22:01:43 <david-lyle> #startmeeting Horizon
22:01:44 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Nov 19 22:01:43 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is david-lyle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:01:45 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:01:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'horizon'
22:01:51 <jcoufal> o/
22:02:03 <jcoufal> david-lyle: congrats
22:02:09 <lsmola> hello
22:02:12 <julim> hi all
22:02:13 <jtomasek> hey
22:02:31 <jtomasek> congrats david-lyle
22:02:47 <david-lyle> Hello everyone!  I now know none of you have any sense, at least no the majority of you
22:02:49 <bdehamer> hello
22:03:23 <devlaps> o/
22:03:32 <david-lyle> I'll do my best
22:04:13 <david-lyle> I started an agenda at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Horizon
22:04:20 <jomara> congrats!
22:04:39 <david-lyle> As I said in the last meeting please add your agenda items there in the week prior to the meetings
22:05:03 <david-lyle> But I'm going to insert a topic first
22:05:08 <david-lyle> #topic Blueprints
22:05:42 <david-lyle> I was hoping to wait until the election was concluded to have the blueprints prioritized, but Icehouse-1 is on Dec 5 (feature freeze Dec 3) and we needed a more rational plan for icehouse-1 other than everything.  So I rearranged some bps. https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/icehouse-1
22:06:14 <david-lyle> Basically, if there wasn't code already up for review it got bumped
22:06:36 <david-lyle> that's not to say things can't get added back in, but there's already a lot to review out there
22:06:51 <david-lyle> Is anyone close with another BP that they think should be in the list?
22:07:37 <david-lyle> silence sounds like a no
22:07:39 <jcoufal> david-lyle: what about Navigation, I belive we might start with implementation fairly soon
22:08:08 <david-lyle> jcoufal: I think we can, but <2 weeks seemed tight
22:08:22 <jcoufal> david-lyle: alright, no need to push it
22:08:24 <david-lyle> I don't think early i-2 is any worse
22:08:35 <jcoufal> agreed
22:08:50 <david-lyle> anything on  the list that is problematic?
22:08:59 <david-lyle> actually, I see one
22:09:20 <david-lyle> I think the Hyper-V RDP is not in nova yet, I need to follow up on that
22:09:34 <david-lyle> so that may move out too
22:09:57 <jcoufal> david-lyle: inline editation - I am not sure about the very latest state, but last thing I saw needed more work to do
22:10:08 <jcoufal> maybe lsmola might say more...?
22:10:12 <lsmola> yeah true, my old patch
22:10:29 <lsmola> david-lyle, i have almost forgot it :-)
22:10:42 <mrunge> the last time, I saw that, it was quite good
22:10:46 <lsmola> david-lyle, yeah that stands there and was prepared in H3
22:10:47 <jomara> david-lyle: there's already a PR for the angular blueprint (the blueprint showed up after the PR) and its not on the list, but we have a separate agenda item to discuss that
22:11:10 <david-lyle> ok, I remember reviewing it, but wanted to try it out, and never got to it.  Do you think it needs help?
22:11:30 <mrunge> lsmola, what was the issue, why wasn't that approved?
22:11:34 <jpich> I remember it was pretty neat when I tried it last, too. Must review again
22:11:40 <mrunge> I don't remember any more
22:11:42 <jpich> Too close to feature freeze?
22:11:47 <mrunge> yes, it worked quite well
22:11:48 <lsmola> david-lyle, would be good to merge it at some point :-) otherwise it will rebase me to death :-D
22:11:56 <david-lyle> I think that was the primary concern
22:12:00 <mrunge> I tested it in a very early state
22:12:24 <jcoufal> alright, then it looks like achievable BP, sorry for confusion :)
22:12:25 <david-lyle> may need a rebase now, but you're still good with the idea lsmola?
22:12:55 <david-lyle> jcoufal: good to be clear on it
22:13:18 <david-lyle> #topic IA proposal
22:13:21 <lsmola> david-lyle, ok, i can rebase it tomorrow
22:13:41 <david-lyle> So last meeting I took on a task to propose some IA guidelines.
