13:00:36 <alex_xu> #startmeeting nova api
13:00:37 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Apr 19 13:00:36 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is alex_xu. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:00:39 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
13:00:42 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'nova_api'
13:00:47 <alex_xu> who is here today?
13:00:57 <gmann> o/
13:01:29 <alex_xu> gmann: let us wait two minutes for johnthetubaguy and sdague
13:01:34 <gmann> sure
13:01:43 <johnthetubaguy> o/
13:01:48 <cdent> o/
13:02:42 <Kevin_Zheng> o/
13:02:57 <alex_xu> #topic priorities
13:03:14 <sdague> o/
13:03:31 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: from the last nova weekly meeting, I saw there are some note about more problem found for policy
13:04:17 <johnthetubaguy> ah, yes
13:04:35 <johnthetubaguy> I should have added comments in the spec, but... well things got in the way
13:04:57 <johnthetubaguy> basically, I think we need more consensus on the general direction around policy
13:05:08 <johnthetubaguy> there is a google hangout scheduled for later today
13:05:17 <johnthetubaguy> in the keystone policy meeting slot
13:05:45 <alex_xu> ok, cool
13:05:54 <johnthetubaguy> I think sdague and I got close to the problem, its very related to the concept of "global" ness
13:06:03 <johnthetubaguy> like project observer vs global observer
13:06:09 <johnthetubaguy> and how that would fit into the world
13:06:26 <johnthetubaguy> the current status quo is massively confusing
13:06:30 <sdague> yeh
13:06:48 <johnthetubaguy> is_admin_project is the main point of contention
13:06:49 <sdague> I honestly feel like its a few more hours of discussion to unpack the whole thing
13:06:55 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: +1
13:07:36 <johnthetubaguy> honestly, I know folks glazed over at the PTG in a fog of confusion, we need to get through that
13:07:36 <alex_xu> ok, looking for good thing come out
13:08:08 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I think we have folks interested and thinking about the problems, so hoping we can straighten something out
13:08:43 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: I forget actually, did we say we keep anything from those two specs, I think probably not?
13:09:09 <sdague> johnthetubaguy: I don't know
13:09:11 <johnthetubaguy> obviously, we finish off the policy docs
13:09:19 <sdague> honestly, I feel like we were starting to get somewhere, then folks had to go
13:09:24 <johnthetubaguy> and we can still remove those still policy rules
13:09:42 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: yeah, that was "the OSIC" meeting
13:09:47 <sdague> ah
13:09:55 <sdague> yeh, I can understand why that was important
13:11:44 <alex_xu> ok, we just need to wait for new spec come out, i guess?
13:12:19 <sdague> yeh
13:12:35 <johnthetubaguy> +1
13:12:42 <sdague> I honestly think glossary and diagrams of the current state of the world would make more sense then a new spec in a lot of ways
13:12:54 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I think that the bit we need
13:13:01 <sdague> the glazing over is because the current reality is pretty hard to understand
13:13:01 <johnthetubaguy> the landscape
13:13:20 <johnthetubaguy> turns out we all don't have the same context here, including lots of the keystone folks
13:13:30 <sdague> the only reason I can follow half of it is because I learned a chunk for the policy in code bits
13:13:30 <johnthetubaguy> well, we all have different bits of the context
13:13:55 <johnthetubaguy> yeah
13:14:15 <johnthetubaguy> anyways, more ground work needed around that stuff
13:15:18 <alex_xu> you guys' words make me looking forward to see the new spec a lot, looking for a surprise :)
13:15:28 <johnthetubaguy> heh, maybe!
13:15:43 <alex_xu> heh
13:15:53 <alex_xu> #topic open
13:16:11 <alex_xu> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/api-no-more-extensions-pike
13:16:20 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: looking fo one more +2 ^
13:16:35 * cdent loves that ^ stuff
13:16:42 <alex_xu> cdent: :)
13:16:48 <johnthetubaguy> I will take a look at that after the meeting
13:17:00 <johnthetubaguy> been going through the +2 back log past few days
13:17:07 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: thanks
13:17:10 <sdague> yeh, getting the /servers one landed would be great
13:17:10 <johnthetubaguy> got stuck in a few holes along the way, digging out now!
13:17:52 <alex_xu> try to add a test to ensure the microversions are sequential https://review.openstack.org/#/c/458004/, the test failed, but approved the test works...
13:18:44 <sdague> interesting
13:18:56 <alex_xu> but as sdague said, there is no way to test the microversion sequential on json-schema, which can found bug like this https://review.openstack.org/457577
13:19:43 <johnthetubaguy> ah, interesting, I spotted something similar in placement the other day, so it brought this back to mind
13:20:02 <cdent> alex_xu was good enough to provide a similar thing for placement
13:20:08 <johnthetubaguy> sweet
13:20:10 <cdent> s/thing/test/
13:20:10 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: yea, I have a patch for placement also https://review.openstack.org/458049
13:20:21 <sdague> yeh, I honestly think if we did things a little different in how we executed the wrappers it might make it easier to verify
13:20:21 <gmann> nice, i did not about that bug but yea checks for such are great to have
13:20:56 <sdague> for instance some kind of __versions on the function
13:21:20 <johnthetubaguy> honestly, I wondered about the explicit routes, should versions go in there?
13:21:30 <sdague> johnthetubaguy: how?
