14:01:45 <russellb> #startmeeting nova 14:01:46 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Feb 20 14:01:45 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is russellb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:47 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:49 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nova' 14:01:52 <russellb> hello! who's around? 14:01:58 <mriedem> hi 14:02:03 <BobBall> Mostly. 14:02:14 <llu-laptop> o/ 14:02:38 <russellb> 2.5 people! 14:02:39 <russellb> :) 14:02:48 <mriedem> there were at least 3 others in -nova 14:03:01 <russellb> ok, usually a load of lurkers too 14:03:03 <russellb> onward 14:03:06 <russellb> #topic general 14:11:07 <mriedem> ok 14:11:07 <mriedem> in general, i'm all ears 14:11:07 <mriedem> did we lose russellb? 14:11:23 <russellb> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icehouse_Release_Schedule 14:11:23 <russellb> icehouse-3 closing in fast 14:11:23 <russellb> we've past the deadline for having blueprint code proposed 14:11:23 <russellb> that was tuesday of this week 14:11:23 <russellb> feature freeze is march 4 14:11:23 <russellb> < 2 weeks away 14:11:23 <russellb> so we should focus on merging blueprints 14:11:23 <russellb> any questions on the schedule? 14:11:23 <russellb> #topic sub-teams 14:11:24 <russellb> the bot is ignoring me, or we're having some irc troubles ... 14:11:24 <russellb> is this thing on? 14:11:24 * russellb taps on the mic 14:11:24 <annegentle> ow my ears 14:11:24 <annegentle> russellb: I'm seeing topics set and bot stuff 14:11:24 <russellb> seems i'm back now 14:11:32 <mriedem> wow 14:11:33 <russellb> what's the last thing you saw from me ... 14:15:30 <zhangleiqiang> ~ 14:15:30 <annegentle> russellb: you tapped the mic 14:15:30 <russellb> heh before that 14:15:30 <mriedem> russellb: the general topic tag 14:15:30 <mriedem> but everything just dumped in 14:15:30 <mriedem> reading scrollback 14:15:49 <garyk> hi 14:15:52 * johnthetubaguy got IRC connected again, and crashes through the door a bit late 14:15:53 <garyk> is this the nova meeting? 14:15:56 <llu-laptop> yes, already started with the topic #general 14:15:56 <llu-laptop> though waiting for your guys to fill the silence here 14:15:59 * johnthetubaguy wonders if IRC is acting funny for other people too 14:16:00 <BobBall> There was a netsplit a short while ago 14:16:00 <BobBall> so probably 14:16:00 <garyk> i can hear silence 14:16:00 <BobBall> In fact only 10 minutes ago. 14:16:00 * llu-laptop sometimes see IRC messages got jammed 14:16:02 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: ah yes, I did wonder 14:16:04 * johnthetubaguy raises hand for XenAPI news, but BobBall has all the juicy details 14:16:15 <BobBall> Indeed - but not much point going through it without half the people and possibly without the log bot :) 14:16:15 <johnthetubaguy> agreed 14:16:16 <johnthetubaguy> ah, hello 14:16:16 <BobBall> 14:11 < russellb> what's the last thing you saw from me ... 14:16:16 <johnthetubaguy> It just dumped into my screen, with taps on the mic 14:16:16 <johnthetubaguy> and the icehouse-3 closing in fast stuff 14:16:17 * johnthetubaguy raises hand for XenAPI 14:16:17 <BobBall> Looks like IRC isn't back working yet 14:16:17 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I guess not 14:16:18 <russellb> ah 14:16:18 <annegentle> topic setting does seem slowwww 14:16:18 <russellb> yes this is it, we're starting a bit slow, irc troubles 14:16:18 <russellb> ok well in generall all i had was the release schedule 14:16:18 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: yes 14:16:18 <russellb> big net split i think 14:16:18 <russellb> #topic https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icehouse_Release_Schedule 14:16:18 <russellb> #undo 14:16:18 <russellb> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icehouse_Release_Schedule 14:16:18 <russellb> so, just wanted to make sure everyone is aware that feature freeze is just under 2 weeks away 14:16:18 <russellb> and on to sub-teams ... 