22:13:51 <david-lyle> Short story, I failed to get that far
22:14:26 <jcoufal> Neither me. I need to revisit that as well
22:14:35 <david-lyle> Hopefully, jcoufal and others can help me with that this week and we can at least introduce it next meeting
22:14:48 <jcoufal> david-lyle: yeah, we should take a stab on that
22:15:11 <jcoufal> at least some first draft
22:15:17 <david-lyle> I do think it's important to set up the broad guidelines at least and maybe haggle the finer points a little later
22:15:47 <jcoufal> david-lyle: +1
22:15:49 <julim> +1
22:15:50 <david-lyle> thanks jcoufal
22:15:51 <julim> happy to help
22:15:59 <david-lyle> any help is appreciated julim
22:16:18 <david-lyle> I think we just need to reconcile the proposals
22:16:28 <david-lyle> #topic Discuss using AngularJS
22:16:33 <jcoufal> david-lyle: we can discuss here: http://ask-openstackux.rhcloud.com/question/1/openstack-ui-information-architecture/
22:16:44 <jcoufal> (belongs to previous topic)
22:16:48 <david-lyle> thanks jcoufal
22:17:08 <david-lyle> So this topic should probably include Discuss non-JS support soft requirement
22:17:15 <david-lyle> because they hinge on each other
22:17:53 <david-lyle> I've been looking into the non-js requirement and got some valuable feedback from Gabriel regarding the matter too
22:18:22 <david-lyle> The core of that requirement stems from accessibility standards that are over 6 years old
22:18:44 <david-lyle> when JavaScript support in browsers was not very uniform
22:19:31 <david-lyle> That said, there may be some government based installations that still are tied to antiquated browsers, regulations
22:19:37 <jcoufal> yeah, it's very common for all the accessibility documents - they are very old, especially from governments
22:19:50 <bdehamer> So, the issue is not no-js specifically -- it's more about accessibility
22:20:03 <david-lyle> Well, I've read both
22:20:11 <david-lyle> but I think the main issue is accessibility
22:20:17 <lsmola> david-lyle, so does it mean it runs some old version of openstack?
22:20:34 <jtomasek> and accessibility topic has been also touched here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/018887.html
22:20:36 <david-lyle> which I think we can address with client-side means
22:20:47 <jcoufal> david-lyle: but since openstack UI is not supported in antique browsers we don't have to care about that anyway, right?
22:20:48 <mrunge> I don't think it's related to OpenStack at all
22:21:03 <david-lyle> not openstack, say IE 2
22:21:23 <lsmola> :-O
22:21:24 <mrunge> and IMHO, if you want to sell something to governments, your stuff needs to be accessible
22:21:35 <david-lyle> that's not a real example of course, but say a group that is barred from having JS enabled
22:21:42 <mrunge> i.e. readable by screen readers
22:21:46 <david-lyle> I think mrunge is right
22:22:08 <david-lyle> We don't support lower end browsers already
22:22:20 <jtomasek> according to what jomara sent to the discussion, the javascript is not a blocker for accessibility and screenreaders
22:22:24 <jomara> screen readers and JS can get along, if you design your application well
22:22:32 <david-lyle> so as long as screen readers are supported, I think we can move forward
22:22:34 <jtomasek> +!
22:22:37 <jtomasek> +1
22:22:41 <mrunge> in my experience, the group of folks (0.2% or so) will shout out loudly
22:22:46 <Toshi> +1
22:22:49 <mrunge> when cut off
22:22:58 <david-lyle> I would like to take it slowly though
22:23:00 <jcoufal> +1, if we can support screen readers, we don't have to support non-js
22:23:05 <mrunge> but agreed +1
22:23:07 <jomara> +1 to that
22:23:15 <lsmola> +1
22:23:26 <david-lyle> I have a large concern that we are moving away from the core coding strength of OpenStack which is python
22:23:40 <jtomasek> david-lyle: yes we should maintain some affordable level of non-js support (graceful degradation)
22:23:56 <lsmola> david-lyle, with angular?
