02:00:50 <zhenguo> #startmeeting nimble
02:00:51 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Nov 24 02:00:50 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is zhenguo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
02:00:52 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
02:00:54 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nimble'
02:00:59 <zhenguo> o/
02:01:14 <lei-zh> o/
02:01:48 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng, yuntongjin: are you around?
02:02:24 <shihanzhang> o/
02:02:42 <yuntongjin> hi
02:02:44 <liusheng> o/
02:02:49 <zhenguo> the agenda:
02:02:58 <zhenguo> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nimble#Agenda_for_next_meeting
02:03:10 <zhenguo> ok, let's jump in
02:03:18 <zhenguo> #topic announcements and reminders
02:03:38 <zhenguo> Our initial tempest patch has been merged yesterday
02:03:55 <zhenguo> and the infras dsvm gate has been seup as well
02:04:14 <zhenguo> thanks liusheng
02:04:48 <zhenguo> but seems there are something wrong with the devstack setup there according to the logs of my test patch
02:05:04 <zhenguo> #link http://logs.openstack.org/20/401820/1/check/gate-nimble-dsvm-tempest-plugin/4464112/logs/
02:05:22 <zhenguo> so currently our gate is broken :(
02:05:28 <shaohe_feng> zhenguo: hi
02:05:33 <liusheng> zhenguo: :(
02:05:35 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: o/
02:06:37 <zhenguo> liusheng: we don't need the devstack gate hook anymore right?
02:07:06 <RuiChen> o/
02:07:11 <liusheng> zhenguo: I don't think it need, I have referenced other project's
02:07:16 <zhenguo> RuiChen: hi
02:07:27 <RuiChen> sorry, i'm late
02:07:34 <zhenguo> RuiChen: np
02:07:42 <RuiChen> so we start?
02:07:55 <zhenguo> RuiChen: sure, haha
02:08:11 <zhenguo> liusheng: yes, so we can cleanup that hook script
02:08:14 <RuiChen> please go ahead :-)
02:08:36 <liusheng> zhenguo: which one ?
02:08:50 <liusheng> zhenguo: oh I see
02:08:50 <zhenguo> nimble/devstack/gate/
02:09:15 <zhenguo> liusheng: but without that, we can't control which services are enabled
02:09:38 <zhenguo> liusheng: I read the currently dsvm logs, seems it setup all services
02:10:12 <liusheng> zhenguo: I will check
02:10:21 <zhenguo> liusheng: ok thanks
02:10:44 <zhenguo> and we still need to add more tests including UT and functional
02:10:51 <zhenguo> especially for api and engine
02:11:27 <zhenguo> who are still working on tests now?
02:12:06 <yuntongjin> we could have a wiki/list to track test-case task
02:12:51 <yuntongjin> or have a blueprint to track
02:12:59 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: seems like there will be many test cases
02:13:12 <zhenguo> yuntong: I'm afraid it's hard to list all :(
02:13:32 <yuntongjin> can list by resource like instance/type....
02:14:02 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: yes, we already list by place them into different dir now
02:14:33 <yuntongjin> k, that works
02:14:35 <liusheng> zhenguo: about the tempest, I think it is easy to add tests for instance_type, but for instance, I am not sure...
02:14:59 <zhenguo> liusheng: yes, recently I merged the refactor patch
02:15:11 <zhenguo> liusheng: It will affect all instances related tests
02:15:20 <liusheng> zhenguo: e.g. if we add test for instance creation, it is ok to create an instance from nimble-api to ironic ?
02:15:28 <liusheng> zhenguo: Ok
02:16:02 <zhenguo> liusheng: I think it's ok, because our current devstack setup can support that
02:16:21 <liusheng> zhenguo: ok, let's try :)
02:16:32 <zhenguo> liusheng: you can just add tests for creating with the parameters we create in devstack by default
02:16:55 <liusheng> zhenguo: ok, thanks
02:17:26 <zhenguo> ok, so next, seems like we still lack the basic abilities of powering instance in our CLI
02:18:10 <zhenguo> RuiChen, shihanzhang: do we have a plan for that ?
