19:00:02 #startmeeting operators_ops_tools_monitoring 19:00:04 Meeting started Wed Jan 13 19:00:02 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is j^2. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:00:05 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:00:07 The meeting name has been set to 'operators_ops_tools_monitoring' 19:00:15 #topic rollcall 19:00:19 hey everyone! 19:00:32 o/ 19:00:35 Hey there. 19:00:59 like normal i’ll give everyone ~5 mins to trickle in 19:01:22 * jamespd waves. 19:01:37 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/osops-irc-meeting-20160113 19:01:42 that is the agenda ^^ 19:03:30 i take the responsibility for not sending out the reminder email, my bad :( 19:04:08 hello 19:04:20 hi! 19:04:30 going to officially start in about 2 mins 19:04:33 okay 19:05:31 #topic Talk about releases for repos other than tools-contrib and tools-generic 19:05:50 we punted on this last time 19:06:08 has anyone else come up with any thoughts or ideas about this? 19:07:11 ? 19:07:22 * jamespd didn't catch the last meeting. was there a particular point of contention? 19:07:39 jamespd: creating releases for the different repos 19:07:49 there’s a plus side to it, and a few negitives 19:08:08 by creating releases are you talking about tagging commits or packaging? 19:08:08 we state in the wiki we won’t but EmilienM was asking for us to 19:08:26 i think both 19:08:42 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Osops 19:08:52 we state: We don't plan on having releases, but we do plan on collecting useful resources for anything ranging from Junior to Senior level administrators. 19:09:27 there is a lot of overhead with creating releases and getting in the pipelines, and i lean towards saying our community isn’t large enough to have that level of overhead 19:09:45 it’s a nice to have when we grow, but hell…4? people are here right now 19:09:54 Idon't really see any value in either releases or packages 19:09:59 I have to agree. That is what I immediately think about when it comes to managing by release 19:10:05 Yeah... I agree about that at this point. 19:10:06 unless its for a specific tool inside osops 19:10:10 especially if there are code changes and back porting, etc 19:10:32 give our ops focus, many of the tools will be written for older releases of openstack 19:10:38 yep 19:11:37 so far we have been seeing primarily scripts 19:11:42 so with this input i’m getting that we _aren’t_ going to support creating releases 19:11:53 can we have it loock for the versions in the script or have it called out there 19:12:10 when we are building tools which needs interop, we can evaluate the need for releases 19:12:13 my 2cents 19:12:25 I think that's a great idea once we get more continous commits. 19:12:32 raginbajin: agreed 19:12:40 primarily given the amount of people involved and the effort it is needed for the release 19:12:41 I think we are fortunate to get what we have. 19:12:51 raginbajin: agreed 19:12:51 raginbajin: it is only the begining 19:13:16 balajin: that’s true, but we still need to get involvement 19:13:43 it’s not growing at a constant rate by any standard; we built it…but the aren’t coming 19:13:57 I think it goes back to the work load to do this at this point in time. I think it's a great idea, just not at this junction 19:14:11 +! 19:14:14 +1 19:14:30 raginbajin: works for me 19:15:06 anything else or continue on? 19:15:37 #topic Talk about osops-coda 19:15:59 we have another official osops project: 19:16:11 #link https://github.com/openstack/osops-coda 19:16:35 i just wanted to make sure everyone saw it and we are slowly growing the namespace 19:16:53 I think it's great. 19:16:55 this one specifically we haven’t gotten gates in yet, but that’s still slowly happening 19:17:16 interesting. would this be useful for say cleaning up after rally runs ? 19:17:33 PaulCzar: that’s an interesting use case 19:17:53 nice 19:17:56 i could see a great opportunity there come to think of it 19:18:04 if y’all take some time to check it out that would be awesome 19:18:45 I could totally see something like coda moving towards release/packaging 19:19:05 PaulCzar: yep, that’s why it’s in it’s own repo 19:19:07 PaulCzar: +1 19:19:26 the previous topic was about tools-generic or tools-contrib 19:19:36 which causes…challenges 19:20:25 Will the HPE team manage the commits, etc 19:20:47 raginbajin: nope, they gave it to us to run with it after they get the gates in 19:21:15 they wanted the exposure to our community because they realized that if they spun up their own project no one would ever look at it 19:21:29 ahh. Do we fear that since none of us really work on Coda that it will eventually go stale or we can't keep up with any blueprints or bugs 19:22:06 ^^ I worry about this. 19:22:37 yeah that’s a challenge, it’s something that we’ll have to see happen et al. just the exposure alone is the most important part 19:22:42 totally ... is this repo "upstream" for the HPE team ... or do they work on their own repo and push up to it ? 19:22:54 neither, the project is dead at HPE 19:23:00 ahhh 19:23:04 glhf ? 19:23:10 heh 19:23:11 they wanted to give it to OS as something that we could use if we wanted to 19:23:42 was there talk about it becoming part of horizon ? 