20:04:55 #startmeeting 20:04:56 Meeting started Tue Aug 2 20:04:55 2011 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:04:57 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 20:05:02 we can go ahead and give these updates on the record i suppose... 20:05:07 #topic previous action items 20:05:23 o/ 20:05:29 o/ 20:05:50 i am still trying to get project model thoughts together around autonomy, common tooling, process for vetting options. so i am running behind on that. 20:06:27 josh mckenty has formed up a group that has agreed to work on putting together some specifications for a Faithful Implementation Test Suite (FITS). if any of you want to be involved, ping me or josh 20:07:09 the goal is to have a spec and a testing mechanism within the next couple of months that can be run against an implementation to determine if it meets the minimum requirements to be called "openstack" 20:07:44 they haven't really started much work on it yet, so again...now's the time to jump in if you have an opinion on it 20:08:20 what comes out of that effort will almost certainly become part of the trademark use policy 20:09:07 jaypipes: do you want to briefly fill people in on freecloud? it would probably be good for this group to have awareness of that as well. 20:09:25 so does that mean that trademark stuff is in our purview or does that belong to someone else? 20:09:45 jbryce: sure thing. 20:11:04 The FreeCloud project has made some good progress. We've secured datacenter space, some hardware, and have a plan for an initial 2-zone implementation that will showcase two reference architectures, with more zones added in future buildouts. 20:11:15 http://wiki.openstack.org/FreeCloud 20:11:19 notmyname: trademark policy is not but we've been asked to help define technical standards around usage 20:12:11 We're working with Cisco, Dell, HP, NTT Labs and Novell/MSFT right now. Others are more than welcome to email me and I can go into further detail on what the projet is about. Think: Eucalyptus community Cloud, but for different OpenStack reference architectures. 20:12:27 jbryce, jaypipes: could be good for PPB to formally accept to push git+gerrit in "almost accepted option" to justify pushing Glance (a core project) to using it 20:13:09 ttx: I think jbryce is working on finalizing that stuff. is that correct, jbryce? 20:13:46 have people reviewed the git+gerrit process enough to vote on it? 20:13:47 jaypipes: ok. because I feel a bit uncomfortable pushing a core project to use it while we said the PPB voted on vetted options. 20:14:32 I'm ok with a derogation though. 20:14:59 well, it's a bit of a chicken/egg problem. we don't have enough feedback to make such a vote, no? which was the point of moving glance? 20:15:37 eday: we've gotten feedback from keystone so far, and yes, Glance was meant as another test. 20:16:12 however - I sort of should point out that when we say "test" here - we really mean "test to make sure that nothing is catastrophically wrong" not - initial toe-in-the-water test 20:16:16 eday: we could formally decide that Glance is the last field test, and exceptionally a core project. 20:16:24 mtaylor: yes, true. 20:16:59 wouldn't be insane to provisionally vote on git/gerrit - or to vote on the direction with a caveat that it's possible that a technical showstopper might be encountered 20:17:13 before making a vote, I would love to see feedback from folks who were initially pushing for git, so we should encourage them to make a contribution and review on keystone or glance 20:17:15 but now I'm just babbling 20:17:30 mtaylor: we can indeed vote on "it's ok, if Glance transition works" 20:17:42 I think the issue is whether the Swift team is interested in using Gerrit. 20:17:51 ttx: do we really need to vote for that? :) 20:17:54 all other teams seem to have indicated they are on board with it. 20:18:24 notmyname, creiht? 20:18:25 notmyname: you in bro? 20:18:30 I agree with eday 20:18:41 would like to hear termie's feedback too 20:19:19 notmyname: well, I believe you and creiht were two of the folks intiially pushing for git, so I encourage both of you to make a contribution and review on keystone or glance. :) 20:20:08 I was mainly voicing my opinion as that seemed to be the opinion of many in the openstack community, not just those of the swift team 20:20:15 otherwise, we're just going to keep spinning our wheels and revisiting this same conversation every week :) 20:20:52 how about an action item to pick 3 folks who were pushing for git, and to get a review of gh/gerrit process out of them? 20:21:06 some of guys may be interested… 20:21:19 mtaylor: do you think you could do that? 20:21:19 if we are switching to git just because of the swift team, then that is fail 20:21:19 creiht: you and notmyname were two of the most vocal voices for git. I would hope you two would give the setup a spin? in addition, could you suggest other specific community members that would do so as weel that wanted to move so badly? 20:21:27 i nominate termie for one of them, since he led the GH discussion at the last summit 20:21:36 tr3buchet: you too, right? 20:21:44 i think termie is a good choice 20:22:00 pvo: if you, dabo and tr3buchet would give it a spin, that would be appreciated. 20:22:03 I would suggest that there should be someone from each of the projects 20:22:11 jaypipes: I imagine if you ask, you will likely find people who will give you their opinion 20:22:12 nova, swift, glance, dashboard 20:22:31 yes. I think that opionions from folks are great 20:22:39 jaypipes: i definitely +1 git if that's what you are asking 20:22:42 jaypipes: docs on the wiki? 20:22:49 tr3buchet: no, that's not what I'm asking. 20:22:57 pvo: http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritWorkflow 20:22:59 HOWEVER, I would caution (which is the reason we wanted to suck in people) ... you kind of actually have to use it for something real for a couple of iters 20:23:05 jaypipes: right on. thanks. 20:23:20 tr3buchet: I'm asking you to give the Gerrit/GH setup a spin by becoming a Keystone or Glance contirbutor and testing the code review proecess. 20:23:21 eday, jbryce: yeah i suppose i could deal with that 20:23:28 termie: grazi 20:23:35 jaypipes: oh i see. i'd love to 20:23:38 eday, jbryce: would want somebody to shoot me the existing documentation about how they think i should use it 20:23:39 tr3buchet: rock. 20:23:49 I can help too 20:23:51 notmyname, creiht: please do so yourselves. 20:23:54 termie: http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritWorkflow 20:23:55 termie: http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritWorkflow 20:23:55 jk0: ty 20:24:01 i just did a push to keystone using it. We'll see how the review process goes 20:24:01 coolness 20:24:12 vishy: long patch.. going through it now. :) 20:24:25 there is a UI crapiness atm ... just to be aware of - but it's been fixed by nokia so we should be able to roll it out soon 20:24:54 jaypipes: quite a bit of it is whitespace...they don't have pep8 barrier on apparently 20:25:23 vishy: nope. it's coming as soon as they can get their pep8 cleaned :) 20:25:27 vishy: they have a pylint barrier... not sure about pep8. 20:26:12 jaypipes: perhaps a mailing list email to solicit feedback is in order? 20:26:28 creiht: sure, I will do so. 20:26:48 termie, tr3buchet, notmyname, creiht, jk0: feel free to ping jeblair or myself as you start poking if you run in to issues 20:26:58 o/ 20:27:02 sure thing 20:27:19 cool 20:27:44 mtaylor, jeblair: I'll draft an email to th ML. 20:27:50 so delay a vote until we get feedback from the group of testers 20:28:01 jeblair: watch out - the local git gods are about to start poking us :) 20:28:10 can we try to get feedback in the next week and vote at the next meeting? 20:28:19 WHO DARES SPEAK OF ME 20:28:24 would be good to get past this... 20:28:29 * mtaylor cowers appropriately 20:28:32 jaypipes: amen 20:28:50 mtaylor and jeblair have done a lot of work on this that would go to waste. 20:29:16 anyone have other topics? 20:30:29 not from me. 20:30:57 ok 20:31:09 thanks everyone 20:31:38 #endmeeting