17:00:37 <sergmelikyan_> #startmeeting murano
17:00:38 <openstack> Meeting started Tue May 20 17:00:37 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is sergmelikyan_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:39 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:00:42 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'murano'
17:01:09 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Roll Call
17:01:13 <sergmelikyan_> Serg Melikyan
17:01:15 <ankurrr> Ankur Rishi
17:01:19 <sjmc7> Steve McLellan
17:01:28 <stanlagun> Stan Lagun
17:01:33 <iyozhikov> Igor Yozhikov
17:01:40 <katyafervent> Kate Fedorova
17:01:55 <gokrokve> Georgy Okrokvertskhov
17:02:12 <akuznetsova_> Anastasia Kuznetsova
17:02:20 <sergmelikyan_> Welcome to Murano weekly meeting :)
17:02:37 <katyafervent> Hi guys!
17:02:47 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Action Items Review
17:03:28 <dteselkin> Hi
17:03:41 <gokrokve> Hi.
17:03:56 <gokrokve> Dmitry did you start work on MSSQL Cluster porting?
17:04:01 <sergmelikyan_> Looks like there are no Action Items from previous meeting
17:04:11 <gokrokve> We have a customer who wants this..
17:04:39 <sergmelikyan_> #info no AI from previous meeting
17:04:56 <katyafervent> gokrokve, He did, actually we have some issues with AD deployment now
17:04:58 <dteselkin> gokrokve, yes, but actually I was working on fixing AD issues today.
17:05:01 <sergmelikyan_> #topic BugScrab/BP Review planning
17:05:18 <dteselkin> However, this is a requred part of MsSQL cluster anyway
17:05:25 <sergmelikyan_> Guys, let's stick to the agenda :)
17:05:27 <gokrokve> Thanks
17:05:30 <tsufiev_> hi there!
17:05:39 <gokrokve> BP review for which release?
17:05:47 <gokrokve> Juno M1?
17:05:51 <sergmelikyan_> Yes
17:05:59 <gokrokve> ok
17:06:13 <sergmelikyan_> #link http://doodle.com/cqf4biexd45ngi7i - BP Review Doodle
17:06:33 <gokrokve> There is a new process in OpenStack to use a repo with specs and do a review in Gerrit.
17:06:38 <sergmelikyan_> Please, open this doodle and let me know if you have suggestion with another time, that not mentioned there
17:06:45 <gokrokve> I think we can adopt this process too.
17:07:12 <gokrokve> It allows to keep a history of review and also enables a good communication between team members.
17:07:56 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: I am not sure - this is very long process. that may work well for Nova, but not for projects that move faster
17:07:57 <tsufiev_> gokrokve: is there one single repo for specs of all OS projects?
17:08:17 <gokrokve> tsufiev_: It is a repo per project
17:08:21 <katyafervent> Is it UTC format?
17:08:49 <katyafervent> let's do Friday
17:08:57 <sergmelikyan_> katyafervent: yes
17:09:22 <sergmelikyan_> Time in doodle is in UTC, so please add or subtract your timezone difference from UTC
17:09:37 <sjmc7> i can be available whenever
17:09:46 <katyafervent> how will we approve the decision?
17:10:13 <sergmelikyan_> I will send mail with final date and time to ML
17:10:41 <katyafervent> Excellent! Should we move on?
17:10:45 <sergmelikyan_> #info will send message with final date & time for BugScrab/BP Review
17:10:48 <gokrokve> Ok. Do we have a list of BP prepared?
17:10:53 <sergmelikyan_> #link http://doodle.com/9yzmx5gpe336ac34 - BugScrub
17:11:14 <gokrokve> Please make sure we have all BP on launchpad.
17:11:25 <sergmelikyan_> Let's do the same for BugScrab doodle. We have no requirement to do this right now, just do not forgot to do this today :)
17:11:28 <gokrokve> I will open couple BPs today for a new requested features.
17:11:52 <sjmc7> i'll make sure anything i know we'll need has a blueprint by then too
17:12:08 <gokrokve> I think we need to have bugscrub meeting on regular basis.
17:12:09 <katyafervent> gokrokve, cool! we have two days to prepare BP list
17:12:31 <gokrokve> Minimum once a month.
17:12:47 <gokrokve> Bi-weekly probably will work fine.
17:12:52 <katyafervent> +1 we can set first Monday of the month
17:13:10 <gokrokve> ok
17:13:32 <gokrokve> Lets have it on 1st Monday each month. Any objections?
