15:59:40 #startmeeting Horizon 15:59:40 Meeting started Tue Jul 29 15:59:40 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is david-lyle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:59:41 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:59:43 The meeting name has been set to 'horizon' 16:00:11 howdy 16:00:14 hi 16:00:20 Hello everyone 16:00:23 Hello 16:00:25 o/ 16:00:26 hello 16:00:27 hello 16:00:41 hello 16:00:46 hi 16:00:55 hi 16:01:45 J-2 was tagged last week on Wed, we finished 12 blueprints and closed 103 bugs 16:02:00 Thanks everyone for your hard work and many reviews to make that happen 16:02:06 hello o/ 16:02:11 hiya! 16:02:24 hey 16:02:35 Right after J-2 we merged the rest of the code for the Sahara blueprint as well. \o/ 16:02:43 yay! 16:03:14 Thanks to crobertsrh for staying on top of those changes for so long and making sure they were always in a good state 16:03:31 Thanks for reviewing the piles of code everyone :) 16:03:35 amazing 16:03:48 I have to admit, those reviews were ... unpleasantly repetitive 16:03:51 hi everyone 16:03:54 hi 16:04:15 hi all 16:04:19 We also merged the update to bootstrap 3 this week 16:04:47 there are several bugs related to that, but last week we decided those would be more easily addressed as bug fixes 16:05:06 than trying to keep that large patch in sync with master 16:05:18 so let's tackle some of those defects quickly 16:05:36 one related to that is on the agenda later I believe 16:05:56 That leaves us with https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/juno-3 16:06:14 Which I need to massively prune down in the next day or two 16:06:45 Given past performance and review capacity, I would expect maybe 20 blueprints to land 16:07:35 I will implement a feature proposal freeze probably a little before the rest of OpenStack so that we can concentrate on merging what we have in the pipeline already 16:08:01 when that would be ? 16:08:25 Makes sense to me 16:09:13 I haven't determined the exact date yet, the common one is August 21, so maybe a week before that. 16:09:25 Let's say 2 weeks from today. 16:10:00 So August 12 16:10:30 I am asking because we are hardly working on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/glance-metadata-definitions-base-admin-ui which is partially in glance and in horizon, I am expecting this need to be reviewed first in Glance before going into horizon ? 16:10:42 without the feature freeze the review load gets too noisy and makes it tough to land anything 16:11:03 pawels: without support in Glance, we won't merge in Horizon 16:11:32 horizon has many dependencies on other projects. 16:11:38 david-lyle: ok, we are starting some review on Glance side this week 16:12:05 so glance will have to support it, glanceclient will have to support it, glanceclient will have to be released, an openstack/requirements change will have to merge and finally changes to Horizon can merge, that seems very tight for scheduling 16:12:26 that's why I am rising it ;) 16:12:32 pawels: just looking at it realistically 16:13:35 FFE are a possibility for certain features, but those are the exception 16:13:38 Re client requirements change, how about requirement freeze? does it occur during RC1 phase? I can't remember it well. 16:14:14 amotoki: good question, that sounds correct 16:14:16 david-lyle:: we should have like code complete this week of all the parts glance/glanceclient/horizon 16:14:48 The requirements freeze doesn't really apply to the openstack clients, since we control them and they're supposed to be backwards compatible 16:15:09 or let's say it's much easier to get a requirement freeze exception for them 16:15:48 jpich: yeah.. but it requires more efforts to us :-( 16:15:49 jpich, true, but depending on how the feature is supported (optional) we may have to require a newer version of the client 16:16:46 that should have been (optional or not optional) 16:17:58 Anyway on J-3, expect pruning, we only have 5 weeks left 16:18:15 david-lyle, want a dashboard link? 16:18:24 tzumainn: 16:18:26 sure 16:18:31 Right, just saying that when I asked for a requirement exception for a client requirement last time, people thought it was silly to even have to ask :) http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-March/031178.html 