22:24:04 <jcoufal> david-lyle: I wouldn't like to see everything JS based
22:24:24 <jtomasek> we should definitely not try to convert horizon to pure js single page application
22:24:25 <david-lyle> The more involved the client side becomes, the less likely new project teams like Heat, Trove will be able to contribute the base UI implementation of their support
22:24:55 <mrunge> yupp, completely agree
22:25:03 <lsmola> david-lyle, well, there is base UI implementation
22:25:13 <jomara> the angular implementation only supplants the *existing* js implementation
22:25:20 <david-lyle> which would create a high burden on an already taxed Horizon development team
22:25:35 <david-lyle> jomara: for now, right?
22:25:42 <lsmola> david-lyle, and there are fancy pages based on well written and tested angular libraries
22:25:49 <david-lyle> It certainly could
22:26:03 <jtomasek> david-lyle: let's keep js to UI features only? (matches the intent of using angular directives)
22:26:26 <jomara> for now / the foreseeable future - theres quite a bit of work to do
22:26:32 <david-lyle> I think that sounds like a great rule of thumb
22:26:38 <david-lyle> jtomasek
22:26:54 <david-lyle> Is there anyone that has a strong concern with this direction?
22:26:58 <jcoufal> +1
22:27:02 <devlaps> +1
22:27:04 <lsmola> +5
22:27:08 <jcoufal> -4 lsmola
22:27:12 <lsmola> hehe
22:27:15 <bdehamer> +1
22:27:21 <jomara> i was going to rewrite the entire app in node js, but i guess i'll stop now =(
22:27:21 <Toshi> +1
22:27:25 <julim> +1
22:27:26 <jomara> +1
22:27:41 <jomara> (joking)
22:27:47 <lsmola> jcoufal, thanks for auto correction
22:27:48 <david-lyle> :)
22:28:36 <david-lyle> So, let's review jomara's change, and I'll add it back to target i-1
22:28:58 <jomara> great - im still working on patch2, itll probably be tomorrow
22:29:03 <jcoufal> \o/
22:29:08 <lsmola> yaay
22:29:08 <david-lyle> just remember...  accessibility
22:29:10 <david-lyle> :)
22:29:12 <jomara> maxv gave me a bunch of great feedback i need to fix
22:30:04 <david-lyle> #topic Horizon/Openstack-dashboard split
22:30:51 <david-lyle> This was discussed at the summit and I talked to mordred this morning about it.
22:30:54 <mrunge> I must admit, I havenÄt had the time to put more effort into that
22:31:10 <david-lyle> I think he's not online right now
22:31:11 <mrunge> s/Ä/'/
22:31:19 <david-lyle> mrunge no worries
22:31:48 <mrunge> david-lyle, at least, mordred is listed here
22:31:54 <mrunge> in the users list
22:32:11 <david-lyle> he has an idea of just leaving the horizon repo as is with openstack-dashboard below it and stripping out the current horizon/horizon dir and renaming that
22:32:26 <david-lyle> he has a server that's always on
22:32:45 <mrunge> I see
22:32:53 <david-lyle> that would minimize package compatibility problems going forward
22:33:12 <jcoufal> well the dashboard itself is a bit confusing name though
22:33:22 <jcoufal> if we are going to rename, I would do it properly
22:33:25 <david-lyle> we could even rename the openstack_dashboard dir if we wanted to
22:33:49 <david-lyle> well, we want the Horizon name to stick with the actual UI, that would accomplish that
22:34:08 <david-lyle> the stripped out h/h directory would get the new name and package
22:34:15 <david-lyle> and become a dependency
22:34:17 <mrunge> If I could choose, I would rename both
22:34:29 <bdehamer> any thoughts on what the new name for h/h would be?
