17:02:19 #startmeeting Ironic 17:02:19 #chair devananda 17:02:20 Meeting started Mon Jun 15 17:02:19 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is NobodyCam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:02:21 Welcome everyone to the Ironic meeting. 17:02:22 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:02:24 The meeting name has been set to 'ironic' 17:02:25 Current chairs: NobodyCam devananda 17:02:26 o/ 17:02:28 Of course the agenda can be found at: 17:02:29 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic#Agenda_for_next_meeting 17:02:29 o/ 17:02:30 o/ 17:02:31 o/ 17:02:37 FYI: Nobodycam is in poor bandwidth area and may drop at any moment 17:02:38 o/ 17:02:43 #topic Greetings, roll-call and announcements 17:02:43 Roll-call: Who's here for the Ironic Meeting? 17:02:45 o/ 17:02:46 o/ 17:02:48 :) welcome all 17:02:53 o/ 17:02:55 o/ 17:02:57 \o 17:03:08 Good UGT everyone. :) 17:03:17 hi 17:03:22 great to see everyone thhis fine monday 17:03:28 o/ 17:03:44 lets kickk this off 17:03:45 #topic announcements: 17:03:45 Devananda IS in Tel Aviv. WE hope he's having fun :) 17:04:14 sounds sunny :-) 17:04:15 NobodyCam: and BadCub: are also traveling this week 17:04:33 I here tel Aviv is quite warm this time of year 17:04:34 eep.. sorry.. lateness happened 17:04:43 :) 17:04:59 any other announcements 17:05:25 BadCub: I know you have to leave early. want to talk about the mid-cycle? 17:05:36 NobodyCam: yeah 17:05:39 #topic Mid-Cycle 17:06:09 Spoke with devananda this morning. He has sent a request to Facilities at HP Seattle to host the mid-cycle Aug 12-14. 17:06:21 Polling for dates is considered officially closed 17:06:50 do you have the poll results? 17:06:56 getting now 17:07:26 10 Yes for Aug 12-14 17:07:35 One vote for Aug 5-7 17:07:47 Two votes for Aug 19-21 17:07:52 BadCub: so does being 100% solid on those dates depend on HP facility response? 17:07:59 not a high viter turnout. 17:08:05 s/viter/voter 17:08:30 jroll: from what devananda and I discussed, if HP is negative, we will try to find alternative location 17:08:45 ++ 17:08:46 BadCub: ok, so hold off on booking travel :) 17:09:07 jroll: yes please. I hope to have answer from HP facilities by EOW 17:09:14 BadCub: location in seattle or location in US (west)? 17:09:29 ok, thanks :) 17:09:37 rloo: the location will be Seattle 17:09:46 BadCub: thx 17:09:50 yw 17:09:55 * lucasagomes hopes he can go 17:09:59 ++ 17:10:26 I will keep everyone updated as SOON as I hear back 17:10:36 awesome thank you BadCub for all the effort in getting this planned 17:10:49 My pleasure 17:11:07 any thing else about the mid-cycle 17:11:22 yes 17:11:37 if we can get an early headcount, I can try to setup a small group block at one of the hotels 17:11:57 if not, that's cool too 17:11:57 :) maybe we can use the white board 17:12:02 yes 17:12:04 +1 whiteboard 17:12:09 or another etherpad we can plan work on 17:12:10 ++ 17:12:30 ++ 17:12:38 ++ 17:12:48 +1 17:13:06 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-liberty-midcycle 17:13:09 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-liberty-midcycle 17:13:11 cool new pad or whiteboard /me is good with either 17:13:11 done. 17:13:17 I am traveling this week and won't be on a great deal, if someone would kindly volunteer to set up said whiteboard/epad, I would be deeply greatful 17:13:23 or that ^^^ 17:13:27 awesome Thank you jroll 17:13:29 jroll: thank you! :) 17:13:39 * jroll adds to whiteboard 17:13:47 :) 17:14:02 so we can use that for mid-cycle planning 17:14:48 ok then moving along 17:15:09 #topic SubTeam: status report 17:15:10 Posted on Whiteboard 17:15:12 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicWhiteBoard 17:16:05 added some notes on neutron integration stuff there 17:16:05 I would like to ask... Should we add BiFrost as a official sub-team? 17:16:15 would love eyes on the specs to see how insane we are 17:16:15 NobodyCam, and inspector, and inspector :) 17:16:21 NobodyCam: dtantsur +1 17:16:27 NobodyCam: I updated irmc part, and I'd like core team to review irmc deploy driver #link https://review.openstack.org//#/q/owner:+naohirot%2540jp.fujitsu.com+status:+open,n,z 17:16:31 jroll: dtantsur ++ 17:16:41 jroll: naohirot: awesome thank you 17:16:43 NobodyCam: +1 on both bifrost and inspector 17:17:06 i was going to say -1 on bifrost and inspector. 