16:00:39 #startmeeting containers 16:00:40 Meeting started Tue Apr 28 16:00:39 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:41 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:43 The meeting name has been set to 'containers' 16:00:46 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2015-04-28_1600_UTC Our Agenda 16:00:50 #topic Roll Call 16:00:53 o/ 16:00:54 o/ 16:00:55 Adrian Otto 16:01:01 Ton Ngo 16:01:08 o/ 16:01:42 o/ 16:01:51 o/ 16:01:55 o/ 16:01:59 o/ 16:02:17 hello sdake_, apmelton, Tango, rpothier, juggler, dims, tcammann_, and thomasem 16:02:25 we will begin in a moment 16:02:27 o/ 16:02:45 o/ 16:03:40 hello jjlehr, and diga_ 16:03:59 hello adrian_otto 16:04:18 ok, let's begin 16:04:26 #topic Announcements 16:04:34 1) Reminder: Our IRC Meeting will be skipped on 2015-05-19 because we will be at the Vancouver Design Summit 16:04:59 2) We did not release on schedule on 2015-04-25. I expect to complete the release work today. 16:05:16 after the release we will have two branches: master, and stable/kilo 16:05:40 once we do that, we fix bugs in master, and backport defect fixes to stable/kilo 16:05:51 not all bug tickets are defects 16:06:09 so please use the tag "defect" to identify a bug ticket as a defect 16:06:21 which, in the git log? 16:06:24 and be sure to indicate which branch(es) that defect impacts. 16:06:43 no, the tag I am talking about is actually in LP (in the ticket system) 16:06:52 got it 16:07:04 but being clear in the commit log is also wise, so plan to do both 16:07:16 any questions on that? 16:07:22 in the git log add 16:07:26 tag: defect 16:07:27 ? 16:08:03 no, because the git log are the fixes to the bugs 16:08:14 Closes-Bug: NNNN is enough for that 16:08:18 ok 16:08:34 but you can mention in the narrative of the commit message that this is a fix for master, or a fix for stable/kilo 16:08:57 that is visible in the patch metadata as well, but because this is something new, this should help reviewers get used to it 16:08:59 that should be obvious in gerrit becasue of the repo it is applied against :) 16:09:12 and if for any reason something is not clear, or you think it would work better another way, let's discuss it 16:09:32 ok, I have a special update to share with you 16:09:47 I'd like to keep this to the team, but I think it's important to mention so that we are ready 16:09:54 3) Special Update 16:10:14 as you know, we will be showing a demo of Magnum at the OpenStack Design Summit in Vancouver in a few weeks 16:10:31 that demo will happen in a conference track session 16:10:40 the link to that is on our wiki page 16:11:00 the new info is that we will also be giving the demo in one of the keynotes 16:11:08 nice! 16:11:10 \o/ 16:11:28 noice 16:11:30 +1 16:11:32 so we will be laser focused on making that demo really smooth, and compelling 16:11:33 yea 16:11:49 this is obviously good news because we will gain new users and new contributors 16:11:52 by we, he means everyone ;) 16:12:20 yes, I'm mentioning this to you because I'm seeking all of your help to get this go play really smooth 16:12:34 rehearsals happen on May 7th, so we need to be done basically in a week 16:12:51 and if anything is glitchy, we will have a little time to iron it out. 16:13:04 adrian_otto: so "stable/kilo" should be really stable :) 16:13:11 yes, dims! 16:13:21 ++ 16:13:27 What's planned for the demo? 16:13:45 wordpres 16:13:47 * sdake runs 16:13:49 https://libertydesignsummit.sched.org/event/44475e888cc90b5e7b14ac61a0b8de0e#.VT-xrIVxMxA 16:13:57 talk link :) 16:14:00 Tango, I'm still open to suggestions, but Bay creation is the thrust of our value right now, so we'll want to do that 16:14:11 #link https://libertydesignsummit.sched.org/event/44475e888cc90b5e7b14ac61a0b8de0e#.VT-xrIVxMxA Magnum Session 16:14:21 adrian_otto: the main thing that i can think of is the time taken for things to come up (which i am facing on the CI job) 16:14:38 we are not doing virt on virt dims 16:14:43 we are doing bare metal bay creation 16:14:44 yes, that's something that we will want to apply some creativity to 16:14:46 yeah, don't do virt nesting.. 