17:03:34 <ativelkov> #startmeeting Murano 17:03:35 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jan 14 17:03:34 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ativelkov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:03:36 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:03:38 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'murano' 17:03:46 <tsufiev_> hi there 17:03:48 <ativelkov> Hi Muranoers! 17:03:59 <tnurlygayanov_> Hi )) 17:04:16 <IgorYozhikov> Hi 17:04:28 <ativelkov> Seems like this is our first meeting ater NY holidays 17:04:47 <ativelkov> I hope you all had a good vacation 17:05:06 <ativelkov> This is our agenda for today: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/MuranoAgenda#Next_meetings 17:05:43 <ativelkov> Let's start with the AI review 17:06:00 <ativelkov> #topic AI review 17:06:24 <ativelkov> First item was "update https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Roadmap for 3.0 and 4.0" 17:06:55 <ativelkov> Do I understand correctly that this was done? 17:07:00 <tsufiev_> this was on me, done 17:07:10 <ativelkov> Good, thanks 17:07:24 <ativelkov> #info roadmap for 0.3 and 0.4 was updated 17:07:54 <ativelkov> next one, tsufiev make sure that 0.4 known issues are marked with 0.4.1 milestone 17:08:25 <tsufiev_> again, done, but not all the known issues of 0.4 are planned for 0.4.1 17:08:29 <katyafervent> I guess wee did it ob our bug triage 17:08:39 <katyafervent> * we 17:08:47 <ativelkov> tsufiev_: why are not they? 17:09:09 <ativelkov> Some has to be fixed only in 0.5? 17:09:32 <tsufiev_> because as tnurlygayanov said, we don't have time to setup lab for Neutron in 0.4.1 17:09:35 <tnurlygayanov_> or 0.5+ 17:10:09 <tnurlygayanov_> yes, I will try to do this on this week. 17:10:21 <ativelkov> This is important 17:10:36 <ativelkov> 0.5 is not a proper release for bugfixing 17:10:51 <katyafervent> Do we have list of known issues in our openstack wiki page? 17:10:55 <ativelkov> it will introduce completely new functionality, and even some of the features will be missing 17:11:25 <ativelkov> so all the fixes for 0.4.* have to be done in 0.4.* 17:11:45 <tsufiev_> katyafervent: yes, we have 17:11:47 <ativelkov> if if don't do somthing important in 0.4.1 it means that we will have to do 0.4.2 17:11:59 <tnurlygayanov_> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/ReleaseNotes_v0.4#Known issues 17:12:18 <ativelkov> or - as another option - we may postpone 0.4.1 a bit, to have more time for neutron testing 17:13:29 <ativelkov> tnurlygayanov_: what are your estimates: how much time may we need to setup lab and fix them? 17:13:35 <tnurlygayanov_> I belive that we will have time for testing with Neutron load balancer before the end of Jun 17:13:50 <katyafervent> and why do we need fuel for that? 17:13:58 <ativelkov> Jun?? 17:13:58 <tsufiev_> tnurlygayanov_: June :)? 17:14:19 <tnurlygayanov_> it is one-two days 17:14:20 <ativelkov> Jan, I hope ) 17:14:30 <tnurlygayanov_> yes, sorry, Jan ) 17:15:05 <ativelkov> Is this Neutron LB a separate module, which does not come installed with MOS? 17:15:20 <tnurlygayanov_> katyafervent, we do not need fuel for it 17:15:30 <katyafervent> tnurlygayanov, ok) 17:15:32 <tnurlygayanov_> yes 17:16:11 <tnurlygayanov_> we can install and configure it with devstack and I plan to do this in our QA lab 17:16:25 <sergmelikyan> ativelkov, Neutron LB may be installed separatly and joined with MOS installed via Fuel 17:16:43 <ativelkov> Ok, but for distribution we will need to either add its support to Fuel or to have a separate deploymnet routine for it 17:17:00 <ativelkov> I see 17:17:09 <tnurlygayanov_> today we finished murano installation script, which allow to install Murano using the devstack - I plan to test Neutron LB and this script in parallel. 17:17:31 <katyafervent> but we are working on devstack integration, right? could it helped with this issue? 17:17:44 <katyafervent> Oh, cool 17:17:56 <ativelkov> So, let's then plan to add Neutron LB support into the 0.4.1 - postponing the release if nessesary 17:18:06 <tnurlygayanov_> yes, need to add this LB in Fuel installation 17:18:20 <ativelkov> Any objections on this? 17:18:24 <katyafervent> ok, I'll add it to 0.4.1 deliverables 17:18:27 <tnurlygayanov_> ativelkov, ok 17:18:43 <sergmelikyan> What integration we are talking about? 17:19:05 <ativelkov> #agreed add Neutron LB support into the 0.4.1 - postponing the release if necessary 17:19:33 <sergmelikyan> Integration Neutron LBaaS to MOS? How it is related to Murano? 17:19:51 <ativelkov> It is a different topic indeed 17:20:11 <tnurlygayanov_> sergmelikyan, it is for another meeting ) 17:20:23 <ativelkov> let's continues with the AIs 17:20:34 <ativelkov> "consider possibility to provide the way to share environments across BUs without involving admins" 17:21:05 <ativelkov> I guess this is irrelevant now, as we have changed the suggested implementation for per-tenant isolation, right? 17:21:28 <tsufiev_> it was the thing that our unidentified guest on the previous meeting wanted 17:22:03 <ativelkov> Was that about environments or about service definitions? 17:22:33 <tsufiev_> wait a minute.... 