14:16:18 <russellb> johnthetubaguy and BobBall: go for it 14:16:18 <mriedem> russellb: you're onto sub-teams now 14:16:18 <mriedem> johnthetubaguy: let's wait for ack from russellb, i think he's gone again 14:16:18 <BobBall> Based on russellb's comments and mriedem's later comments than ours, this is a 3-way split! the most fun kind. 14:16:18 <BobBall> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/XenServer/XenServer_CI 14:16:18 <johnthetubaguy> wow 14:16:18 <BobBall> CI is there, processing changes, and was voting for a short time... 14:16:19 <russellb> omg, now i just got a huge flood 14:16:20 <openstack> Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x2e07d50> 14:16:35 <BobBall> I've disabled voting now because two things changed - one was a d-g change in how tempest concurrancy was calculated 14:16:37 <mriedem> are we back? 14:16:38 <BobBall> but we've worked arund that 14:16:46 <BobBall> the second was something we're still digging in to 14:17:00 <BobBall> the result of the second change is that now all tempest full's are failing with different reasons 14:17:00 <johnthetubaguy> mriedem: not sure we are, but this bit is quite one way, so lets go for it 14:17:10 <mriedem> sure 14:17:33 <BobBall> So far all of the failures we've investigated have been traced back to existing bugs - but it's useless to report all of the failures yet 14:17:35 <sdague> internet sneaker chat.... 14:17:37 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: whats the symptom of the second change? 14:17:46 <mriedem> sdague lurks... 14:17:57 <garyk> anyone out there? 14:18:10 <mriedem> garyk: yes, xenapi CI status is going on 14:18:25 <BobBall> The symptom is just that full tempest used to pass now it consistently fails with different bugs which all seem to be races. We think it's highly likely to be a configuration thing - but haven't tracked it down. 14:18:41 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: gotcha, ouch 14:18:46 <mriedem> consistently racey 14:18:53 <garyk> BobBall: nice to hear that the CI is up and running 14:18:54 <BobBall> in different races mriedem :D 14:18:56 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, it wasn't so bad yesterday mind 14:19:03 <johnthetubaguy> funky 14:19:15 <garyk> minesweeper also has discovered all kinds of races - bugs atcually.. 14:19:19 <BobBall> We don't seem to be getting lucky and getting through them all :/ 14:19:19 <mriedem> BobBall: johnthetubaguy: could the known buggy tests be excluded for a time to at least stabilize your CI? 14:19:22 <sdague> BobBall: so based on the fails that you were seeing, I think if you disable volumes tests, all you'd need to do is sort out the issue with that one image test 14:19:38 <mriedem> what sdague said 14:19:48 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, seems like a good path 14:19:53 <BobBall> That's part of the fun... we're using d-g with tox which doesn't have a way to exclude tests ATM 14:20:07 <mriedem> the docker guys were having the same kinds of problems at the meetup last week, high failure rates b/c they were just flooded with fails - they should pair it down and get to a working baseline, then expand 14:20:08 <sdague> BobBall: you can disable volumes tests with a tempest config variable 14:20:15 <BobBall> oh brilliant sdague ! 14:20:21 <BobBall> We'll do that then. 14:20:30 <BobBall> and see what falls out 14:20:37 <mriedem> yeah, start small 14:20:46 <mriedem> otherwise it's overwhelming 14:20:48 <BobBall> matel is also looking at adding a specific exclude list 14:21:04 <BobBall> basically discovering all tests then removing some from the list before getting testr to run them 14:21:13 <BobBall> but disabling volume tests is easy to do 14:21:29 <mriedem> BobBall: do you guys use nova-network? 14:21:32 <BobBall> So I'll do that and we'll see where we get to later today when it's ran a fwe tests. 14:21:35 <BobBall> yes, nova-network 14:22:18 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: you happy with that plan? any more updates? 14:22:33 <BobBall> No more updates 14:22:34 <russellb> very happy to see the progress 14:22:35 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: do you have the capacity you need to drain the queue now? 14:22:55 <BobBall> Probably john 14:23:22 <mriedem> other sub-team status? 14:23:23 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: cool, more than you had yesterday at least, thats the main 14:23:30 <garyk> i have a concern regarding all of the third party CI's - when there is the end of cycle rush - it is going to be intersting to see how it all works. 14:23:38 * johnthetubaguy raises scheduler hand if none else 14:23:50 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: sure, update on your fun scheduler? 