22:34:34 <lsmola> hmm I kinda like Horizon for UI
22:34:34 <mrunge> to confuse everyone
22:34:40 <lsmola> hehe
22:34:50 <jpich> Seems fine to me - keeping 'openstack_dashboard' as a directory would avoid a lot of renaming in our codebase and for already existing plugins who consume us
22:35:01 <david-lyle> his suggestion was just django-horizon or something
22:35:06 <jcoufal> right, but then openstack_dashboard dir doesn't make big sense then
22:35:36 <jpich> david-lyle: Oh, so keep 'horizon' also in the 'framework-bits' name?
22:35:41 <jcoufal> yeah, something like django-ui-lib, django-horizon-lib, or similar :)
22:35:49 <mrunge> my intention was to strip out the outer horizon dir at all
22:35:56 <david-lyle> but it doesn't really matter either way what the directory is called, it need to be there
22:36:14 <david-lyle> mrunge, you still likely want the directory
22:36:28 <mrunge> then we'd have another horizon (the framework) and openstack_dashboard for the UI stuff
22:36:45 <jpich> These conversations get confusing quickly
22:36:56 <mrunge> exactly jpich
22:36:59 <lsmola> yeah
22:37:03 <bdehamer> yeah, I think I just got lost
22:37:04 <david-lyle> I think we need to mark it up somewhere rather than in just text
22:37:13 <jcoufal> diagram would help :)
22:37:15 <jpich> Pictures :-) Diagrams!
22:37:33 <julim> +1
22:37:45 <mrunge> nooo. if you can't express in just a few words ;-)
22:38:14 <david-lyle> two packages horizon and django-horizon
22:38:25 <lsmola> yep
22:38:29 <david-lyle> horizon is the same as today
22:39:04 <mrunge> at least I'd call it openstack-horizon
22:39:04 <david-lyle> except the second horizon directory is stripped out into a new package called say django-horizon
22:39:19 <mrunge> but, yes!
22:39:20 <david-lyle> my concern was the upgrade path for existing installs
22:39:44 <mrunge> david-lyle, package-wise that shouldnÄt be a problem at all
22:39:46 <david-lyle> if we change the name and directory structure we push a lot of work outside of just the Horizon team
22:40:02 <lsmola> true
22:40:26 <jtomasek> just a point, django-horizon should then undergo some changes eg moving js files and _scripts.html into horizon, there might be more places that will need these decisions
22:40:39 <david-lyle> where if it were still Horizon (which people associate with the UI anyway) they just upgrade, and pull down a new dependency
22:40:58 <david-lyle> jtomasek: yes there are some finer details, ack
22:41:04 <mrunge> as someone to do the work outside: that's just a matter of an hour or so
22:41:12 <jpich> jtomasek: Definitely some things need to be moved around still
22:41:39 <mrunge> IMHO more confusing or requiring work would be the static stuff, such as js .less etc....
22:42:08 <david-lyle> yes, that will be trickier, because essentially both assume those files are present
22:43:29 <david-lyle> alright, mrunge I believe you own this one anyway, correct?
22:43:47 <mrunge> david-lyle, own what?
22:43:56 <lsmola> the bp?
22:44:00 <david-lyle> the bp, or did you just propose?
22:44:10 <mrunge> yupp
22:44:13 <mrunge> both
22:44:46 <david-lyle> we can just move forward commenting in the blueprint then
22:45:15 <david-lyle> and you can determine what's rational :)
22:45:35 <lsmola> cool
22:45:39 <jpich> ...and add a link to a diagram :-)
22:45:43 <lsmola> hehe
22:45:44 <david-lyle> will do
22:45:54 <jcoufal> colors included please :)
22:46:10 * david-lyle needs to remember to generate diagram
22:46:39 <jtomasek> jcoufal can help you, he likes drawing rectangles :)
22:46:52 <david-lyle> colored rectangles?
22:46:54 <jcoufal> yeah, but I have problems with circles :-/
22:46:56 <jtomasek> sure
22:46:59 <jtomasek> haha
22:47:00 <david-lyle> I hear color's important
22:47:00 <jpich> lol
22:47:23 <david-lyle> #topic Open Discussion
22:47:43 <lsmola> i have a quick one
22:47:50 <lsmola> could you review a https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-reusable-charts
22:47:51 <david-lyle> lsmola: sure
22:48:09 <lsmola> there is a WIP review that shows the chart in action with mock data
22:48:23 <lsmola> real overview pages will land in I2
22:48:37 <david-lyle> oh yeah, reviews.  Thanks!
