16:01:31 <eglute> #startmeeting interopwg
16:01:31 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Mar  1 16:01:31 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is eglute. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:32 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:01:35 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'interopwg'
16:01:49 <eglute> Hello Everyone!
16:01:54 <markvoelker> o/
16:02:17 <mguiney> hello!
16:02:26 <eglute> #topic agenda
16:02:32 <eglute> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreRoble.14
16:02:37 <eglute> please add/update as needed
16:03:31 <eglute> #topic PTG follow up
16:03:54 <eglute> Thanks everyone that came to PTG, we had some great discussions and lots of work that needs to be done as a result
16:04:06 <eglute> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RefStackInteropWGAtlantaPTG
16:05:14 <eglute> we have a few action items from PTG, but I don't think they are ready to go over yet
16:05:28 <hogepodge> o/
16:05:57 <eglute> we talked about Vertical program pilot: NFV
16:06:14 <eglute> markvoelker would you give a summary of that?
16:06:50 <eglute> #chair markvoelker hogepodge
16:06:51 <markvoelker> Sure.  I put some notes in the pad, but in a nutshell we're using NFV as a pilot for developing "vertical" or "use case specific" programs since it's a well-established use case for OpenStack with particular requirements
16:06:51 <openstack> Current chairs: eglute hogepodge markvoelker
16:07:23 <markvoelker> We had some folks from the telco side of the house attend the PTG and talked through a few things, and we're working with OPNFV to start picking through requirements
16:07:44 <zhipeng> o/
16:07:46 <luzC> o/
16:07:55 <markvoelker> The general idea is that we should be able to draw up an initial guideline around the 2016.08 timeframe
16:08:43 <markvoelker> Most of what we did in ATL was brainstorming and knowledge sharing, but I'll start putting together some structure in the next couple of weeks
16:08:47 <eglute> there was definetly a lot of interest in it.
16:09:12 <eglute> thank you markvoelker
16:09:17 <markvoelker> Meanwhile, Jose from OPNFV is starting to pick through tests to see what might be reusable, and has added 2016.08 tests to functest.
16:09:28 <markvoelker> So: stay tuned. =)
16:09:30 <eglute> nice
16:09:46 * markvoelker ends summary
16:09:56 <eglute> does anyone have questions about NFV + openstack?
16:11:37 <eglute> #topic Add-on programs pilot
16:11:55 <eglute> we also talked about Add-on programs pilot, markvoelker would you give a brief summary?
16:12:32 <markvoelker> Sure
16:13:10 <markvoelker> The basic idea here is that even though some projects haven't reached wide enough deployment to be included in the existing Powered program, people that do deploy them still have an interest in interop
16:13:49 <hogepodge> I had a chance to speak to several projects at the PTG.
16:13:58 <markvoelker> The idea behind add-on programs is that a product (e.g. a distro, public cloud, appliance, etc) could get the "OpenStack Powered" mark and additional "add on" badges showing what projects in addition to the core ones it supports
16:14:26 <markvoelker> Those "Add-on" projects would help define guidelines laying out what interoperability means for them, similar to how we do the guidelines for the Powered programs
16:14:51 <markvoelker> We think it's best to start with a handful of "pilot projects" for this and open it up wider once we get the structure nailed down
16:15:05 <markvoelker> The projects we talked about piloting with are Heat, Ceilometer, Trove, and Designate
16:15:21 <markvoelker> (I know I talked with the Trove/Designate PTL's and they're certainly interested)
16:15:44 <markvoelker> hogepodge is going to play point on getting add-on programs off the ground.
16:15:47 * markvoelker ends summary
16:15:56 <eglute> thank you markvoelker!
16:16:04 <hogepodge> Ceilometer, sadly is likely off the table. They deprecated their API.
16:16:16 <eglute> hogepodge is that still the case? what is their plan?
16:16:34 <hogepodge> We could look at some of the adjacent programs, but they're focusing on making a performant backend that other reporting tools can plug in to
16:17:05 <zhipeng> Heat would be a good choice
16:17:16 <hogepodge> Heat is excited, will draw up their plans. They're going to look into how to test that specific components exist within a cluster.
16:17:39 <hogepodge> Designate is also excited, they say coming up with a set of apis will be no problem.
16:18:05 <hogepodge> Trove will also be participating.
16:18:07 <eglute> i am excited about DNS
16:18:32 <hogepodge> Overall I think it's a good group to start with, and we have a good amount of buy in.
16:18:33 <eglute> i think trove and heat are also great
16:18:42 <eglute> too bad ceilometer is off the table
16:19:10 <eglute> but 3 is a good pilot to start with
16:20:21 <hogepodge> I asked the teams for a list of capabilities and tests to cover them, and I'll work them into the new schema once it's ready. I didn't want to burden them right now with an incomplete format.
16:20:30 <eglute> any other comments on PTG?
16:20:45 <hogepodge> I'll pop into their meetings from time to time to remind them.
16:21:10 <eglute> thank you hogepodge
16:21:19 <eglute> #topic 2017.08 Guideline
16:21:35 <eglute> it is that time again! Time to start identifying new capabilities
16:22:14 <eglute> We need a couple volunteers to help with scoring
16:22:16 <markvoelker> We had a few folks sign up to start scoring/contacting PTL's in Atlanta, but we need more
16:22:20 <markvoelker> (see etherpad)
16:22:40 <markvoelker> Anyone want to tackle Keystone and/or Nova?
16:23:04 <luzC> I'll keystone
16:23:13 <luzC> *take
16:23:19 <markvoelker> thanks luzC
16:23:31 <eglute> thank you luzC!