02:18:57 <shihanzhang> i will do it  next week
02:19:12 <zhenguo> shihanzhang: ok, many thanks :)
02:19:30 <zhenguo> the contribution report:
02:19:39 <zhenguo> #link http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/nimble/90
02:20:19 <zhenguo> thanks all for that :P
02:20:56 <zhenguo> not much of announcement, anyone else have a thing here?
02:21:32 <zhenguo> ok
02:21:41 <zhenguo> #topic Ocata feature priorities
02:21:54 <zhenguo> #link https://trello.com/b/FBsIvUTp/ironic-nimble-plan
02:22:04 <zhenguo> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nimble
02:22:15 <zhenguo> really so many things to do
02:22:55 <zhenguo> but seems we only have about 3 developers full time dedicated to nimble now, which is less than we startup :(
02:23:25 <liusheng> zhenguo: :(
02:24:02 <liusheng> zhenguo: attract new comers in Bug Smash :)
02:24:19 <zhenguo> liusheng: I hope so, hah
02:24:55 <zhenguo> or maybe we can add some simple bug on launchpad to attract new developers?
02:25:37 <zhenguo> but we are not a offical project, seems nobody want to join to a new startup project :(
02:26:16 <liusheng> zhenguo: new startup project can make them easy to become core members, hah
02:26:28 <zhenguo> liusheng: hah, that' true
02:27:16 <zhenguo> maybe we can announce a new core member in mailing list, that seems the best way to attract new developers, lol
02:28:21 <liusheng> zhenguo: which day we want to announce our project to public ?
02:28:35 <zhenguo> liusheng: I would to do that by this week
02:28:46 <zhenguo> do you still have any concerns about that
02:28:49 <zhenguo> ？
02:30:02 <liusheng> zhenguo: no, it is cool, I will check the tempest job and fix it today
02:30:17 <zhenguo> liusheng: thanks a lot?
02:30:37 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: do you still have some concerns?
02:31:46 <zhenguo> yuntongjin, RuiChen: wdyt?
02:32:38 <zhenguo> ok
02:32:53 <zhenguo> next week I plan to finish az and quota,
02:33:21 <zhenguo> and do you think which is the highest priority thing we need to do?
02:33:46 <yuntongjin> zhenguo: i think it's the announcement
02:34:07 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: ok
02:34:47 <zhenguo> come on, please say something here, @everyone
02:35:17 <liusheng> zhenguo: may we can share some docs about Nimble besides the Wiki, but I am not sure we have
02:35:18 <yuntongjin> i was think to add network device in nimble as new resource
02:35:38 <liusheng> zhenguo: when announcing the project
02:35:39 <zhenguo> liusheng: we only have a dev-quickstart doc currently
02:36:07 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: yes, I also want to add that
02:36:23 <yuntongjin> great, will file a BP for that
02:36:50 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: ok, thanks, and maybe we need to add a specs, and discuss there, wdyt?
02:37:48 <zhenguo> as we support to specify port type when requesting to create a new instance, but no way to scheduling a node with that type of network interfaces
02:38:29 <yuntongjin> do we have a BP for this task?
02:38:30 <zhenguo> it's unaccepatable, and we also want to support portgroup in future, which also depends on the network resources
02:38:35 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: no
02:39:04 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: can you help to add a bp for that, or maybe also draft a specs :)
02:39:19 <yuntongjin> will do
02:39:32 <zhenguo> yuntong: thanks very much!
02:39:49 <zhenguo> ok, what's next
02:39:57 <zhenguo> #topic open discussion
02:40:00 <luyao> zhen
02:40:06 <zhenguo> luyao: hi
02:40:36 <zhenguo> luyao: I remember you have been investigating taskflow this week, right?
02:41:20 <luyao> yes,I have something to do last week
02:41:56 <zhenguo> luyao: how about that? could we introduce flow work in our create method
02:42:03 <luyao> I want add rollback mechanism for creating intsance this week
02:42:16 <zhenguo> luyao: awsome!
