16:01:34 #startmeeting interopwg 16:01:34 Meeting started Wed Feb 8 16:01:34 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is eglute. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:35 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:01:38 o/ 16:01:38 The meeting name has been set to 'interopwg' 16:01:43 #chair markvoelker hogepodge 16:01:43 Current chairs: eglute hogepodge markvoelker 16:01:44 o/ 16:01:51 #topic agenda 16:01:59 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreRoble.12 16:02:11 o/ 16:02:13 Hello Everyone, please review and update agenda as needed 16:02:32 I'm on mobile and about to get on a train to Seattle, so my participation may be a bit spotty 16:03:09 * eglute has been on that train from Portland to Seattle 16:03:31 #topic PTG 16:03:46 once again, a reminder of PTG in a couple of weeks 16:04:02 please add any topics you wish to see: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RefStackInteropWGAtlantaPTG 16:04:40 we need to do a schedule planning. perhaps markvoelker hogepodge and i can do so before next meeting 16:04:56 any comments on PTG? 16:05:20 #topic #Boston Summit 16:05:53 o/ 16:05:54 the deadline to submit proposals got extended, so if you have a great idea, you still have time. 16:06:05 also, if you have submitted something, let us know :) 16:06:38 there is a submitted sessions section on etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreRoble.12 16:07:17 hogepodge do you know if there will be space for working groups? 16:07:21 in Boston? 16:07:48 Yes, but I have no details 16:08:14 I am wondering if I should be going to boston 16:08:21 there is no design summit anymore, is there? 16:08:22 cool, for barcelona it was part of the abstract submission process but i didnt see that this year 16:08:27 Uh, I know a bit. 16:08:59 Thechairs can request either or both space for BoF and working sessions 16:09:23 Rockyg do you know if thats been communicated? 16:09:34 and by when we need to request? 16:09:47 You go to the presentations and submit. 16:09:59 It went out on the UC mailing list 16:10:01 oh it is part of the submission process? ok then 16:10:13 * eglute needs to subscribe to that mailing list 16:10:28 i am really glad the deadline is extended then 16:10:43 #action eglute submit WG session for Boston 16:11:01 Yeah. If the wg and BoF don't show up, sumit a ticket to the email on the web page 16:11:18 gema i think you should still come for all the working group sessions and other content, if you can. 16:11:26 thanks Rockyg 16:11:31 np 16:11:33 eglute: ok, will try 16:12:05 would love to see everyone at every event, though i know travel can be hard. especially when it is a long flight. 16:12:19 anything else regarding boston? 16:12:40 #topic Flagging two network-l2-CRUD capabilities 16:12:51 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/422715/ 16:13:17 this looks good to me, any new comments or feedback? 16:13:39 I think most of the concerns have been addressed now. 16:14:14 in that case, i think it is ready to merge 16:15:16 will merge it after the meeting unless there are any last minute comments 16:15:29 #topic Flag tests that require second set of user credentials 16:15:36 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428847/ 16:16:11 that looks good to me, except markvoelker is right and next.json should also be updated 16:16:37 agree. 16:16:53 yea I will make the change to 2016.08 and next .. if we agree to flag it 16:16:57 them 16:17:06 i am in favor of flagging 16:17:14 thank you catherine_d|1 16:17:34 I would still put them as flag in next instead of remove . 16:18:10 works for me 16:18:23 ok will do .. 16:18:29 thank you catherine_d|1 16:18:37 any other comments on this patch? 16:18:48 only issue is now many capabilities will have no tests 16:19:14 are we OK with that? 16:19:34 Well, some of these things are sort of inherently two-party things 16:19:37 E.g. ACL's 16:19:47 You can test creation of an ACL with a single user 16:20:10 But can't really test that it's allowing users it should an denying users it shouldn't without a second set of credentials 16:20:23 If we can't come up with tests that meet criteria, we'll have to drop the capability 16:20:34 markvoelker: yup that is why we would still leave them in llag and not remove for chnances of test update 16:20:46 But I think there's room on some of these for that to happen, so agree with flagging for now 16:21:14 Sounds like a discussion we should have with the QA team 16:21:15 i think that is a good compromise for now, and maybe we can ask for new tests were feasible 16:21:49 who could talk to QA team about these tests? 