16:00:40 #startmeeting hierarchical_multitenancy 16:00:41 Meeting started Fri Sep 11 16:00:40 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is schwicke. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:42 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:44 The meeting name has been set to 'hierarchical_multitenancy' 16:01:12 hi, sajeesh! 16:01:16 welcome back! 16:01:29 hi, schwicke ..thanks :-) 16:02:00 I have started making test cases 16:02:39 #topic test cases for MTsupport for Nova 16:03:21 New once or extending the once we had already ? 16:03:41 I am extending 16:03:57 to have more coverage 16:04:06 the more the better 16:04:18 * geoffarnold lurking 16:04:25 +1 16:04:44 for the BP, it has been resubmitted already for liberty, right ? 16:04:52 yes 16:05:41 not liberty, sorry :) 16:05:52 :) 16:06:06 mitaka 16:06:38 hi vilobh 16:06:43 Hi, vilobh! 16:07:05 Sajeesh is resuming the work by extending the test cases. 16:08:28 I'm checking for the BP for Mitaka ... 16:10:02 hello all 16:10:15 hi 16:10:33 vilobh, if I am not wrong in cinder u have not included the parent_id in the url right ? 16:10:37 as i mentioned on skype if the nested quota spec needs to be re-approved again for mitaka we should start with it 16:10:46 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova?searchtext=quota 16:11:05 yes it needs to be re approved 16:11:44 sajeesh : https://github.com/openstack/nova-specsquick steps to do so 16:12:03 please check the steps under Previously approved specifications 16:12:07 There are a couple of others in the same state 16:12:18 thanks..we have followed that 16:12:48 same thing we had done for liberty....In fact this spec was first approved for kilo 16:13:10 sajeesh : ok 16:13:13 The link gives me a 404 16:13:30 schwicke : https://github.com/openstack/nova-specs 16:13:44 try this : ^^ 16:14:33 priority is set to "low: 16:14:35 don't like that 16:14:36 https://github.com/openstack/nova-specs#previously-approved-specifications 16:15:59 if that's correct we should get the approval soon. 16:16:06 yes 16:17:09 vilobh, if I am not wrong in cinder u have not included the parent_id in the url right ? 16:17:27 #topic treatment of parent_id 16:17:44 nope 16:17:52 we calculate parent id on the fly 16:17:54 (just to conclude on the previous topic we should be fine for Nova and Mitaka for now) 16:18:08 depinfing on the project id passed 16:18:16 in nova , I am also doing the same thing 16:18:22 ok 16:18:22 cool 16:18:56 schwicke vilobh , I would like to have parent_id in the keystone token 16:19:10 schwicke, sajeesh : we @ yahoo have special interest in nested quota for nova and we will be happy to help in what it takes to get this in for mitaka 16:19:24 thanks ...vilobh ? 16:19:48 we can ask keystone team to do so…btu need to open a blueprint/spec 16:19:51 beforehand 16:20:00 and we should start early IMHO 16:20:13 yes...I will start then 16:20:22 cool 16:20:31 or...do we need to ask the keystone team to do so ? 16:20:40 Sajeesh, will you file a BP for keystone for this ? 16:20:51 I can do 16:21:17 cool 16:21:21 +1 16:21:26 #action Sajeesh will open a BP in keystone to have the parent ID included in the token for hierarcical projects 16:21:36 Great! 16:21:51 The other thing into which we should look is horizon. 16:22:07 the BP needs to be resubmitted as well. Not sure though who's working on this 16:22:07 vilobh, in cinder is there any context checking done before the api call 16:23:01 sajeesh : i don't think so 16:23:53 in nova we are having ....for that parent_id in token is very much required 16:24:10 ok we should start talking to keystone ASAP then 16:24:18 +1 16:24:20 +1 16:24:36 we may need to patch the cinder code once we have that 16:24:50 lets do one thing I can take ownership of https://review.openstack.org/151327 and https://review.openstack.org/151677 and work towards getting this merged…sajeesh can focus on other patches so that he don't have to do the follow up thing on these patches and saves his time... 16:25:24 Hi 16:25:31 hi eric 16:25:32 a little bit late here :/ 16:25:40 np :) welcome 16:25:45 thanks :) 16:25:47 hi, welcome anyway :) 16:25:51 np 16:26:17 schwicke, thank you 16:26:30 sajeesh, schwicke : ^^ what you think of above proposal 16:27:01 vilobh....it is fine with me 16:27:13 for me it is ok if it is ok with Sajeesh :) 16:27:28 I have no objections. Thanks for the proposal1 16:27:39 It's a good idea 16:28:02 I can spend more time on the patches following that 16:28:23 #agreed Vilob will take owership of https://review.openstack.org/151327 and https://review.openstack.org/151677 to allow Sajeesh to work on other patches 16:28:48 the first one is owned by Raildo it seesm 16:29:14 yes 16:30:41 vilobh...in cinder any changes you are making the current cycle 16:30:57 in the current cycle 16:31:09 you were talking abt concurrency 16:34:42 shwicke...vilobh got disconnected from IRC .. 16:34:52 yes, just noticed. 16:35:39 let's wait a little to give him a chance to come back 16:36:56 OK, let's try to follow-up with him via skype which still works for him 16:37:52 +1 16:39:08 Vilob says: " not planning to do so in this cycle ...will add it depending on the adoption of nested quota 16:39:08 [18:38:25] Vilobh Meshram: plan to make it more stable 16:39:08 [18:38:31] Vilobh Meshram: before adding more features 16:39:08 " 16:40:21 +1 from schwicke, Sajeesh and ericksonsantos 16:41:17 Anything else on this topic ? 16:41:49 #topic summit attendance 16:42:06 I guess from CERN there will be a couple of people. Probably not me though 16:43:11 Sajeesh cannot make it, nor Vilob 16:44:33 #topic: AOB 16:45:27 let's continue the discussion on skype 16:45:47 #endmeeting