16:18:42 http://goo.gl/RG6HQt 16:18:46 it'd need to be updated after the pruning 16:19:22 I also merged a horizon dashboard to the gerrit-dash-creator for general horizon reviews, minus tuskar-ui 16:19:48 https://review.openstack.org/#/dashboard/?foreach=%28project%3Aopenstack%2Fhorizon+OR+project%3Aopenstack%2Fdjango_openstack_auth%29+status%3Aopen+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D-2&title=Horizon+Review+Dashboard&My+Patches=owner%3Aself+status%3Aopen&Needs+Approval%2C+not+me=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3E%3D1+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+label%3AVerified%3E%3D1%252cjenkins+NOT+owner%3Aself+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D2+NOT+label%3ACode-R 16:19:48 eview-1+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D1%252cself&Needs+Approval=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3E%3D1+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+label%3AVerified%3E%3D1%252cjenkins+NOT+owner%3Aself+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D2+NOT+label%3ACode-Review-1&Not+Reviewed+by+Me=NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D-1%252cself+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D1%252cself+limit%3A50&Needs+Reverify=label%3AVerified%3C%3D-1%252cjenkins+branch%3Amaster+NOT+label%3ACode-Review 16:19:48 %3C%3D-1+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1&5+Days+Without+Feedback=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3E%3D1+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+label%3AVerified%3E%3D1%252cjenkins+NOT+owner%3Aself+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D2+age%3A5d&No+Negative+Feedback=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3E%3D1+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+label%3AVerified%3E%3D1%252cjenkins+NOT+owner%3Aself+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D-1+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D2+limit%3A50&With+Negati 16:19:50 ve+Feedback=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+NOT+label%3AVerified%3C%3D-1%252cjenkins+NOT+owner%3Aself+label%3ACode-Review-1+limit%3A20&Work+In+Progress=NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3E%3D1+NOT+owner%3Aself+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1 16:19:54 wow 16:19:56 wow, that was a mistake 16:20:05 * david-lyle facepalm 16:20:08 :-) 16:20:13 IRC cuts off longer link :-( 16:20:25 aieee 16:20:35 you can generate it from the repo :) 16:20:48 I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader 16:20:57 lol 16:21:23 http://goo.gl/ldHJEX would be the shortened version of that, I think 16:21:26 david-lyle: I pasted the similar one to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Horizon/Reviews about a month ago. I will update it. 16:21:46 amotoki: ok, I missed that 16:22:14 with the creator repo, you can also modify to your taste 16:22:52 so the agenda for today: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Horizon 16:23:10 #topic Current breakages, for general awareness (jpich) 16:23:26 Yo! For Your General Awareness: 16:23:41 The pep8 job has been broken for about a month, you can't trust that your code is correct by running ./run_tests.sh -p so please be careful. pawels and rdopieralski are working on fixing this (thank you so much!), thanks to amotoki as well for helping to pinpoint where some of the issues are coming from 16:23:54 https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1347472 for the gory details and keeping track of the upcoming patches *refreshes page* 16:24:03 together with radomir we are working on the issue 16:24:26 The 2nd point is that there's some new intermittent gate failures popping around because of horizon, 2 seem related to the recent scss patch. Not sure if it's because of errors that got in due to lack of pep8ing, but something we'll want to keep an eye on and fix 16:24:34 thanks pawels and rdopieralski 16:24:36 I've been tagging those with "gate" when I see them, https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bugs?field.tag=gate 16:24:48 16:25:11 oops, I think there's an additional one, that may or may not be a horizon bug 16:25:23 https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1349774 16:25:24 Thank pawels and rdopieralski, please let us know if you need help or when you need reviews for these ones :) 16:25:36 sure, thanks ! 