16:22:10 I thtink they'll be at PTG... 16:22:39 meeting at the same time as us 16:22:53 that is the bad part for PTG ... 16:22:54 :-( 16:23:08 I hate the fact that I cannot meet most of the people I need to talk to 16:23:17 due to the scheduling 16:23:24 2 days overlapse ... in the past we can still attend some QA sessions 16:23:52 Yeah. Scheduling all the crossproject suff a the same time. Meh. We'll see how that works 16:24:10 yeah, first time PTG will be interesting I am sure 16:24:17 anything on the flagging patch? 16:24:19 Rockyg: I am going to have to favor kolla over interop, QA and infra :( 16:24:36 gema :( so sad to hear that 16:24:50 eglute: cannot be in all of them , it's a shame 16:25:17 gema need to work on cloning tech! 16:25:22 yep 16:25:47 speeaking of which, how is mini Egle;-? 16:26:32 Elena is great! She is going to PTG as well. 16:26:41 #topic Glance change: Implement and Enable Community Images 16:26:54 I do not remember who was going to look at that 16:28:27 o/ 16:28:42 markvoelker have you had a chance? it is not urgent i dont think. 16:29:17 I did some poking last week. Given the tests we're currently requiring, I don't think this is going to impact us for now. 16:29:33 great, thank you for looking! 16:30:07 It probably wouldn't hurt to poke a little more at the effect of the column change on older versions of OpenStack with the current tests, but I'm not seeing any "red flags" here that wouldn't be flushed out by the usual flagging process. 16:30:38 thank markvoelker. 16:30:39 So in other words: I think vendors should continue to test and if they do hit problems (likely only on very new OpenStacks), do the usual flag request thing 16:30:52 works for me. 16:31:16 I updated etherpad with a short note, and we will just keep an eye on flags 16:31:42 any other comments on the image patch? 16:32:22 #topic name change 16:32:31 markvoelker any updates on repo migration? 16:32:36 A couple: 16:32:57 1.) I have the necessary patches ready to go locally and plan on submitting them this week. 16:33:33 2.) Note that there are a couple of light patches to governance too: e.g. things in projects.yaml like refstack's entry that mention DefCore 16:33:44 (catherine, unless you want to do it yourself I'll take of those too =p) 16:34:31 3.) The last thing to be done is to get this on infra's agenda. I think there's an order here, so I'll surface it on their radar but we'll probably want a couple of the other patches to land before they get gears grinding. 16:34:51 thanks markvoelker! 16:34:57 markvoelker: go for it ...thanks 16:35:31 That's all for me. 16:36:06 thank you for all the work and updates markvoelker 16:36:40 i added notes to etherpad. i guess you will need to coordinate the refstack patch with catherine_d|1 anyways 16:37:21 anything else on the renames? 16:37:36 eglute: I think they're mostly independent actually. Stuff like the projects.yml patch is just housekeeping of the verbage and shouldn't actually affect day-to-day work 16:37:45 ah cool 16:37:46 But yes, I'll keep them in the loop. =) 16:37:59 but refstack pulls things from defcore repo, no? 16:38:09 like the guidelines? 16:38:15 Yeah, that bit is more closely tied 16:38:41 cool, i imagine it is a simple patch as well 16:39:00 i can help if needed 16:39:31 anything else? 16:39:42 #topic Schema v2.0 16:39:50 hogepodge are you still online? 16:39:54 I sent up a first patch 16:40:11 #link https://review.openstack.org/430556 16:40:19 It's a wip, and I'd love feedback as I work on it 16:40:21 thank you! 16:40:46 hogepodge: you are writing comments to your own patch? 16:40:54 Starting essentially as a design doc, then once we have the details down I will formalize the spec 16:40:55 gema he is! 16:40:58 lol 16:41:11 that's the next level of talking to yourself when working from home 16:41:26 gema some are points of discussion :-) 16:41:35 hogepodge: +1 will review :D 16:41:36 hogepodge are you starting to add new programs to the schema? 16:41:44 But yes, I need to keep myself company ;-) 16:42:08 * eglute thinks hogepodge is always in great company 16:42:19 What I have there is an example of how the schema would look 16:42:39 Trying to demonstrate the different use cases 16:42:42 hogepodge can you talk briefly on why "database" would have heat? are those just examples? 