02:42:36 <zhenguo> luyao: I have refactored some codes, please update you dev repo to see
02:42:38 <luyao> I 'am not sure,I need trying :)
02:42:45 <luyao> OK
02:42:58 <zhenguo> luyao: ok, thanks
02:43:22 <zhenguo> hi all, do you have other things want to discuss here?
02:43:58 <yuntongjin> luyao: add a BP for your task so that everyone can contribute
02:44:21 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: oh yes, thanks for remindering that!
02:44:52 <zhenguo> kevinz: are you around?
02:45:03 <luyao> yuntongjin: OK
02:45:10 <yuntongjin> next step, after annoucement, let's keep focus on killer feature
02:45:20 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: sure
02:45:48 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: do you think it's easy for us to add instance transfer ability?
02:46:10 <yuntongjin> like ironic did?
02:46:14 <kevinz> zhenguo: Hi zhenguo I'm here just now :D
02:46:29 <zhenguo> kevinz: oh, hah
02:46:42 <zhenguo> yuntongjing: like cinder volume
02:46:54 <yuntongjin> k, i see
02:47:02 <zhenguo> kevinz: do you have some suggestion for us, like do we need to add more docs?
02:47:09 <yuntongjin> transfer b/w tenenats?
02:47:16 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: yes
02:48:00 <zhenguo> kevinz: as we want to announce the project in mainling list this week, not sure if we are ready
02:48:01 <yuntongjin> try file a BP to discuss, i prefer it's a low P task
02:48:18 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: yes
02:48:54 <kevinz> zhenguo: Wow cool, push nimble to big-tent?
02:49:25 <zhenguo> kevinz: no, not ready for big-tent, just announce in the mailing list :P
02:49:32 <yuntongjin> should pay more focus on feature that related HW
02:49:54 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: we are open source, lol
02:49:56 <yuntongjin> kevinz: that's the plan
02:50:40 <yuntongjin> HW = Hardware 8-)
02:51:04 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: oh, sorry, I misunderstood, lol
02:51:19 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: I think it means huawei, hah
02:51:31 <yuntongjin> my bat
02:51:44 <yuntongjin> my bad
02:51:55 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: hah
02:52:48 <zhenguo> oh, any other things want to discuss here?
02:53:12 <yuntongjin> not much from here
02:53:27 <kevinz> good luck to nimble :D
02:53:35 <zhenguo> kevinz: thanks
02:54:11 <zhenguo> do you think notifications should be a high priority thing for us now?
02:54:33 <zhenguo> notifications of nimble, or leveraing ironic's notifications
02:55:03 <yuntongjin> i don't think so
02:55:04 <shaohe_feng> zhenguo: I'm back
02:55:15 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: o/
02:55:28 <zhenguo> yuntongjin: ok, maybe later
02:55:30 <yuntongjin> focus on hardware feature
02:56:12 <RuiChen> agree with yuntongjin, notification should not be high
02:56:48 <shaohe_feng> RuiChen: do we have a priority list?
02:56:55 <zhenguo> RuiChen, yuntongjin: ok, but we need to consider charging in future
02:57:20 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: not cureently
02:57:42 <shaohe_feng> zhenguo: do we need spec for the BP?
02:58:02 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: for new bp, I think we can try to use specs
02:58:21 <zhenguo> shaohe_feng: but for some thing easy to implement seems not needed
02:58:57 <RuiChen> yes, and we can discuss details in the comments
02:59:39 <zhenguo> yes, and we need to file bugs for patches
02:59:56 <zhenguo> should follow the offical way
03:00:13 <RuiChen> zhenguo agree, but we should give a exact describe in blueprint
03:00:56 <zhenguo> RuiChen: seems not, just some summarize it's enough IMO
03:01:05 <RuiChen> i means if we don't parpere a spec for BP
03:01:26 <zhenguo> RuiChen: oh, yes, it's needed for those bps
03:01:37 <zhenguo> oh, seems time's up
03:01:51 <zhenguo> thanks everyone, we can continue to discuss in our channel
03:02:04 <zhenguo> #endmeeting