17:22:52 <tsufiev_> i don't remember, need to see logs 17:23:27 <tnurlygayanov_> yes, in 0.4.11 we can just make per tenant isolation, but for 0.5 need to support RBAC. 17:23:37 <tnurlygayanov_> *0.4.1 17:24:28 <katyafervent> do we have time for it in 0.5? 17:24:50 <tsufiev_> <tsufiev> we decided that there should be 'Common' Services&Metadata objects + per-tenant Services and objects 17:24:52 <tsufiev_> <tsufiev> Common one should be read-only via WebUI, but can be changed via file-system 17:24:52 <ativelkov> It depends on how do we implement metadata storagde 17:24:53 <tsufiev_> <tsufiev> per-tenant ones are modifiable by any user of that tenant 17:24:55 <tsufiev_> <Guest36589> this is instead of enabling ownership of the object by a tenant with a sharing attribute? 17:25:10 <tsufiev_> <Guest36589> post .6 i hope this can be reconsidered. We have many BUs that will innovate and want to share with related BUs with having to have the provider IT involved. 17:25:23 <ativelkov> Ah, I see 17:25:27 <ativelkov> We have plans for this 17:25:57 <ativelkov> If we use Glance for storing artifact, we may use the same system for sharing artifacts which is currently present for sharing images 17:26:09 <ativelkov> but for 0.4.1 this will not be possible 17:26:47 <ativelkov> implementation for 0.5 is tentative - depends on the glance arttifacts repo implementation and our adoption of it 17:26:57 <ativelkov> But this is planned anyway 17:27:33 <ativelkov> Are we done with AIs? 17:27:51 <katyafervent> ativelkov, I guess so 17:27:57 <ativelkov> Then lets move on 17:28:02 <ativelkov> #topic Status for release 0.4.1 features 17:28:17 <katyafervent> Release 0.4.1 is on it's way, wiki page is up to date with information about it 17:28:54 <ativelkov> Will 0.4.1 contain the devstack integration which we have discussed above? 17:29:03 <katyafervent> So we do have two main features: per-tenant isolation and managing key-pairs 17:29:23 <katyafervent> Also we'll improve dynamic UI - it should be work faster 17:30:17 <tsufiev_> (but if we use OS Lab on the opposite side of the world, you won't notice that) 17:30:19 <tsufiev_> :) 17:30:33 <katyafervent> Yes, and it's almost done afaik 17:30:36 <ativelkov> I see 17:30:42 <ativelkov> good, thanks 17:31:16 <ativelkov> moving on 17:31:18 <ativelkov> #topic Changes in per-tenant isolation 17:31:56 <ativelkov> So, since out last meeting there it was decided to change the proposed implementation of per-tenant isolation 17:32:18 <tsufiev_> yes, and it simplifies an implementation very much 17:32:45 <ativelkov> There will be no managable "common" repository, instead, commons will be "forked" at the moment when the tenant uses Murano for the first time 17:33:02 <ativelkov> katyafervent - is the new approach documented on wiki somewhere? 17:33:43 <katyafervent> ativelkov, Yes, the specification was updated 17:33:58 <katyafervent> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Specifications/Per_Tenant_Isolation 17:34:03 <ativelkov> Thanks 17:34:20 <ativelkov> #info new approach to per-tenant isolation is documented at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Specifications/Per_Tenant_Isolation 17:35:10 <ativelkov> #topic New DSL engine 17:35:46 <ativelkov> So, speaking about new DSL engine - stanlagun, can you share the update? 17:37:25 <ativelkov> stanlagun, are you here? 17:37:34 <stanlagun> there is a prototype that has nearly everything that is required for 0.5 with exclusion of correct YAQL function registration. I'm going to make if complete today and commit to custom repository so that it can be used as a code base 17:37:50 <ativelkov> ah, thanks 17:38:01 <stanlagun> I also expect to have demo service (AD) on new DSL 17:38:06 <stanlagun> by tomorrow 17:38:14 <ativelkov> #info new DSL proptotype is almost ready, will include an engine PoS and a demo service 17:38:29 <ativelkov> #action stanlagun to submit the sources to a custom repo 17:38:34 <ativelkov> Thanks 17:38:37 <rakhmerov> guys, sorry if that's a dummy question.. Do you have this new DSL documented somewhere? 17:38:46 <rakhmerov> I'm curious to take a look 17:38:56 <ativelkov> rakhmerov: yes, there is a blueprint and etherpad 17:39:06 <stanlagun> it is slightly outdated 17:39:15 <rakhmerov> could you please provide links? 17:39:48 <stanlagun> I'm going to write more detailed and up-to-date description as soon as I finish with PoC 17:40:01 <rakhmerov> ok 17:40:04 <stanlagun> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MuranoMetadata 17:40:21 <rakhmerov> ok, thanks 17:41:01 <ativelkov> so, the spec will be updated during this week, right? 17:41:41 <ativelkov> #action stanlagun to update the DSL description according to the implemented PoC 17:42:21 <ativelkov> And then we will have a meeting with Dmitry Meytin to demostrate the proptotype to him and discuss the contribution possibilities 17:42:34 <ativelkov> #action ativelkov to schedule a meeting with Dmitry 17:43:07 <ativelkov> That is all on DSL 17:43:47 <ativelkov> #topic Open Discussion 17:44:10 <ativelkov> Does anybody has something unplanned to discuss? 17:44:33 <katyafervent> I have not 17:45:02 <IgorYozhikov> nope 17:45:10 <ativelkov> Well, then I think we are done 17:45:17 <ativelkov> Thanks for joining 17:45:19 <katyafervent> Thanks everyone! 17:45:24 <ativelkov> #endmeeting