17:17:09 TheJulia: would like to handle the bifrost section moving forward? 17:17:12 what about ironic-lib then 17:17:15 rloo: oh 17:17:16 and ironic 17:17:25 NobodyCam: Absoloutely 17:17:28 NobodyCam: liberty-1 is Jun 25, so what is the current status of core team's review? 17:17:29 or +1 17:17:34 NobodyCam, official subteam? 17:17:38 guess it depends on what these statuses are for etc 17:17:49 lucasagomes: (listed on the whiteboard) 17:18:04 ah... +1 17:18:10 lucasagomes, that means, I'll put the major news about inspector on the dashboard every week :) 17:18:18 NobodyCam: what features are planed to be part of liberty-1? 17:18:22 and ditto for bifrost 17:18:30 I figured it would a quick way for folks to stay updated on 17:18:33 dtantsur: but i like your email messages :) 17:18:34 naohirot, whatever we land? 17:18:40 rloo, I hope so :) 17:18:42 dtantsur: \o/ 17:18:43 and ya ironic-lib should prob also be htere 17:19:02 Nova sub-team would like feedback on: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1289048 Is it still an issue? 17:19:03 Launchpad bug 1289048 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "Ironic nova driver spawn() makes too many redundant calls" [Low,Confirmed] 17:19:06 dtantsur: I'm fine with adding inspector/bifrost, but i wanted to understand what would be reported there 17:19:16 bifrost and inspector don't affect ironic directly. 17:19:25 jlvillal: we've somewhat mitigated it but it could be better 17:19:38 rloo, major news for those interested 17:19:38 dtantsur, w00t 17:19:48 jlvillal: I suggest you spin up devstack and maybe list the calls that currently happen on a delpoy 17:19:51 jroll: Thanks. Trying to figure out if we should try to get someone working on it. 17:20:01 jlvillal: it's pretty low priority 17:20:03 dtantsur: It's not clear to me that whatever we land means 17:20:06 jroll: Okay. Thank you. 17:20:15 jlvillal: if it was a problem then my team would be all over it :P 17:20:20 naohirot: it really is 'wahtever we land' 17:20:22 :) 17:20:26 naohirot: of course, there are priorities 17:20:30 naohirot, it literaly means: we're trying to land as much stuff as it's possible, we can't make any promises 17:20:33 naohirot: so maybe that's what you might want to know 17:20:33 jlvillal, as jroll said :-) 17:20:42 naohirot: I don't believe we have set any riorities for l-1 17:20:45 Thanks all 17:20:46 naohirot, whatever we manage to land, will enter liberty-1. that's my understanding 17:20:50 priorities * 17:20:58 rloo: no core member can do just wait? 17:21:07 so speaking of "liberty-1" has everyone had a chance to look at the release model spec? 17:21:09 NobodyCam, boot-deploy split is one 17:21:21 a lot of stuff depends on it 17:21:26 naohirot: i don't know what you mean. Are you saying that core members just wait for ?? 17:21:27 naohirot: cores try to review everything, but we're all human unfortunately 17:21:54 naohirot, you mean, what you can do? review other's patches to free some core reviewer's time 17:21:57 jroll: i have no idea how liberty-1 fits in with your new release model. is it mentioned in the spec? 17:22:02 naohirot, and timely address comments on your patches of course 17:22:11 rloo: basically we ignore openstack's milestones 17:22:13 that's all (we all) can do to speed up the thing 17:22:16 rloo: I don't know the meaning of whatever land. 17:22:29 jroll: that's what i thought. so 'liberty-1' won't mean anything to ironic. 17:22:32 dtantsur: yep thatspec ha landed 17:22:40 rloo: correct. 