17:14:00 <sjmc7> nope, sounds good to me
17:14:05 <akuznetsova_> no
17:14:15 <tsufiev_> +1
17:14:26 <sergmelikyan_> #info BugScrab meeting will be held at 1st Monday of the month
17:14:37 <gokrokve> Cool. Serg, please record this. In a court they say "For the record"....
17:15:29 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: did it above ^^ :)
17:15:34 <gokrokve> Thanks
17:15:39 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Documentation Status
17:16:01 <katyafervent> So the next meeting will be on the 2d of June
17:16:13 <katyafervent> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano-documentation-status
17:16:27 <sergmelikyan_> katyafervent prepered a list of topics that need to be published in our docs ^^^^
17:16:44 <tsufiev_> An error occured while loading the pad
17:16:50 <sjmc7> ah, cool. i will see if our team has anything to add to this
17:16:53 <katyafervent> Here is the link with some points we need to improve, does somebody have something to extend this list?
17:17:14 <sergmelikyan_> Any important topic that are not already covered in docs and not in the list above?
17:17:44 <sjmc7> this looks like a good list - the package docs are the most crucial IMO
17:17:49 <katyafervent> Do I need to create a BP as the result? or file bugs for each point?
17:17:56 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: it will be very interesting, since guys just starting working on Murano and I think constantly hit some not covered topics
17:18:18 <sjmc7> yes. like us :)
17:18:22 <tsufiev_> katyafervent: funny, we have docs not listed in this etherpad
17:18:25 <akuznetsova_> katyafervent: i think you can create BP, this is not a bug
17:18:59 <sergmelikyan_> Let's go with a BP for new topics and bugs for improvements
17:19:32 <sergmelikyan_> #info we will create BP for new topics that needs to be added to the docs and bugs for improvements of existing ones
17:19:34 <katyafervent> sergmelikyan_,  got you
17:19:50 <tsufiev_> sergmelikyan_: some improvements are bigger than some new topics :)
17:20:20 <sergmelikyan_> tsufiev_: BP vs Bug not measured in a lines of code :)
17:20:32 <tsufiev_> that's true ))
17:21:07 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Review Roadmap
17:21:16 <sergmelikyan_> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Roadmap - Murano Roadmap
17:22:27 <sergmelikyan_> I think this thing better discuss after we will review BP for J1
17:22:43 <katyafervent> yes, we did not update it
17:22:51 <sjmc7> sergmelikyan_ - yeah, at this point i think we just need to tag blueprints for juno and work from that list
17:23:01 <sjmc7> we can do that friday or whenever we decide to do it
17:23:07 <akuznetsova_> why don't we have a 0.5.1 in this list? do we plan it?
17:23:28 <sergmelikyan_> I suggest to postpone this topic, and return to reviewing our roadmap on BP Review meeting
17:23:44 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: yes
17:23:45 <sjmc7> there are some things on here that are still kind of vague, too
17:23:48 <sjmc7> the 'align' ones
17:24:25 <sjmc7> we need to make a decision as soon as we can what will be the state of things for juno
17:24:33 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: I think they was created long time ago, and we should break down features to milestones and be more specific
17:24:44 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: +1
17:25:12 <sergmelikyan_> any objections about moving discussions of Roadmap review to our BP Review meeting?
17:25:19 <sjmc7> not from me
17:25:24 <tsufiev_> no
17:26:16 <sergmelikyan_> #info moved discussion of Murano Roadmap to our BP Review meeting
17:27:11 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Planning of Demo
17:27:42 <sergmelikyan_> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano_demo_plans we have a list of proposed topics for making demo
17:28:49 <katyafervent> I guess we should have separate demo on using heat templates as application definition, right?
17:28:50 <sergmelikyan_> I suggest to review this list, and add thoughts about what topic will be interesting to cover
17:29:17 <sjmc7> for me, 2 3 4 are most useful right now
17:29:30 <tsufiev_> we have already 2 dynamic UI demos for older versions - 0.2 (if i recall correctly) and 0.4
17:30:21 <tsufiev_> the only change in it since 0.4 is ability to use reference-type to some Application (by its fqn)
17:30:35 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: +1, agree topics related to exposing Murano as Application Catalog for OpenStack are most interesting ones from my POV
17:31:34 <katyafervent> All our demos should be listed here why it's not listed https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Screencasts
17:31:47 <katyafervent> Timur, please add it
17:32:19 <tsufiev_> katyafervent: will do
17:33:01 <katyafervent> what about new demo for dynamic ui and murano pl object model?