14:23:56 <russellb> scheduler optimization at least 14:24:04 <johnthetubaguy> oh right, I wasn't going to talk too much about that 14:24:08 <russellb> oh :) 14:24:12 <russellb> thought that's why you raised your hand 14:24:15 <johnthetubaguy> but anyways, a little bit of DB caching is going a long way 14:24:18 <johnthetubaguy> please review that 14:24:21 <russellb> heh 14:24:28 <russellb> yeah, seems doable for icehouse 14:24:29 <johnthetubaguy> no, was at the meeting yesterday 14:24:33 <johnthetubaguy> talk about a split 14:24:34 <russellb> cool 14:24:37 <johnthetubaguy> well, I suggested one at least 14:24:42 <russellb> meeting split? 14:24:46 <russellb> or? 14:24:48 <johnthetubaguy> just finding the dam etherpad 14:24:54 <johnthetubaguy> oh, scheduler split, not meeting split 14:24:58 <russellb> ah 14:25:20 <johnthetubaguy> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-external-scheduler 14:25:28 <russellb> yeah, and consensus seems to be that even if we don't think gantt is close to ready, we should leave it in openstack/ and not move to stackforge/ 14:25:33 <russellb> because moving repos around is a PITA 14:25:48 <johnthetubaguy> ah thats cool 14:25:57 <johnthetubaguy> we would only have to move it again 14:26:01 <johnthetubaguy> so, the plan 14:26:08 <johnthetubaguy> its at the bottom of that etherpad 14:26:13 <johnthetubaguy> basically, like no-db-compute 14:26:15 <garyk> russellb: will there be time set aside at the summit to speak about gantt? 14:26:17 <russellb> plan b? 14:26:25 <garyk> it seems like a topic on its own 14:26:31 <russellb> garyk: as a part of the nova schedule 14:26:42 <johnthetubaguy> lets separate out obvious bits, then see where we are, basically 14:26:42 <russellb> a project has to be incubated to get its own time 14:26:58 <garyk> i think at least one nova session should be devoted to it and then it may split out onto its own track 14:27:14 <russellb> yeah when we originally talked about this, i think i was assuming we'd have the conductor bits done 14:27:17 <garyk> ok, it will be an incubated project. 14:27:46 <johnthetubaguy> russellb: yeah, sorry about that, it sucks 14:27:53 <russellb> oh no worries 14:27:58 <russellb> just a bit of dependency management fail 14:28:17 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, it should have been higher priority sooner 14:28:19 <johnthetubaguy> oops 14:28:37 <russellb> but all good, on from here 14:28:49 <russellb> but the plan does sound reasonable 14:28:52 <johnthetubaguy> if we get time, should we push that through? 14:28:58 <johnthetubaguy> the conductor bits that is 14:29:02 <russellb> sure, would love to if we can 14:29:12 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, thinking RPC cleanup 14:29:15 <russellb> exactly 14:29:27 <russellb> if we do it before release, we can remove all that code once juno opens 14:29:32 <russellb> otherwise it's stuck until K 14:29:32 <johnthetubaguy> right, well its bumped a bit higher in a massive pile of doom 14:30:04 * johnthetubaguy feels he is done typing for now, wonders if we will cover v3 API 14:30:24 <russellb> yes, we need to cover that 14:30:41 <russellb> maybe in blueprints 14:30:46 <russellb> want to talk bugs real quick, then to blueprints 14:30:48 <russellb> #topic bugs 14:31:07 <russellb> so, tracy jones has taken the bug czar role now 14:31:14 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, bug sub groups seems to be forming now :) 14:31:18 <russellb> she put out a message to openstack-dev trying to get an initial team together 14:31:29 <garyk> saldy there are not too many volutneers 14:31:34 <russellb> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027190.html 14:31:46 <russellb> more now 14:31:51 <russellb> but more the merrier :-) 14:31:54 <garyk> nice to hear 14:32:05 <russellb> really need a solid group that can devote an hour to this every week 14:32:09 <russellb> at least an hour is all i ask :-) 14:32:14 <johnthetubaguy> List is not too tiny right now https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-bug-management 14:32:34 <johnthetubaguy> that seems like a good plan, an hour a week 14:32:38 <russellb> so, if you're interested, please sign up! 14:32:51 <russellb> i'm quite hopeful that this renewed effort will help improve our bug queue 14:33:06 * mriedem wishes the ML thread was tagged with [nova], never saw it 14:33:20 <russellb> after feature freeze, we'll all switch focus to bugs, so more on bugs in a couple weeks ... 