aware of the issue? 22:39:36 May be. 22:39:58 I tried contacting them but couldn't 22:40:10 no mailing list? 22:40:25 I will raise an issue for this 22:40:35 I haven't mailed yet 22:40:47 ya, evaluate the upstream - see if they are responsive 22:40:51 we need to know that as well 22:40:53 oh, in all the excitement during announcements, I forgot to discuss PTL election. 22:40:57 Ok. sure 22:41:11 do you want to take a moment to touch on that? 22:41:19 adrian_otto +1 22:41:39 !! 22:41:40 juggler: Error: "!" is not a valid command. 22:41:50 So I will try to make generated code work 22:41:53 !give_me_all_the_money 22:41:54 sdake__: Error: "give_me_all_the_money" is not a valid command. 22:41:58 ok, so historically Stackforge projects all ran their own elections, announcing candidate openings on openstack-dev ML 22:42:33 based on feedback from our _OpenStack_ election official that has been confusing the OpenStack electorate 22:42:52 so we have been asked to conduct an election candidate nomination process that does not use the mailing list. 22:43:03 so I have a specific proposal for you all to consider. 22:43:20 first of all, we only need to hold an election if there is > 1 candidate 22:43:35 only contributors are eligible to declare a candidacy. 22:43:57 so we can email all contributors and ask them to show up to our next IRC team meeting 22:44:18 and if one of us wants to have an election, a candidacy can be announced during that agenda item 22:44:38 i dislike this personally 22:44:44 then the election official will run the election. The electorate is made up of the project contributors, should an election be needed. 22:44:47 I htink a permanent mailing list record is beneficial 22:44:55 this will only matter for this election 22:45:10 because subsequent elections we will fit into the OpenStack election 22:45:21 i'd be surprised if this one should fit in? 22:45:24 since we hit integration 22:45:27 sdake__: there is another way to deal with taht 22:45:40 sdake__: it is too late for this one, right? 22:45:50 no, the elections haven't been done yet 22:45:53 candidate deadlines have elapsed for this cycle? 22:45:53 asfar as i can tell 22:46:03 oh, in that case we can just tag along. 22:46:07 i could be out of the loop but beest to double check 22:46:36 usually the elections are after 2015.1.0 is cut - april 25th 22:46:55 let me check on that. one moment please. 22:47:42 #Link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PTL_Elections_March/April_2014 OpenStack Election 22:47:50 March 28 - April 4, 05:59 UTC: Open candidacy to PTL positions 22:48:04 so this is a solved problem!! 22:48:13 winning:) 22:48:14 * sdake__ the voice of reason 22:48:31 yeah 22:48:42 ok, so I will take no further action on this topic 22:48:42 correction, ya 22:48:44 we just need to make sure someone actually runs one for us :) 22:49:16 all I need to do is declare a candidacy in accordance with the process 22:49:26 but we don't need our own election 22:50:28 and any other people that want to run of course ;) 22:50:43 actually, I don't see what program we would belong to 22:50:53 I will follow up to check 22:51:25 #action adrian_otto to check to see if Magnum may participate in the April 4 - April 11: PTL elections. 22:51:28 is sdake volunteering? :) 22:51:49 I am not running, I have too much on my plate and adrian_otto is doing a fine job :) 22:51:57 agreed 22:52:00 if adrian_otto falls over dead, i'll run :) 22:52:04 I can tell you that being PTL of more than one project is extremely hard 22:52:35 that begs the question and i'm not volunteering, but is there an alternate PTL? 22:52:36 agree I dont know why anyone would do two :) 22:52:39 I don't know if anyone else has tried that besides me 22:52:58 one is enough work for two people imo 22:53:14 well said! 22:57:00 ok, time to wrap up for today? 22:57:07 yup 22:57:10 I'm hearing crickets. :) 22:57:44 Our next meeting is 2015-03-31 at 1600 UTC. I look forward to seeing you all there. 22:57:49 thanks everyone! 22:57:54 Cheers! 22:57:57 take care all 22:58:04 #endmeeting