17:33:06 <sergmelikyan_> katyafervent: can you shorten this list to ones related directly to AppCatalog functionality and I think it's better to discuss this topic in ML?
17:33:14 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: what do you think?
17:33:45 <gokrokve> Good. Heat team might be interested in this demo.
17:34:00 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: in which one?
17:34:09 <gokrokve> Dynamic UI
17:34:14 <katyafervent> what do we need to discuss, we need to record demos!
17:34:51 <sergmelikyan_> discuss which one do first $)
17:35:00 <gokrokve> Also there was a questions about Ju-ju style UI in Murano.
17:35:12 <katyafervent> Does anybody want to take a topic and record short video?
17:35:19 <gokrokve> Which can be reused by other projects.
17:35:57 <akuznetsova_> katyafervent: i want, i signed in the list
17:35:59 <tsufiev_> gokrokve: first Ju-ju style should be implemented at least in Murano :)
17:36:08 <katyafervent> akuznetsova_, Great!
17:36:32 <katyafervent> Will we create BP for that ju-ju ui?
17:36:35 <tsufiev_> katyafervent: I've added 0.4 dynamic UI demo to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNd3b9CC5mU
17:36:49 <tsufiev_> meant https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Murano/Screencasts
17:38:41 <tsufiev_> katyafervent: sure we can. still there are a couple ui blueprints in drafting/discussion state...
17:38:56 <sjmc7> with the heat-template-as-a-package thing, the heat team will likely be interested in adding functionality to the existing orchestration UI
17:39:32 <tsufiev_> e.g. this one https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/murano-ui-horizon-patterns
17:39:49 <tsufiev_> or this one https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/dynamic-ui-v3
17:40:41 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: What functionality?
17:40:51 <sjmc7> dynamic UI for heat templates
17:41:28 <sjmc7> but i think we've gone a little off topic
17:41:30 <sergmelikyan_> sjmc7: they have they own implementation - not sure that our is better
17:41:56 <sjmc7> ok
17:42:10 <katyafervent> I think we need to record first 4 demos
17:42:19 <sergmelikyan_> There was a suggestion to have cross-project group to work on UI, we will explore this on the next meeting I believe.
17:42:35 <katyafervent> If somebody has nothing else to add.
17:42:45 <sergmelikyan_> tsufiev_: I suggest you to read through etherpad from our Heat/Solum/Murano meeting
17:43:18 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: ? Do you agree on list of demos?
17:43:20 <tsufiev_> sergmelikyan_: ok
17:44:02 <gokrokve> Where is the list?
17:44:18 <sergmelikyan_> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano_demo_plans
17:44:23 <sergmelikyan_> gokrokve: ^^
17:45:48 <gokrokve> yes
17:45:51 <gokrokve> looks good.
17:46:30 <sergmelikyan_> #info https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano_demo_plans - first four items should be done
17:46:43 <sergmelikyan_> #topic Open Discussion
17:46:58 <sergmelikyan_> Should we make gate tests voting?
17:48:08 <sjmc7> i discussed this with ruhe last week. if it's practical to make them voting, i'm in favor of it
17:48:13 <sjmc7> it depends how stable they are
17:49:35 <sjmc7> and also, i guess, what's common in other projects
17:50:03 <gokrokve> Do we have out CI working? Last time it put -1 due to test issues.
17:50:15 <gokrokve> It is important to have stable gate.
17:50:30 <tsufiev_> i'd like to draw your attention to the drafting dynamic UI v3: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/dynamic-ui-v3
17:50:47 <tsufiev_> it has a link to etherpad inside
17:50:58 <sergmelikyan_> I am not sure, I think it is quite stable, but we should wait Ruslan for final call on voting gate
17:51:13 <sergmelikyan_> I think we should make it voting
17:51:33 <sjmc7> ok. the gate tests are passing at least for most commits. i can take a look at where they're not
17:51:47 <sjmc7> but agree, it can wait for ruslan to make the call
17:51:49 <katyafervent> and they will be fixed quicker :)
17:53:05 <tsufiev_> speaking of that blueprint, we need to gather as much requirements before approving the spec - most probably it won't be backwards compatible with v2
17:53:26 <sergmelikyan_> Ruslan will be available from monday
17:54:08 <tsufiev_> so i encourage you to read it and comment (in launchpad or in etherpad)
17:55:23 <sergmelikyan_> tsufiev_: sure
17:56:52 <sergmelikyan_> #endmeeting