17:22:58 jroll, yup I did :-) 17:23:00 rloo: therefor I thought that all I can do is just waiting for good luck? 17:23:07 naohirot, I started reviewing your iRMC stuff today, just didn't have time to finish. stay tuned please :) 17:23:10 didn't vote yet, I've to finish my thoughts but so far so good 17:23:15 will try to finish tomorrow 17:23:22 thanks for the answer on the global requirements 17:23:39 lucasagomes: cool, ty sir 17:23:57 naohirot: no, good luck doesn't help much. i find that if patches are really well written etc, they get reviewed faster etc. but again, the reviewing isn't an automated process and we are all busy and have our own priorities 17:24:05 I think we are out of topic here? 17:24:12 naohirot: also, large patches take a lot of time to review. 17:24:18 lucasagomes: aren't we always :) 17:24:21 +1 lucasagomes 17:24:25 lucasagomes: yep 17:24:25 +1 17:24:26 +1 17:24:32 jroll: I know all we are human, but as I mentioned many time, I'd like to know the priority of core member's tasks. 17:24:32 let's move on 17:24:35 #topic New dashboard proposed by huawei 17:24:35 #link https://github.com/niuzhenguo/ironic-dashboard 17:24:35 #link https://review.openstack.org/191131 17:24:53 hi all, I proposed the dashboard project. 17:24:57 oh, i had questions about subteams. will ask later. 17:24:58 this as I under stand was put up like last week 17:24:58 why isn't it on stackforge btw? :) 17:25:06 oh, you did apply for it, right? 17:25:07 I first heard of it this mornign 17:25:20 so, I have a few concerns here. 17:25:40 I have a few concerns as well 17:25:41 it's a horizon plugin like tuskar-ui, 17:25:51 hi zhenguo 17:25:56 1) this is the first, afaik, time that any of the ironic team has heard anything about this. it's a 2500 line code drop without git history, etc. 17:26:05 and recently I see other porjects like magnum apply it for openstack. 17:26:09 2) it's based on very outdated code. uses pxe_deploy_kernel etc. 17:26:22 3) it's importing tuskar. tuskar has nothing to do with ironic or horizon. 17:26:28 tuskar is only a tripleo thing 17:26:36 4) test coverage is lacking 17:26:55 yes, it's a init repo only on github now 17:27:10 5) last point, the proposal puts this under the ironic team. is the ironic core team supposed to maintain this? 17:27:12 zhenguo, oh, what does it add on top of Tuskar UI? 17:27:33 it's not on top of tuskar ui 17:27:36 and on that note, is any of the ironic core team interested in maintaining this? 17:27:38 zhenguo: with only a very quick look I think its early to be perposing to the govenence repo at this time 17:27:40 ah, I see 17:27:42 it's for horizon 17:27:57 zhenguo: it's importing tuskar e.g. https://github.com/niuzhenguo/ironic-dashboard/blob/32012e7ce3bad710a6cfcbab3ad375a5d371c4dc/ironic_dashboard/baremetal/nodes/tests.py#L26 17:28:09 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/191142/ 17:28:28 I have to agree with NobodyCam. I think this is good for stackforge so it can itererate and evolve, but it is not the one UI gui for openstack considering we also know of a JS one in development now. 17:28:43 jroll, it's split from tuskar so left something to be cleaned later :) 17:28:54 right that's including the project under the ironic umbrella 17:29:16 zhenguo, what's the reason of the split? 17:29:16 regardless of stackforge or openstack, does the ironic core team want to and/or have the time to maintain this? 17:29:17 s/openstack/ironic/ 17:29:28 jroll, on stackforge, it does not matter 17:29:31 I fully support a horizon plugin for ironic, fwiw 17:29:39 dtantsur: if it's under ironic in governance, it does. 17:29:46 dtantsur: as I understand, tuskar-ui is specifically geared towards TripleO 17:29:48 jroll: if it goes into openstack umbrella, I say a vote is required. 17:29:57 jroll, I think most have the intention to have something... A UI was even part of the graduation plans and Josh was working on one right? 17:30:05 ironic needs it's own dashboard for self-services needed 17:30:06 jroll: I also share your concerns about maintaining this 17:30:09 my suggestion is that some description is written similar to our spec process. it isn't clear that this is a plugin for horizon. 