13:21:49 <cdent> I love watching you guys be so honest all the time ;)
13:22:04 <johnthetubaguy> like GET / -> version range -> function, rather than GET / -> function
13:22:16 <johnthetubaguy> cdent: heh
13:22:42 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: emm...sounds good
13:23:16 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: but you can't trust that route list, we have a lot of in-code version check
13:23:17 <sdague> or just put the schema ranges in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/445864/14/nova/api/openstack/compute/routes.py@122
13:23:48 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: yeah in there is what I was thinking, how I am less sure
13:23:51 <sdague> anyway, this is a brainstorming exercise for later
13:23:55 <johnthetubaguy> yeah
13:24:04 <sdague> the point is the interface is currently easy enough to misuse that we have bugs
13:24:12 <alex_xu> ++
13:24:13 <johnthetubaguy> agreed its too easy to screw it up
13:24:13 <gmann> yea, having at router level makes less error prone
13:24:22 <sdague> and we need to climb the hierarchy of - http://sweng.the-davies.net/Home/rustys-api-design-manifesto
13:24:43 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: oh, nice
13:25:17 * alex_xu adds that to readlist
13:25:52 <gmann> sdague: nice one. thanks for sharing.
13:26:20 * alex_xu always expect sdague's sharing
13:26:25 <sdague> yeh, no worries, I heard it in a rusty keynote a long time ago, and it always stuck with me
13:26:44 <sdague> :)
13:26:49 <sdague> ok, next topic?
13:26:58 <johnthetubaguy> I think I only ever saw the tl;dr of that before
13:27:00 <alex_xu> anything people want to bring up?
13:27:18 <cdent> i start fixed in the nova-api under wsgi stuff
13:27:18 <johnthetubaguy> I guess spec freeze has passed
13:27:25 <alex_xu> cdent: cool
13:27:31 <cdent> at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/457283/
13:27:33 <johnthetubaguy> ah, sweet
13:27:48 <cdent> still a bit roughly hewn, suggestions welcome
13:27:59 <cdent> there's associated devstack changes in progress too: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/457715/
13:28:09 <cdent> sdague did a pile of nice work to make uwsgi simple in devstack
13:28:19 <cdent> and we're thinking may as well make nova-api default to that
13:28:29 <cdent> one question is: should the metadata server too?
13:28:41 <johnthetubaguy> oh... that is a harder question
13:28:59 <johnthetubaguy> I guess thats often deployed on the nova-compute node, with a neutron proxy in front of it
13:29:00 <cdent> keeping in mind that this is for devstack only
13:29:18 <sdague> I think the md server should run the same way
13:29:24 <sdague> johnthetubaguy: even in the neutron case?
13:29:29 <johnthetubaguy> its tempting to say yes, just not sure what the deployers think
13:29:35 <sdague> I thought in the neutron case, just the proxy was there
13:29:52 <sdague> it was nova-net where you either put it local, or did the multicast route thing
13:30:03 <cdent> does it matter what deployers think, with regard to devstack? part of the point of moving to wsgi-only is so that deployers have a) choices, b) must make a choice
13:30:12 <cdent> c) have choices which are sane
13:30:17 <sdague> cdent: I think it's fine to do for devstack
13:30:30 <cdent> me too, just checking the pulse of others
13:30:45 <sdague> cdent: does it require the md server as a dedicate uwsgi process? or do they run in the same one?
13:31:32 <cdent> I think it would be better separate, more debuggable and inspectactable
13:31:45 <cdent> the mod-wsgi setup (which didn't really work anyway) was separate
13:31:51 <johnthetubaguy> sdague: so I had that all wrong in my head, I know what you mean now
13:32:09 <cdent> and presumably for multi-node separate metadata server is a good thing?
13:32:22 <johnthetubaguy> cdent: I like separate too, so everything is the "same" in some sense
13:32:27 * cdent nods
13:32:38 <johnthetubaguy> we can kill some more silly config variables that way
13:33:05 <sdague> johnthetubaguy: true
13:33:23 * johnthetubaguy makes bashing config option noises
13:33:35 <sdague> honestly, it's probably worth getting this all working enough to deprecate the eventlet way of running nova-api for the release
13:33:42 <johnthetubaguy> +1
13:33:47 <cdent> \o/
13:34:08 <alex_xu> \o/ for removing something again
13:34:22 <sdague> well, it will be a couple cycles before it can be code deleted
13:34:34 <cdent> we'll call the the r cycle: removals
13:34:37 * alex_xu sad now
13:34:40 <sdague> but it does simplifiy
13:34:51 <johnthetubaguy> cdent: nice
13:35:09 <cdent> (and the s cycle: simplify)
13:35:10 <sdague> we did hard and fast transition on a few things in this last cycle, I think for this we need to give people a little more time
13:35:35 <johnthetubaguy> cdent: time to start adding locations on google maps near summit venues
13:35:48 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, this one needs time
13:35:55 * cdent makes a todo item
13:36:17 <johnthetubaguy> well, the had time for the other ones, just they didn't notice
13:37:44 <alex_xu> sounds, should ask next topic?
13:38:02 <sdague> yep
13:38:09 <johnthetubaguy> +1
13:38:23 <johnthetubaguy> I don't really have a topic
13:38:25 <alex_xu> johnthetubaguy: sounds like you said half words about freeze
13:38:34 <johnthetubaguy> I was just going to check we have no specs hanging in mid flight
13:38:38 <johnthetubaguy> that are really important
13:38:44 <johnthetubaguy> I think the answer is no
13:38:57 <alex_xu> i think no
13:39:13 <alex_xu> i probably needs to check how much spec approved for api
13:39:28 <alex_xu> s/needs/need/
13:40:18 <alex_xu> #link https://review.openstack.org/457181
13:40:28 <alex_xu> the patch about deprecation is up ^
13:40:53 <alex_xu> that is all i have
13:41:03 <alex_xu> anything more want to bring up?
13:41:50 <alex_xu> ok, I guess no
13:42:05 <alex_xu> thanks all, let us close the meeting
13:42:13 <alex_xu> #endmeeting