16:25:42 does that bug really mention 2500 pep8 failures? 16:26:11 david-lyle: It's in the list. derekh proposed a revert of the giant bootstrap patch as it introduced the issue, I'm not sure what's the best course of action 16:26:30 jpich, see it now 16:26:32 thanks 16:26:47 tzumainn: if you remove the line "select = H236" you will get that number of errrors 16:26:51 I'm a bit anxious huge patches are getting in without being pep8'd, but maybe we can catch the fixes in time with bug 1347472... It'll have to be soon though because from what I understand this breaks the TripleO gate 16:26:54 not sure either, I don't think a revert is the right course of action 16:27:26 http://paste.openstack.org/show/88908/ show error count per flake8 check. 16:27:29 tzumainn: There's about 700 new errors, and from what I understand a couple of 1000s we missed because of new rules that were introduced in a new version of hacking. These ones we'll add to the ignore list for later, we just want to fix what used to work for now 16:27:45 parsing _stylesheets.html shouldn't be pep8 related 16:28:39 H904 and H307 were introduced in hacking 0.9 and hacking 0.9 came after the bug was introduced :-( 16:28:50 what is H904 16:28:50 ? 16:29:01 H904 is a hacking rule number. 16:29:11 I understand that, what's the rule 16:29:12 ? 16:29:28 H904 (Wrap long lines in parentheses instead of a backslash) 16:29:43 good grief 16:29:48 who cares 16:29:50 oops 16:29:52 lol 16:30:14 Definitely for the explicit ignore list till some later time 16:30:23 * david-lyle returns inner voice to internal only 16:30:26 in a galaxy far far away 16:30:53 ah we've reviewed larger patches :-) 16:30:53 of course we need to discuss which rules should be enabled in horizon, especially like H904. 16:31:37 amotoki: thanks for catching the larger issue, I'm not trying to discount the checks, I think they're valuable, at least most of them are valuable 16:32:16 so we will ignore H904 for the begining but we also need to make a long term decision here 16:33:14 what was the other new check added? 16:33:34 H307 16:33:43 and that is ? 16:33:48 H307: like imports should be grouped together 16:34:16 I thought we already had that, did it become more stringent? 16:34:41 It checks all imports are groupd into three categories: standard, thirdparty and project. 16:35:23 It check three groups are separated by blank line and each group does not have a blank line inside group. 16:35:47 most horizon codes do not follow this. 16:36:22 hmm, I thought we already went through that exercise, apparently I'm mistaken 16:36:31 we have several groups: standard, thirdpaty, django, horizon and openstack_dashboard. 16:36:36 Nope, it's been up to the human reviewers so far 16:37:04 Previously grouping check is up to reviewers :-( 16:38:17 I think it'd be a nice to have, maybe -- but likewise, later, once we're back to where we used to be with pep8 :) 16:38:28 ok, I was thinking alphabetical I bet https://github.com/openstack/horizon/commit/cea720e793777519dab542fdc4105dd456e000f6 16:38:34 anyway 16:39:43 sounds like we're targeting the old and will move forward with supporting the new rules, which I would propose for early Kilo 16:39:55 Sounds reasonable to me 16:40:01 as we don't need extra code thrash at this point in the release 16:40:28 Nope, we don't need all the juno-3 patches to have merge conflicts on feature freeze day :-) 16:40:47 jpich: exactly, we'll have enough fun already 16:41:03 #topic Open Discussion 16:41:04 totally makes sense. 16:41:10 Support for cisco DFA in horizon BP is approved but it show up in http://goo.gl/RG6HQt under Blueprints (Review). Is that correct? or list needs to be updated? 16:42:14 nlahouti: that heading means code for blueprint up for review 16:42:24 not that the blueprint needs to be reviewed 16:42:50 david-lyle: thx for clarification. 16:42:57 nlahouti: np 16:43:24 Hi david-lyle: Q on your comment "Given past performance and review capacity, I would expect maybe 20 blueprints to land". I assume approved BPs will be part of the 20, correct? 