14:33:25 <russellb> #topic blueprints 14:33:35 <russellb> and speaking of czars, we have a blueprint czar! 14:33:40 <johnthetubaguy> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-icehouse-blueprint-cull 14:33:41 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: <--- \o/ 14:33:44 <mriedem> russellb: i did have a bugs topic in the agenda, we can do in open discussion 14:33:50 <russellb> mriedem: ah sorry 14:34:04 <mriedem> let's come back to it 14:34:12 <mriedem> later i mean :) 14:34:23 <garyk> i am not sure how anmial rights groups are going to deal with the cull 14:34:28 <johnthetubaguy> so lots of shifting blueprints into Juno, those without all their patches up 14:34:46 <russellb> and i probably didn't do a great job of recording all the changes i made on the etherpad, sorry 14:34:53 <garyk> the deadline for code in review was the 18th. is that correct? 14:35:02 <russellb> garyk: correct 14:35:12 <russellb> so, v3 blueprints ... 14:35:14 <johnthetubaguy> russellb: yeah, hey ho, me neither 14:35:46 <russellb> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027588.html 14:36:00 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, we have two 14:36:08 <johnthetubaguy> I mean, to 14:36:20 <russellb> there are a bunch of v3 blueprints, what should we do with them? 14:36:25 <russellb> we previously had them prioritized up to Medium 14:36:31 <russellb> but given the post above, i dropped them to Low 14:36:31 <johnthetubaguy> well, low for sure 14:36:36 <mriedem> +1 14:36:46 <johnthetubaguy> I wonder about defer to juno though 14:36:48 <russellb> should we leave them and just let whatever happens to merge get in? 14:36:56 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, duno, to be honest 14:37:05 <russellb> or actively defer things, even like this, to help focus on a smaller set? 14:37:07 <johnthetubaguy> we could do with a bit more review bandwidth for the other stuff 14:37:14 <russellb> yeah, that's what i'm worried about 14:37:20 <sdague> well, I was wondering about the meta issue. Because it seems like we should figure out if we're still going ahead on the v3 front as planned 14:37:22 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, its tempting, feels bad not asking Chris though 14:37:37 <russellb> yeah, should definitely talk to him 14:37:42 <russellb> bummer he's not here 14:37:44 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: I think its a question of how to maintain v2 14:37:50 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, stupid timezones 14:37:52 <sdague> and if not, I really wonder about any review time on it. That also includes the api validation bits 14:38:03 <russellb> i haven't had a chance to read your post sdague , sorry 14:38:07 <sdague> because there are a bunch of other things that are only happening on v3 14:38:28 <mriedem> johnthetubaguy: 'how to maintain v2' is the same topic as my bug item... 14:38:32 <johnthetubaguy> oh IRC just broke again :( 14:38:38 <johnthetubaguy> mriedem: its a big fella 14:38:40 <sdague> yeh, silly irc 14:38:55 <russellb> really messing up our meeting today 14:39:07 <russellb> ok, so let's see if there's anything else for today, and if not, we can use the rest of the time on the API topic 14:39:16 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: any other thoughts on blueprints? 14:39:23 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, not much really... 14:39:29 <johnthetubaguy> please keep them up to date, I guess 14:39:41 <johnthetubaguy> but I will try keep people honest on that, once we get the list down 14:39:43 <mriedem> i had a general discussion item 14:39:46 <russellb> and we should try to put more review focus on the targeted blueprints that have all code up 14:39:55 <johnthetubaguy> I might start un-approving things too, that are stale 14:39:56 <johnthetubaguy> etc 14:40:04 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: +1 14:40:06 <mriedem> johnthetubaguy: that's a good idea 14:40:15 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: i found some that had code, but have been abandoned for 1 or 2 months ... just deferred 14:40:20 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I will try get a list together for the patches too, just one tiny error 14:40:28 <johnthetubaguy> russellb: likewise, I will try clean that up 14:40:41 <russellb> johnthetubaguy: really appreciate the help, it's no small pile of work 14:40:50 <russellb> cheers for our blueprint czar! :-) 14:40:53 <johnthetubaguy> I am seeing how much time it takes, no worries 14:40:57 <mriedem> furry hats for everyone! 