22:49:03 <david-lyle> since, the list of bp's for i-1 is only items up for review, please try to have a go at them
22:49:12 <david-lyle> including reusable-charts
22:49:20 <lsmola> cool :-)
22:49:32 <lsmola> thank youuu :-)
22:49:34 <david-lyle> some of lsmola's follow on work builds on those charts
22:49:45 <david-lyle> and no I have reviewed them either yet
22:50:12 <jtomasek> just an update on Bootstrap 3, saschpe told me he's tackling last bugs in Lesscpy, I'll make sure I test it, so we're moving on!
22:50:13 <david-lyle> but I know how the rest of my week is looking :)
22:50:29 <david-lyle> jtomasek: great news
22:50:31 <jpich> jtomasek: Awesome!
22:50:33 <jcoufal> ! go Botstrap 3 go!
22:50:34 <openstack> jcoufal: Error: "go" is not a valid command.
22:50:42 <jcoufal> lol :)
22:50:50 <jpich> go should totally be a valid command
22:51:02 <lsmola> :-)
22:51:06 <david-lyle> the most basic of commands
22:51:33 <lsmola> jtomasek, cool
22:51:45 <jcoufal> this is awesome
22:51:52 <jcoufal> it will generate other BP which are blocked
22:52:01 <jcoufal> less decomposition, icon-font, etc
22:52:40 <jomara> horizon + wingdings?
22:52:41 <jcoufal> s/generate/unleash
22:52:59 <david-lyle> +1 wingdings
22:53:31 <jcoufal> if I get at least five other +1s, I will take that seriously :)
22:53:48 <jcoufal> more voters for wingdings?
22:53:49 <jomara> +1 wingdings
22:54:09 <mrunge> anything else?
22:54:11 <lsmola> lol
22:54:18 <david-lyle> so object browsing, is any one actively using this?
22:54:38 <david-lyle> any would they be opposed to a wholesale rewrite to make it usable?
22:55:13 <jpich> I think kspear is using it, though making it better never sounds bad
22:55:33 <david-lyle> ok, I will ping him
22:56:05 <jcoufal> reminds me - today in ML there started follow up thread on Search project, which is very related to Horizon
22:56:16 <lsmola> david-lyle, never tried more than 2 objects :-)
22:56:31 <jcoufal> I recommend everybody to read that, very interesting effort
22:56:33 <david-lyle> lsmola: try nest objects
22:56:50 <lsmola> david-lyle, :-O
22:57:16 <jcoufal> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/019742.html (Search Project)
22:57:21 <david-lyle> yes the search project could provide a solution to limited filtering in the service APIs
22:58:03 <jpich> The 2mn video is pretty cool
22:58:17 <lsmola> david-lyle, jcoufal , cool, looking forward to that
22:58:21 <david-lyle> I would think especially useful for admins, but also non-admins with larger domains/projects
22:58:51 <david-lyle> it's pretty young currently, but there is strong potential there
22:59:04 <julim> It would help not just admins but also navigation issues, filtering, etc.
22:59:08 <julim> much needed I would say.
22:59:38 <david-lyle> yes, but at least 2 releases away optimistically
23:00:12 <lsmola> david-lyle, :-(
23:00:34 <mrunge> no honestly, lsmola
23:00:54 <jpich> I hope the thread generates some discussion from the other projects as well
23:01:38 <jpich> Ok, we're overtime
23:01:44 <david-lyle> Well, our time is almost up.  I want to thank everyone for their vote of confidence.  I would also like to thank mrunge for allowing us to have an election for PTL.  I think that should be the case for all OpenStack projects.  And I look forward to all of your help going forward in Icehouse.
23:02:15 <david-lyle> #endmeeting