16:14:49 cool 16:15:09 just making sure :) 16:15:19 We might start with an existing bay, and show how we can scale it, interact with it, and explain how it works 16:15:56 bay creation takes about 1 minute on my hardwqare 16:16:02 and with any live demo, we will want to show an actual app running, and some way to demonstrate that it's changing while we give Magnum instructions 16:16:04 so doing bay creation is probably feasible in a demo 16:16:11 I know I'll ahve a dedicated wired network connection 16:16:38 so I can create a really fast demo environment on public cloud (bare metal) 16:16:49 I can also carry in a server, and have something local on the laptop 16:17:02 so there are plenty of options for making sure e have fast hardware 16:17:19 awesome 16:17:26 so we can come back to this in Open Discussion. Let that simmer for now. 16:17:52 #topic Blueprint/Task Review 16:18:08 do any current work items require team discussion today? 16:18:22 lots of our blueprints are not going to make the cutoff 16:18:54 yes, I'll be retargeting those that are incomplete 16:19:22 I was wondering if the blueprint for creating swarm bays will make this cutoff. 16:19:25 if you have a BP that you know is complete, be sure to mark it as "Implemented" now, so we record that in our release notes. 16:19:29 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/multiple-bay-templates 16:19:47 apmelton: can you give jjlehr an update on that? 16:20:00 I believe at this point that bp is complete 16:20:20 rather that entire flow of bps 16:20:24 there were a couple of nice-to-have reviews in process on Friday 16:20:31 I expect those have also merged? 16:20:46 jjlehr: baymodel.coe is complete, right? 16:20:57 Yes it is. It was merged into master last night. 16:21:42 that's awsome 16:21:54 (stop a minute to recognize this milestone) 16:22:03 yay :) 16:22:06 thanks to everyone who worked on this feature 16:22:11 thanks a bunch to jjlehr and diga_ for helping out on this! 16:22:22 this is one of the key reasons that Magnum even makes sense for OpenStack operators 16:22:27 thx jj/diga 16:22:29 apmelton: welcome! 16:22:50 You're welcome! I enjoyed working on it as my first contribution. 16:22:52 because it can give them a framework and an API that the can plug in whatever the prevailing technology is as that evolves 16:23:23 that's really important because large scale operators are reluctant to invest in emerging technologies that are at high risk of changing (quickly becoming obsolete) 16:23:27 trial by fire jjlehr :) 16:23:54 but with a feature like multi-bay-type they can bet on Magnum, and have confidence that they can fit in whatever COE users like best over time 16:24:19 I do want to make a special call out to jjlehr and apmelton 16:24:37 jjlehr: because you handled the learning curve with such grace 16:24:47 apmelton: for just kicking butt 16:24:54 thanks adrian_otto! 16:25:00 who else worked on this feature? 16:25:11 Thank you to everyone who was so patient with me :_ 16:25:25 diga_ worked on the docker conductor 16:25:28 joffter helped me get started 16:25:36 jjlehr: do you feel like we are doing a good job welcoming new contributors? 16:25:49 is there anything we should plan to do better? 16:25:53 Definitely! This seems like a very friendly community. 16:26:24 if you think of anything, just let us know, and we;ll find a way to work it in 16:26:31 Sounds good. 16:26:48 diga_ also worked on bay_distro, which is extremely important for really supporting images other than atomic 16:27:00 cluster_distro* 16:27:03 that's right!! 