16:43:29 I think "Approval" here means "need another +2". 16:44:45 mxu, there are approved blueprints that won't make it for one reason or another, code's not ready, not enough reviews, etc 16:45:50 mxu, the reality is, I don't honestly know who's going to stick with a patch long enough to get it in, who's not, how many reviewers are going to look at a particular patch, which ones will be overlooked 16:46:11 so I approve blueprints that are in line with the direction of the project 16:46:38 if someone is slated to or actively working on a blueprint, I attempt to assign it to a milestone 16:46:56 that person may come or go at any point depending on many factors 16:47:00 david-lyle: thanks for the answer. The code for our BP has been for a long time. Can core reviewers please review and approve? 16:47:02 I can't predict that 16:48:21 mxu, I'm not sure which blueprint you are concerned about 16:48:21 i have a kind of announcement :) 16:48:33 announce! 16:49:08 some time ago (1.5 month) there was a proposal in openstack-dev ML: lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-June/037054.html 16:49:26 david-lyle: here is the code patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83863/ and here is the bp: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-cisco-dfa-support 16:50:11 finally, that proposed framework for building UIs for projects dealing with complex input data (like Heat, Mistral, Murano) got its name - 'Merlin' and wiki at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Merlin 16:51:15 there is not yet a line of code (active design and planning of PoC), but I think that Horizon community should know about it 16:51:52 especially, because I hope that Merlin (if things go well) will become a part of Horizon eventually 16:52:06 Thanks tsufiev. Is the OpenStack UX team involved as well? ( https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/UX ) -- I usually find their inputs extremely valuable in that domain :) 16:53:11 I'm working with tqtran on JavaScript practices. Including instructions to set up editors with jshint & formatting. 16:53:21 jpich, so far I've spoken only with Jacki Bauer, she has provided some initial feedback 16:53:24 Besides Sublime & Eclipse, are people any other edtiors for JS? 16:53:26 jpich++ 16:54:01 rbertram: the js support inside pycharm is excellent 16:54:05 tsufiev: I like the idea 16:54:08 pycharm or webstorm yeah 16:54:09 rbertram: and it supports jshint, etc 16:54:23 jomara: I will look into that! 16:54:37 Horizon can't really target Murano, Mistral and Solum yet 16:54:56 david-lyle, so, the most general overview is to provide framework for building complex wizards, for projects where conventional forms & wizards fail in some way 16:55:06 however, it would be possible to build the UI toolkit into Horizon 16:55:12 and build from there 16:55:51 One of my desires is to completely rebuild the Launch Instances interface, because of the same sort of issues 16:56:19 it's a usability nightmare and doesn't effectively solve the problem, it needs to be built from the bottom up 16:56:27 s/built/rebuilt/ 16:56:30 er... 16:56:39 david-lyle, is it ok for Merlin to come under 'UI' program? My management asked me to clarify that issue 16:56:42 tsufiev: ive seen your proposal doc, it looks great (from the perspective of configuring heat stacks) 16:57:08 Sounds like a discussion that would be appropriate on list, esp considering the time left 16:57:20 tsufiev: I think that would make sense, but that may have to go through the TC 16:57:34 we might want to have more discussion first 16:57:36 :) 16:57:54 jomara, it would be great if you suggested some feedback - either in ML or in wiki :). I'll more official letter in a next few days 16:58:04 tsufiev: sure, mail it out 16:58:05 *I'll write 16:58:45 jpich, sure, I will make a ML announcement 16:58:49 mxu: my understanding is you change is still not merged in neutron, until it is, I'm not investing a lot of review time in the Horizon part 16:58:54 tsufiev: Cool! 16:58:55 s/you/your/ 16:59:00 tsufiev: thanks for sharing this! I will take a lot from another UXers point of view and give feedback too 16:59:03 tsufiev: thanks 16:59:38 We're out of time. Thanks everyone! Have a great week. 16:59:41 #endmeeting