16:43:16 Yes, I started with heat and ended up changing my mind without changing the example 16:43:17 oh, it has children, got it 16:43:42 cool cool 16:43:54 where would we define what an addon is? 16:44:05 You know there's a ton of context missing in this discussion 16:44:50 Nothing I'm doing is set in stone, and I'll add more b notes and design decisions as it evolves 16:45:17 Rockyg i think the idea is to have something for PTG 16:45:18 we had a lot of discussion last midcycle in san antonio 16:45:24 I'm just saying casual glance at the discussion leads to Whaaa? 16:45:30 and i think thats what hogepodge is going based on 16:45:33 eglute: probably the lexicon and process documents 16:45:40 hogepodge cool 16:45:45 suddenly children. Made me do a double take 16:46:01 Rockyg i agree! and last midcycle was a while ago 16:46:17 hopefully at PTG we will have great discussion on this 16:46:18 I've already made a note to change that. 16:46:24 maybe Rockyg means that a Readme or a doc to go with the schema would help 16:46:27 and a productive discussion :) 16:46:48 The goal is to have a solid draft by ptg for discussion and review 16:46:59 ack 16:47:11 Yes to all of that 16:47:18 hogepodge thank you for that! 16:47:20 kewl 16:47:26 I just needed to get the seed out, and I promised today 16:47:32 * catherine_d|1 Luz has a patch ready whenever the defcore repo is renamed to Interop WG https://review.openstack.org/#/c/390881/ 16:48:02 catherine_d|1 luzC perfect! 16:48:15 In general, programs come in two flavors 16:48:34 They are composed of components 16:48:48 And components can have dependencies on other components 16:50:01 That's all I have for now 16:50:20 hogepodge what flavors for programs do you have in mind 16:51:23 Yeah. I really want to dig into this at the ptg. Haven't had much time of late 16:51:35 The names, not final, are platform and addon 16:51:57 Platform can stand alone, like OpenStack Powered Compute 16:52:08 Addon needs a platform 16:52:18 cool, that makes sense 16:52:29 thats what we talked about during midcycle too 16:52:37 So you can have things like OpenStack Powered Compute with Database 16:52:50 yup. cool. 16:52:56 (Where Database is an add-on) 16:53:08 * mguiney nods 16:53:11 makes sense 16:53:30 yup, pretty simple 16:53:36 Oh, I need to introduce mguiney ! 16:53:46 oh! hello all! 16:53:56 hello mguiney! 16:53:57 She just joined the foundation on Monday and will be working on QA and Interop 16:54:15 awesome!! welcome mguiney to interop!!! 16:54:19 glad to have you 16:54:25 mguiney: hello again:-) 16:54:28 Excellent! Welcome! 16:54:32 thank you, I'm very excited! 16:54:34 mguiney: welcome! 16:54:58 was wondering who was gonna do this with hogepodge 's new stuff 16:55:24 since we are talking about new programs, markvoelker would you give a summary on NFV? 16:55:33 Sure. 16:55:36 thank you markvoelker 16:55:41 Very briefly since we're low on time: 16:56:02 We had a preliminary chat with a couple of folks from the OPNFV community this week 16:56:30 THis was basically a "let's introduce ourselves and figure out what we're all trying to do and if we can/should work together" sort of thing 16:56:35 Thanks everyone with your patience on my very rough first draft 16:57:17 hogepodge great first draft, will help us with the discussion in atlanta 16:57:25 As folks in this meeting are aware, we've been lightly discussing vertical programs for some time, and NFV seems to be a consensus pick for a good proving ground for this sort of thing 16:57:51 There will be some NFV folks in Atlanta at the PTG joining us to discuss this a bit more and get some wheels turning together 16:58:08 In the meantime, folks may want to take a look at this section of this deck starting around slide 40: http://www.slideshare.net/markvoelker/interopwg-intro-vertical-programs-jan-2017 16:58:26 +1 they want to learn from our process and use it if it's a good fit. We're trail blazers here 16:58:28 (you've probably seen most of the rest of it before; it's the introductory "Dr. Who deck" I did a while back 16:58:49 * eglute is a big fan of Dr Who. 16:58:58 that is a great set of slides 16:59:19 * markvoelker can't take credit for good sci-fi, but is happy to use it where he's able 16:59:46 ++ 17:00:02 Anyway, this is all kind of "setting the table" stuff...in ATL I'll hopefully have some more prototype content to give us something concrete to talk about 17:00:19 * markvoelker glances at the clock and shuts up 17:00:30 thanks markvoelker for a quick summary 17:00:41 happy to answer questions in interop channel 17:00:57 markvoelker: could you give the link Dr Who set ? 17:01:11 #link http://www.slideshare.net/markvoelker/interopwg-intro-vertical-programs-jan-2017 17:01:17 thanks everyone!! I am out next week, so markvoelker and hogepodge will be running this meeting 17:01:18 #endmeeting