16:27:15 * adrian_otto offers a high five to diga_ 16:27:32 thanks :) 16:27:43 diga_ has worked on a really wide range of stuff 16:27:49 thanks for being so versitile 16:28:24 so our current topic is Blueprint/Task Review 16:28:26 adrian_otto: I enjoy working on magnum 16:28:31 ;-) 16:28:39 I agree. diga's very helpful! 16:29:01 any other work items we should review together today? 16:29:23 juggler: thanks :) 16:30:02 ok, one thing I did not add to the agenda yet is an etherpad to name our Design Summit session topics 16:30:12 would you like to make one now? 16:30:45 adrian_otto: how many sessions do we have? 16:31:06 6+4 I think… I will confirm… one moment 16:31:17 6 fishbowls? 16:32:04 4 fishbowl 16:33:53 We have 4 Fishbowl (large audience) and 6 Workrooms 16:34:51 and 1 contributors meetup on Friday afternoon 16:35:04 #link https://libertydesignsummit.sched.org/ Summit Schedule 16:35:17 search for "Magnum" on that page and check all the Magnum ones 16:35:37 I wish you all the best & have a fun at summit :) 16:36:30 adrian_otto: I guess they didn't tag each event with the project? 16:37:06 regarding adrian's earlier question, an etherpad sounds like a great idea. 16:37:16 apmelton: correct. not yet 16:37:25 gotcha 16:37:26 we can get these placeholders updated with actual topics 16:38:19 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-magnum-topics OpenStack Design Summit Topic Etherpad 16:38:32 Everything You Wanted to Know about Magnum, but Were Afraid to Ask :) 16:40:03 juggler: oh, my 16:40:16 that would be a big Fishbowl 16:40:25 prolly 16:40:59 let's just get all the ideas up first 16:41:06 and then we can slot them after 16:42:42 it might make sense to have networking in a fishbowl as well 16:43:07 ideally one that happens after a workroom… not sure if we have any in that order… looking at that now 16:44:35 adrian_otto: that's fair 16:44:47 I wasn't sure about where to put that 16:45:17 Yay, etherpad formatting! 16:48:44 What's the 'c' or 'd' for? 16:52:45 C = Conference Settion 16:52:49 Session 16:52:56 D = Design Session 16:52:59 Ahhhh, I see 16:53:00 thanks, adrian_otto 16:53:03 np 16:54:09 adrian_otto: so we have fishbowl early on wednesday, then design? 16:54:33 apmelton: I pasted the schedule in the bottom of the etherpad for your reference 16:54:52 so the fishbowls will be before all the work sessions 16:54:53 adrian_otto: I'm just making sure I understand what's pasted 16:54:59 yes 16:55:16 the Room 306 ones are the Fishbowls 16:55:53 adrian_otto: Can we add volume topic for containers "add volume to the container from cinder" ? I never tried yet, hope someone tried that 16:55:59 and I think Room 121/122 is a giant combined room 16:56:56 diga_: well as long as you mount the volume in the nova instance and put a filesystem on it before you do a bind mount of the filesystem, that will work 16:57:20 but you can not "mount" a volume in an ordinary Docker container because it drops the CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability 16:57:23 okay 16:57:32 which is needed to do the mount of the filesystem on the volume 16:57:40 got it 16:57:56 you could actually expose a raw volume to a container, as long as you did not want to put a filesystem on it 16:58:17 okay 16:58:20 there are a few use cases for that, but they are much less common than a filesystem use case 16:58:25 that's actually a good topic 16:58:30 yep 16:58:41 oh, wow, where did the time go! 16:58:47 #topic Open Discussion 16:58:47 I will study on that 16:58:49 yes 16:59:18 for the benefit of new and existing contributors, may i recommend that a reference to https://github.com/openstack/magnum/blob/master/doc/source/dev/dev-manual-devstack.rst be in the quickstart or the contributing page or both. 16:59:24 ok, so I used up all the time on that, sorry 16:59:47 our next meeting will be 2015-05-05 at 2200 UTC 16:59:48 no prob 16:59:53 see you all then!! 17:00:08 #endmeeting