17:30:09 zhenguo, well, yes. Did you talk to the folks about splitting away the common code? 17:30:11 but it needs to mature, it seems that there's more people focused on different efforts to do the same thing 17:30:26 lucasagomes: honestly the thing josh was working on was really only about graduation, we don't care to use it. 17:30:37 and I also do like the idea of a ironic dashboard 17:30:39 right 17:30:48 i've asked before if anyone wanted to pick it up, no takers yet 17:30:53 zhenguo, also, tuskar UI is under Horizon program. why do you want to put this thing under the baremetal? 17:31:00 I think that, as any project that wants to be part of the Ironic umbrella it needs to first go somewhere else 17:31:02 mature 17:31:04 dtantsur, not really split, I reuse some code of that 17:31:08 and then we can talk about including it or not 17:31:14 lucasagomes: ++ 17:31:21 lucasagomes, ++ 17:31:29 it seems that this project is not at this stage already 17:31:35 +1 17:31:38 we cna give a feedback on the idea, so yes having a dashboard is nice 17:31:45 yes, maybe I can put it to stackforge first 17:31:47 but I won't discuss this project specifics because it's not yet time 17:31:51 zhenguo, +1 17:32:04 how about we give Ironic folk a week or so to look at it and revisit in next meeting? 17:32:11 ++ for stackforge, and I believe it should aim for Horizon program, not for Ironic 17:32:14 that was the path for bifrost, IPA and inspector (discoverd at the time) 17:32:15 oh I like starting on stackforge 17:32:23 ++ 17:32:34 once we have something substential we can promote it to the ironic umbrella if people have an agreement 17:32:36 NobodyCam: I think it's clear it needs to mature, let's not spend another meeting on it :) 17:32:40 because we then commit to maintain it 17:32:49 jroll: ack + 17:32:57 i don't think this is solely up to the cores. I'd like to hear from the ironic community as to whether this is wanted/useful to them. 17:33:01 so as a horizon and tuskar-ui core member, I think I can enrich it quickly. 17:33:05 rloo, +1 17:33:22 zhenguo: I suggest you (and your team?) discuss this more with the ironic team in our channel, and we can work together on it. it was quite odd having this much code dropped without hearing anything about it 17:33:30 I'm going to put a action item for zhenguo to put it up on stackforge 17:34:00 I'd prefer if a discussion/something is mentioned in email so the community is aware of it 17:34:19 rloo, ++, and so that comments are not lost 17:34:20 rloo: +1, zhenguo can you send an email to the list once it's on stackforge? 17:34:35 #action zhenguo put Ironic dashup on stackforge and bring attention to it via the ML 17:34:37 yeah an email to the ML. Saying your working on a dashboard 17:34:39 ^^ ?? 17:34:44 +1 NobodyCam 17:34:45 and people can even start to collaborate 17:34:52 NobodyCam, +1 17:34:56 :) 17:34:59 or come out of the woodwork with their own 'UI'... 17:35:03 yes, 17:35:03 and ofc, zhenguo thanks for that! 17:35:07 zhenguo, http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/creators.html 17:35:42 thanks krtaylor 17:35:45 zhenguo: yes this is a great start :) I look frward to seeing wheree it goes 17:35:56 ++ for stackforge, zhenguo, I just did this, let m ekno wif you have questions 17:36:04 It might be worth talking to the horizon team about this too because I know they are working on something to split the different project panels out into separate repos -ui e.g. magnum-ui etc. 17:36:14 sambetts: good point 17:36:24 sambetts: that's what this is 17:36:29 zhenguo is a horizon core 17:36:50 :) awesome 17:37:08 awesome.. good to move on? 17:37:19 ok 17:37:26 #topic Mircoversion guideline 17:37:27 #link https://review.openstack.org/187112 17:37:38 NobodyCam: thanks, it's my turn 17:37:44 yep 17:37:45 :) 17:37:48 really hope you guys can give suggestion for microversion guideline in api-wg. The current version I think already address the concern between nova and ironic. Hope this can merged early then avoid there is third version created by other project :) 17:38:01 the only different I think it is error response body compare to ironic spec. So I think the review won't be too hard. :) 17:38:16 And one question I want to ask quickly at here 17:38:17 * lucasagomes adds to the TODO list 17:38:27 neutron is going to implement microversion also. There is one more thing is "experimental" flag, which introduced in nova spec also, but nova currently don't want to support it. So want to you guys opinion whether Ironic want to support it. 17:38:50 alex_xu: to date, ironic hasn't used the 'experimental' flag. 17:38:52 alex_xu: as in an experimental microversion? 