14:40:58 <johnthetubaguy> anyways, that all for now 14:41:01 <johnthetubaguy> hehe 14:41:14 <russellb> #topic open discussion 14:41:24 <russellb> mriedem: what's up 14:41:27 <johnthetubaguy> mriedem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWucPckXbIw&feature=kp 14:41:36 <mriedem> i was just going to bring up jog0's post last night about an oslo sync tema 14:41:38 <mriedem> *team 14:41:42 <mriedem> he's not here i don't think though 14:41:50 <mriedem> was wondering what the feelings are on that 14:41:56 <mriedem> since oslo sync seems to be a contentious issue 14:41:58 <russellb> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027631.html 14:42:22 <johnthetubaguy> I don't like the risk right now, we should do it when Juno opens for sure 14:42:32 <johnthetubaguy> but maybe we should take the hit anyway, it could fix things 14:42:39 <johnthetubaguy> its a nice fence I am on here 14:42:46 <mriedem> johnthetubaguy: yeah, i think jog0 would say we want to sync before icehouse closes to get any bug fixes 14:42:48 * russellb joins johnthetubaguy on the fence 14:42:49 <mriedem> but yeah, i see both ways 14:42:56 <mriedem> make room 14:43:11 <sdague> honestly, if we think we have enough time to catch fallout, I'd say damn the torpedos on this one 14:43:29 <mriedem> at a high level, it seems to be "well if we exclude this and this and this module, auto-sync should be fine" 14:43:29 <sdague> because we've definitely run into bugs in the past where were entirely because olso was old 14:43:40 <ndipanov> sync, this is the best time to do it I'd say 14:43:45 <russellb> so basically the assertion is that ad-hoc syncs aren't good enough, and someone should just take ownership of it? 14:43:51 <russellb> i at least agree that sure, we should sync 14:43:53 <johnthetubaguy> lets just sync the lot, and if the gate breaks, revert it? 14:44:03 <russellb> +1 :) 14:44:09 <sdague> :) 14:44:10 <johnthetubaguy> russellb: by Juno-1 we should be in sync 14:44:18 <ndipanov> yeah revers are easy no one touches that code except syncs 14:44:26 <ndipanov> +1 14:44:31 <mriedem> well, and jog0 is doing a full sync on cinder as a POC 14:44:39 <mriedem> so he'll probably learn what to trim out there first 14:44:56 <russellb> oslo folks also seem to be working hard on splitting that code out into libs now 14:45:08 <mriedem> yeah, that's nice, still some bumps to iron out there 14:45:10 <russellb> they have a big dependency tree between the stuff in there and are working out from the leaves 14:45:14 <mriedem> yup 14:45:16 <mriedem> log_handler 14:45:24 <johnthetubaguy> hmm, there is a thought... 14:45:46 <johnthetubaguy> we should sync before icehouse ends, else its gona make upgrade hard 14:45:52 <russellb> but there's still the icehouse question 14:45:56 <russellb> i'm all for syncing for icehouse 14:46:08 <russellb> and regarding his idea, having someone take ownership of making sure we stay up to date, sure 14:46:09 <sdague> +1 14:46:09 <russellb> seems fine 14:46:36 <johnthetubaguy> seriously, lets just see if it breaks the gate or not, then see were we are 14:46:54 <mriedem> i'm sure jog0 will be happy to hear this 14:46:57 <russellb> heh, k :) 14:47:06 <russellb> so we can catch up more later in -nova when he's up 14:47:12 <russellb> so, on to the API stuff? 14:47:15 <mriedem> sure 14:47:17 <johnthetubaguy> yeah 14:47:24 <russellb> "now what" 14:47:31 <mriedem> so my topic... 14:47:40 <mriedem> we have two bugs for v2 regarding neutron, 14:47:50 <mriedem> one for the quotas extension and one for the limits extension, 14:48:07 <mriedem> both have patches, in one we proxy to neutron (limits), in the other (proposed last night) we don't 14:48:13 <mriedem> but both are needed to make the tests work in tempest 14:48:28 <mriedem> so if we're going to live with v2 for awhile, and support neutron, do we proxy or not? 14:48:40 <russellb> wellllll 14:48:44 <mriedem> v3 doesn't proxy, which is fine, but this hodge podge in v2 kind of sucks 14:48:50 <russellb> my general feeling is proxying sucks 14:48:50 <mriedem> at least regarding anything to do with security groups and floating IPs 14:48:55 <johnthetubaguy> depends if info_cache gets updated I guess? 