16:23:41 <eglute> any takers for nova?
16:23:43 <luzC> it will be my first time scoring... I might ask a lot
16:23:56 <eglute> luzC please do!
16:25:10 <eglute> ok, we still need some volunteers for Nova... will ask in our channel later, maybe we will get takers that way
16:26:00 <eglute> anything else on the new guideline?
16:26:36 <eglute> #topic Flag tests that require second set of user credentials
16:26:48 <eglute> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/428847/
16:27:11 <eglute> AI from PTG: Chris to work on refactoring in the next week or so.
16:28:07 <eglute> looks like it also needs bugs filed for reworking the tests?
16:29:31 <eglute> hogepodge i am guessing you hadn't had a chance to take a look at this after PTG?
16:30:02 <hogepodge> not yet
16:30:37 <eglute> cool, next topic then
16:30:43 <eglute> #topic Name change
16:31:00 <eglute> markvoelker i think this one is you mostly
16:31:35 <markvoelker> Yeah, not much to tell here.  The governance patch merged, the infra one is sitting in the queue.  We didn't really expect much action there until after the PTG, so we'll check in again soon
16:31:39 <eglute> thanks for submiting #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433414/
16:31:46 <markvoelker> One note on bug tracking though:
16:32:03 <markvoelker> One of our outstanding items was either to move bugs to a new project in Launchpad or migrate to Storyboard
16:32:14 <markvoelker> We have an *very* low count, so there's not much work either way.
16:32:37 <markvoelker> At the PTG we had a quick talk and spoke with diablo_rojo and decided we'll just take advantage of that and move to storyboard
16:32:57 <eglute> thats right
16:33:43 <eglute> so what do we need to do for storyboard?
16:33:48 <eglute> just create one?
16:34:36 <markvoelker> eglute: there are some scripts and things to migrate projects.  I think (?) hogepodge was going to work with diablo_rojo on figuring out what needs doing.
16:34:47 <eglute> sounds good to me.
16:35:11 <hogepodge> I think that refstack made the leap, no? catherineD
16:35:56 <catherineD> hogepodge: not yet ... we are still with launchpad
16:36:01 <diablo_rojo> markvoelker, yep that was the plan :) See if there is anything SB is missing that you guys need so I can talk to the other SB devs to get it implemented.
16:36:25 <hogepodge> catherineD: heh, the refstack room topic says you're on storyboard. must be from last time :-D
16:36:44 <catherineD> hogepodge: yea ..
16:37:14 <luzC> the idea will be to close the queue on launchpad right? it would be bad to have launchpad and storyboard at the same time... or how transition looks like?
16:37:43 <catherineD> luzC: that is RefStack's plan ...
16:37:52 <markvoelker> luzC: TBD by hogepodge, but yes, the idea is to drop LP.
16:38:16 <luzC> catherineD markvoelker cool, get it :)
16:38:51 <eglute> cool, thank you hogepodge and diablo_rojo on working on this
16:39:00 <hogepodge> +1
16:39:10 <eglute> hogepodge let us know when you are ready to move us :)
16:39:28 <eglute> anything else on name change?
16:39:33 <markvoelker> nope
16:39:49 <eglute> #topic New components/add-on programs
16:40:02 <eglute> i think we already talked some about it.
16:40:15 <markvoelker> We already covered the basics here, but we did want to mention that both of those programs rely on schema 2.0
16:40:28 <markvoelker> Which we also discussed in ATL last week. =)
16:40:51 <eglute> yup, new schema patch is here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/430556/
16:41:11 <eglute> for those that havent looked yet
16:41:13 <markvoelker> Basically we think the basics look good, but we discussed some simplifications.  I volunteered to try to pen those into a patch, which I'll try to do this week
16:41:26 <eglute> thank you markvoelker!
16:41:52 <markvoelker> I'll also add in some visual/written explanations if possible it's easy to wrap our collective heads around
16:42:00 <eglute> that would be great, thanks
16:42:06 <markvoelker> One other open point was metadata tags
16:42:24 <markvoelker> We like that we have an open list (e.g. we don't need to iterate on the schema to add new metadata tags)
16:42:37 <markvoelker> But we also know RefStack (et al) are going to need to use some specific tags
16:42:46 <markvoelker> So those probably deserve some kind of formal lifecycle
16:43:06 <catherineD> markvoelker: ++
16:43:11 <eglute> +1
16:43:24 <markvoelker> I think we generally agreed on the need to formalize those, but I don't think we actually gave an AI to anyone to start hammering on it?
16:43:36 <eglute> i dont think so
16:44:25 <eglute> markvoelker can you include them as part of schema 2.0 patch?
16:44:29 <catherineD> markvoelker: I can take that at least from RefStack's usage
16:45:00 <catherineD> to identify the meta data that RefStack needs
16:45:12 <markvoelker> Let's have catherineD take a crack at identifying required tags first...I'm frankly not going to have time to do all that this week. =)
16:45:58 * markvoelker has a bit on his plate and is traveling internationally next week
16:46:19 <eglute> thank you catherineD and markvoelker
16:46:44 <eglute> are there any other comments on this topic?
16:47:12 <eglute> if not, last topic of the day:
16:47:20 <eglute> #topic No meeting next week
16:47:40 <eglute> there is a board meeting next week and markvoelker is traveling. so no meeting next week.
16:47:59 <eglute> but if you want to help with any interop action items, let us know :)
16:48:11 <eglute> #topic open discussion
16:48:16 <eglute> anything else for this meeting?
16:48:48 <eglute> in that case, we can end early.
16:48:52 <eglute> thanks everyone!
16:48:57 <eglute> #endmeeting