17:38:56 I'd be very -1 on that 17:39:06 yeah we didn't use any experimetal flag 17:39:18 alex_xu: does any project want the experimental flag? If not, just delete it. 17:39:21 jroll: yes, it is expected to be a method to introduce new api 17:39:30 oh please no 17:39:42 I feel dtantsur's pain 17:39:46 nova-baremetal was experimental, we saw how that went 17:39:51 rloo: only in neutron spec now, neutron didn't implement it yet 17:39:54 btw I'm planning to have basic support for microversions for inspector as well https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ironic-inspector/+spec/api-versioning 17:39:55 -2 on ironic using the experimental flag from me 17:40:16 -2 also. Just delete it and wait for (hopefully never) some project to ask for it. 17:40:19 yea, people have concern that is a way to enable non-standard api 17:40:35 yeah, if it's exposed people will use it 17:40:37 regardless 17:40:58 ok, looks like nova and ironic on same side, let me talk with neutron team :) 17:41:00 well, we'd block it (I hope) but don't even provide it as a possibility. makes it easier then :) 17:41:30 ya 17:41:35 to be clear 17:41:44 I'm okay with it being part of the api-wg guidelines, saying it's ok 17:41:52 ok, thanks all, no more question, but please help me on the review, really hope get consistent between nova and ironic first :) 17:41:52 but I will never let a patch with that flag land in ironic 17:42:16 jroll: ok, I see now 17:42:29 jroll: but if that is in the guidelines, *someone* will say, hey, it is in the guidelines, so why can't it go into ironic. easier not to have that discussion. 17:43:02 :) 17:43:30 any other question for alex_xu 17:43:31 rloo: that's what the -2 is for :P 17:43:32 anyway 17:43:34 alex_xu, on thing is not clear in guidelines IMO 17:43:38 and jroll, we don't know who the future core reviewers will be for Ironic ;) 17:43:51 alex_xu, in Ironic we used to "hide" new features, when old version is used 17:44:07 alex_xu, we (at least some of us) no longer want to do it for non-breaking changes 17:44:22 alex_xu, not sure if it's implied by the guideline or not 17:44:52 dtantsur: oh, my head hurts. did we decide that? not to hide new features? 17:45:13 ok, how about ask neutron team opinion again, if they still think expermentail usefule for them, I will bring this up to ML again, to see if whether we need put in api-wg 17:45:58 rloo, we had an agreement between me, mordred and devananda :) but I'm close to -2 anything that will hide new features 17:46:22 I was actually planning to propose patch removing this behavior for existing non-breaking microversions, and see what people say 17:46:38 dtantsur: oh, didn't know that. we need some way to capture/communicate those things. 17:46:42 dtantsur: I'd like to see that patch 17:47:08 rloo: I believe it was just chatter at this point 17:47:08 dtantsur: hide new features in old version is behavior nova we have i think 17:47:25 alex_xu, that's what I'm strongly opposed to 17:47:35 (and won't implement for inspector) 17:48:15 alex_xu: guidelines are 'guidelines'. it doesn't mean that they have to be followed, right? 17:48:15 dtantsur: why? the new feature only be introduced by new microversion 17:48:31 alex_xu, I don't see a sane reason to do it for non-breaking change 17:48:39 can we not have this conversation here for the millionth time 17:48:40 (I obviously see a reason for a breaking change) 17:48:44 take it to the ML 17:48:45 heh yeah 17:48:45 jroll, ++ 17:48:48 ++ 17:48:50 rloo: emm...but the goal is we have consistent implementation, at least for the part people want to supported I think 17:49:06 jroll: ok 17:49:17 alex_xu: sorry, but we've had this conversation in ironic a million times 17:49:30 and we only have 10 minutes left 17:49:36 ... and we can't come to agreement anyway 17:49:36 yep: 17:49:41 jroll: but the decision is affected by the guidelines, depending on what it means to have guidelines. 