14:49:06 <russellb> for end user facing APIs, i think we have to, for compatibility 14:49:13 <russellb> for admin APIs, i'm less concerned 14:49:15 <sdague> right, but v2 is all about the proxy. We have proxy API for images, volumes, and network 14:49:15 <mriedem> russellb: that was my feeling 14:49:23 <russellb> sdague: right 14:49:29 <mriedem> also note that the limits api change is ready 14:49:30 <russellb> so, i wonder if we should draw the line between cloud user or admin 14:49:32 <mriedem> i've already tested it with tempest 14:49:34 <russellb> quotas? meh, 14:49:57 <johnthetubaguy> but users list their own quotas, or does it not do that? 14:50:06 <russellb> oh, you're right 14:50:16 <mriedem> in this case i see limits and quotas as being tied together 14:50:29 <mriedem> so if you are going to proxy for one i'd assume (as a user) that you will for the other also 14:50:35 <russellb> limits and quotas sure sound the same don't they. 14:50:58 <mriedem> well, and you find out here how they are tied together: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/74839/ 14:51:09 <mriedem> and the ugly hack if they aren't 14:51:10 <johnthetubaguy> so, whats the question again? 14:51:18 <johnthetubaguy> should we proxy for neutron? 14:51:24 <mriedem> the question is for these two bugs for the APIs, do we proxy to neutron or not, yeah 14:51:39 <johnthetubaguy> its consistent at least 14:51:40 <mriedem> also note that in havana, the v2 limits API bug was marked high 14:51:41 <russellb> i suppose the default answer is always "proxy, or whatever we have to do, to keep APIs working, when reasonable to do so" 14:52:03 <russellb> so proxy, unless we have a good excuse not to support it 14:52:08 <johnthetubaguy> russellb: +1 but nothing in v3, whatever that is 14:52:13 <mriedem> ok, agreed 14:52:20 <russellb> yeah, all of that for v2 specifically 14:52:49 <mriedem> i wanted to bring this up specifically for the quotas patch since i -1'ed it for inconsistency 14:52:59 <russellb> thanks :) 14:53:04 <mriedem> that's it for me 14:53:22 <russellb> so sdague, i guess you were bringing up http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027688.html 14:53:26 <johnthetubaguy> cool, so general v3 stuff? 14:53:30 <sdague> russellb: yeh 14:54:11 <sdague> because with the idea that v2 is around for a while, I think we need to reassess the gameplan for the nova API 14:54:22 <russellb> agree. 14:54:34 <sdague> with a goal of 1 API with 1 data format in L (or worst case M) 14:54:40 <sdague> and how do we get there 14:54:43 <russellb> so you've jumped right to some really hard questions i was a bit afraid to ask (yet at least), heh 14:54:57 <sdague> well just call me an instigator :) 14:55:13 <johnthetubaguy> I kinda thing we don't like the current format 14:55:25 <johnthetubaguy> so I like the idea to move to a slightly updated one 14:55:27 <russellb> yeah, it hasn't gone how anyone really expected 14:55:35 <johnthetubaguy> if only to add in the tasks support 14:55:49 <russellb> so tasks ... could we do tasks in v2? 14:56:01 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, through headers and stuff, but it sucks 14:56:10 <russellb> does it suck more than 2 APIs? 14:56:20 <johnthetubaguy> fair point 14:56:24 <johnthetubaguy> probably not 14:56:35 <johnthetubaguy> the inconsistencies in v3 would be nice to remove 14:56:37 <russellb> not trying to imply an answer, just asking, it's what we have to figure out 14:56:45 <johnthetubaguy> if only by some filter that accepts both 14:56:53 <sdague> we also said we don't like proxy APIs, but if we are talking about v2 largely forever, we need a mechanism to deprecate and remove those 14:57:02 <johnthetubaguy> that would really reduce the testing though? 14:57:14 <johnthetubaguy> we could unit test that stuff, and leave tempest on the new one 14:57:25 <johnthetubaguy> the return values are harder right 14:57:28 <russellb> the more I think about what major API revs mean, the more I think it should be a fundamental do-over almost 14:57:29 <sdague> because the internals on v2 are way more gross and fragile than 3 14:57:33 <johnthetubaguy> and deprecating XML is harder 14:57:56 <russellb> on internals, can we backport internals improvements to v2? 14:58:11 <sdague> russellb: it's not so much a backport as a gut 14:58:25 <russellb> re-do the internals improvements on v2 :-/ 14:58:35 <johnthetubaguy> possibly, but versioning extensions, we could add that at some point I guess 14:58:56 <russellb> not sure why we couldn't 14:59:03 <sdague> it's all just time and motivation 14:59:09 <johnthetubaguy> its only the XML clients, and well... 14:59:28 <sdague> and I think a big piece is first agreeing where we are headed 14:59:34 <johnthetubaguy> I guess we are out of time 14:59:42 <russellb> let's continue on the ML 14:59:44 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: +1 14:59:46 <sdague> because 1 API with 1 data format I think is an important thing to see if we agree on 15:00:00 <sdague> agreed, we can take to the ML 15:00:06 <russellb> thanks everyone 15:00:13 <russellb> #endmeeting