17:01:40 #startmeeting murano 17:01:41 Meeting started Tue Sep 2 17:01:40 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ruhe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:01:42 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:01:44 The meeting name has been set to 'murano' 17:02:09 o/ 17:02:13 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/MuranoAgenda#Agenda 17:02:50 we're not going to expect too many people today. some are busy with internal work some are on vacations 17:03:21 but, katyafervent, dteselkin could still be here? 17:03:53 Hi :) 17:04:09 hi 17:04:21 hooray. we have kind of a quorum :) 17:04:43 #topic keystone trusts wrt Juno release shedule 17:04:53 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/auth-for-long-running-requests 17:05:13 Stan did a good work and updated the whiteboard with his findings 17:05:45 there is still a chance we can get this feature working in Juno. But it should be optional 17:05:53 sergmelikyan: is that correct? 17:06:34 ruhe, perfectly 17:06:43 ok 17:07:00 i hope sjmc7 and angus will provide feedback on that too 17:07:28 anything else for this topic? 17:07:40 * ruhe thinks we can set record meeting time today 17:08:01 #topic drop https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/murano-api-exception-handling from juno 17:08:02 :) 17:08:59 we still don't gave a general agreement on how it should be done and we didn't have a chance to have a broad discussion on this topic. so i suggest to drop this BP from Juno 17:09:14 any objections? 17:09:26 no objections 17:09:54 i hope sergmelikyan doesn't object too 17:10:28 #topic drop https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/dynamic-ui-specify-no-explicit-name-field from juno 17:10:34 ruhe, no objection, we should revise this BP in the next cycle, but some part of the job was made in J 17:10:50 we still don't gave a general agreement on how it should be done and we didn't have a chance to have a broad discussion on this topic. so i suggest to drop this BP from Juno 17:11:06 any objections? 17:11:08 nope 17:12:04 #action ruhe to drop murano-api-exception-handling and dynamic-ui-specify-no-explicit-name-field from juno plans 17:12:15 #topic documentation for juno release 17:12:24 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano-docs 17:12:54 sergmelikyan, dteselkin do you have doc items assigned on yourselves? 17:13:18 i'd personally like to help to document building of images with diskimage-builder 17:13:35 ruhe, not yet, but will do 17:13:43 ruhe cool! 17:14:07 sergmelikyan, dteselkin: please review this document. it's going to be our plan for the next month 17:14:30 sergmelikyan, I picked you to help with api specufication 17:14:51 we also need to provide update on actions 17:15:35 yeah, katyafervent2 feel free to assign at least mirantis folks to specific items :) 17:16:10 ok 17:16:41 we're ready to switch to open discussion unless there is a new important topic to discuss right now 17:17:39 #topic open discussion 17:18:24 i had a question about environment deployments 17:18:54 sure 17:19:01 when an environment is deployed, should you be able to deploy it again? 17:19:09 btully, hi! go ahead 17:19:27 allow me to elaborate 17:19:49 in the ideal case - yes 17:20:05 currently after an environment is successfully deployed, the status gets set to "Ready to deploy" and the api returns a status of "pending" 17:20:17 but currently redeploy is not working 17:20:32 from a UX standpoint, we never really inform the user that the deployment was successful 17:21:03 btully, i have not seen this behaiviour 17:21:43 session is opend in your environment and it becomes pending 17:21:54 https://www.dropbox.com/s/l391le6xvazyeo7/pending-status-components.png?dl=0 17:22:19 but it shoud happen only in case of adding new apps ir deleting existing 17:23:02 it looks like session gets deleted if env is deployed 17:23:50 just wondering if it would be worth it to have a status of "Deployed" provided it were possible 17:26:11 you need to find out why environment has new session 17:26:16 my 2c before i disappear again :) - it'd be nice to see 'Ready' if there's nothing to do, or 'Ready to deploy' if there is (i.e. an application has been added) 17:26:49 katyafervent2: it looks like session gets deleted when env is deployed 17:26:55 that seems pretty reasonable from UX standpoint 17:27:00 then a new one is created which has status pending 17:27:22 sjmc7, thats what I have in my environment 17:28:13 so after you deploy an env, what status do you see? 17:28:35 it can ve named deployed if environment state changed after deployment 17:28:45 ready 17:28:58 interesting. ok i will test a few more times 17:29:07 thanks 17:29:34 dont hasitate to ping me via email or irc 17:30:26 muranopl-based packages report status from muranopl. for instance https://github.com/murano-project/murano-app-incubator/blob/master/io.murano.apps.apache.Tomcat/Classes/Tomcat.yaml#L50 17:31:03 sergmelikyan: is there any way to do something similar from heat SC based packages? 17:32:08 not from within the heat template, no 17:32:26 ruhe, you mean hot packages? I don't think so, cause whole template is sent directly to the Heat. There are no stages in between 17:32:57 we could send a status indicating that it's being dealt with by heat 17:33:19 yeah, at least that. as a first step 17:34:05 polling stack status shouldn't be a problem either 17:35:58 ok. i think we understand the problem here. sergmelikyan let's discuss this with stan and see how we can fix this 17:36:13 'k 17:36:58 btully: we'll get back to you with this topic tomorrow (after discussin it with stan) 17:37:17 any other questions? 17:38:55 waiting 2 more minutes before closing the meeting 17:42:50 all right 17:42:53 thanks everyone 17:42:58 and bye bye 17:43:04 #endmeeting