17:49:49 rloo: then review the guideline spec. 17:49:51 jroll: I see, thanks let me talk about this also :) 17:49:54 dtantsur: ^^ 17:50:08 ok moving on? 17:50:11 +1 17:50:14 yes 17:50:16 #topic Open Discussion / Food For Thought 17:50:23 * jroll eats this thought food 17:50:35 that was the last topic on the agenda 17:50:37 nom-nom 17:50:39 alex_xu: I wanted to say thanks for staying up so late to discuss this. 17:50:49 alex_xu, yeah totally, thank you 17:50:50 jlvillal: :) 17:50:55 if nobody has open discussion items feel free to continue with microversion discussions I guess 17:51:03 alex_xu: and for all the work you've put on this .. 17:51:04 lucasagomes: np 17:51:05 naohirot, you had some concerns in the other topic. If u want to bring it up here 17:51:11 but wanted folks to be able to speak up on other things 17:51:31 rloo: you had somehting I cut you off from above? 17:51:40 lucasagomes: so I think in general it sounds like we aren't communicating priorities down to driver authors etc 17:51:53 lucasagomes: or people not active in the day-to-day discussions in general 17:51:55 NobodyCam: nope, i'm good. oh the subteam stuff. 17:52:09 NobodyCam: did we want to decide about adding bifrost/inspector to subteam reports? 17:52:40 jroll, right, yeah well reviewing stuff is a bottleneck for us :-( 17:52:52 jroll: +1. i thought there was some etherpad with liberty priorities. am trying to recall if it (priorities) was in the email deva sent out. 17:53:00 +1 fro adding bifrost and inspector to subteam report 17:53:03 rloo: I do like reading the subteam reports on the whiteboard just to keep uptodate on what going on 17:53:05 lucasagomes: yeah, but sounds like naohirot has no ideas about what our priorities are right now (boot/deploy split etc) 17:53:10 rloo, we can have a lazy consensus :) 17:53:11 we had a spreadsheet last cycle with some priorities 17:53:22 +MANY of the spreadsheet again 17:53:23 rloo: this was around brainstorming so not sure how accurate https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-liberty-priorities 17:53:27 * for 17:53:30 lucasagomes: I got out of sync 17:53:37 NobodyCam: if people think it would be useful to have bifrost/inspector, let's add them then. 17:53:51 NobodyCam: as long as dtantsur and TheJulia are OK with providing that info :) 17:54:00 yeah, that priorities etherpad isn't very clear 17:54:12 naohirot, I see, I think we all are kinda out of sync in the priorities right now? I think we all agree boot and deploy split is one of them 17:54:18 the network is another I would say 17:54:43 * dtantsur thinks ENROLL state aka finishing the damned state machine is a priority as well 17:54:51 lol, +1 dtantsur 17:54:53 yeah 17:55:04 dtantsur: ++ 17:55:10 so let's put it down folks in a spreadsheet like we had for Kilo? If people agree with it 17:55:22 * NobodyCam will try and get reviews done while traveling 17:55:26 I'll admit we've been horrible about reviewing the irmc patches 17:55:26 jroll, any update from networking neturon vlan and port aggregation? 17:55:27 or etherpad, whatever is best 17:55:30 * naohirot I was invited to another channel. so I got lost what we are discussing right now 17:56:04 naohirot: it Open Discussion 17:56:08 it's* 17:56:14 we should have priorities 'spelled out' for each cycle. somewhere. 17:56:19 with 4 minutes left 17:56:23 rloo: lucasagomes +1 17:56:26 +1 on documenting priorities 17:56:27 maybe I'll ask in the ironic channel. 17:56:44 If priorities could be linked to patches for review, that is a big bonus too. 17:56:50 we can get BadCub to help there I believe 17:57:03 * jlvillal realizes that takes a lot of work to keep that in sync. 17:57:06 i think email is good wrt priorities. etherpad is good too as long as folks don't modify it (too much). otherwise, the priorities will change and i won't know. 17:57:09 tracking and keeping things organazided 17:57:09