19:23:44 PaulCzar: in essence yeah. 19:23:49 that too 19:24:00 this is a place where we could if we see the use cases 19:24:42 we just need to see if the project takes off 19:25:44 ok, we have a couple more things to go through before we get to new business 19:25:53 #topic notes4chairs 19:25:59 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OSOpsNotes4Chairs 19:26:11 I created this wiki page so we can start helping out Chairs for this meeting 19:26:39 I don’t want to be the chair forever, and i hope someone else will be willing to take it and run with it 19:26:57 we can take it out of this meeting and talk about a way to get volunteers to step up 19:27:20 any thoughts or questions? going to wait for 3 mins before moving on….. 19:27:36 But j^2 you've done a great job. why would you not do this forever? You are much better than me.. 19:27:43 raginbajin: ha! 19:27:52 +1 19:28:15 I will add,while projects are in their infancy it's pretty important to have a strong and consistent leader 19:28:18 unless not a big burden for you j^2, i would like you to continue until we gain momentum 19:28:22 which j^2 fits the bill 19:28:38 See even balajin thinks you are better than me.. Even though my last name is almost his username.. 19:28:44 :) 19:28:59 raginbajin, PaulCzar, balajin: wow, thanks, ok, i’ll continue on, i had no idea I was worried that i was playing too much of a dictator 19:29:18 raginbajin: sorrythat came out of context 19:29:29 it is for j^2 doing a good job and asking to continue 19:29:35 :D 19:29:44 ok, cool, thanks guys 19:29:47 sorry, no inner readings please :) 19:30:00 #topic Waiting on so we can add the bashte jobs to tools generic 19:30:13 so we’ve added bashte jobs to tools-generic as a gate 19:30:26 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229031/ 19:30:30 #link -> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229043/ 19:30:38 hey, sorry Im late.. 19:30:43 which is what we are expecting 19:30:56 i need to add the pep8 to tools-generic also 19:31:05 unless someone can take that action item 19:31:29 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4zyjLyBp64 19:31:44 it’s funnier if you get the title after the fact 19:32:04 * jamespd giggles 19:32:43 heh, ok, so i’ll take getting pep8 in 19:32:50 ok, new businees 19:32:53 business 19:33:02 #topic paulcz: talk about moving the terriform tooling to it's own repo 19:33:09 PaulCzar: make your case :D 19:33:48 I don't feel too strongly about it ... but I think it might make sense to have an official terraform repo 19:34:07 We're getting enough repos, maybe we should go for our own tree? like openstack-ops? 19:34:38 I bet infra would be up for it. And they're the ones who maintain this... 19:35:05 rockyg: that makes sense, but at the same time we need more involvement before we “break away” or whatever 19:35:32 as a reminder, the ultimate goal of this project is to get Operators an “easy way” to get ATC 19:35:34 we should probably get more participation before getting it its own repo tho 19:35:39 I think we can up participation by socializing at the midcycle. Any of you gonna be ther? 19:35:40 PaulCzar: agreed 19:35:45 ATC is an interestingpoint 19:36:03 rockyg: couldn’t get the funds to make it happen. England was too far :( 19:36:06 I don't get a lot of time to contribute upstream because I'm always fighting the tire fire that is operating openstack 19:36:19 Full agreement. But infra repos=ATC (and defcore doesn't) 19:36:31 and not getting ATC for doing this ... makes me less inclined to do it 19:36:43 when I could work elsewhere upstream and get ATC 19:36:51 ROI and all that 19:37:03 Can we put together an etherpad I can socialize at the midcycle? I'll be there. 19:37:04 yep, we need involvement and a “group” of people before we can ask to get approved to get ATC. It was/is a chicken and egg problem 19:37:54 Also, on folks running for board, JJ and I are not the only ones who want ATC for Ops participants.... Just so you know where to put your votes;-0 19:38:11 ha! well said rockyg 19:38:34 And, yeah. The TC holding the power is kinda difficult. 19:39:10 But FYI, TC is looking to update the OpenStack mission to include Ops/User community as part of mission statement 19:39:38 i recall j^2 mentioning something about ops getting ATC 19:39:51 and that was the primary reason we were going for osops under big tent 19:39:56 am i missing someting 19:40:01 Yeah. Lots of user community oriented folks are pushing. 19:40:02 balajin: yep :D that was the ultimate goal 19:40:02 or was it for the openstack-chef stuff 19:40:20 Nope. Ops code contributions should count. 19:40:23 balajin: that’s true, openstack-chef you do already 19:40:39 everyone need to realize that ops support is as critical as code 19:41:05 balajin: yep, that’s more true then most anything 19:41:07 agreed 19:41:24 +1000 and that the projects are writing code for ops and apps dev, not themselves 19:42:37 we kinda went off topic here 19:42:51 is there any objection to moving PaulCzar ’s changes to it’s own repo? 19:42:56 Speaking of which, fYI, if you're not aware, I'm the person puushing log improvements, but I've realized we have to fix config options global, and locations, etc to all be talking about the same thing 19:43:12 ++ to new repo 19:43:55 cool, i’ll make that happen asap 19:44:04 last topic then open floor 19:44:13 #topic balajin: Fixing the ical to reflect correct dates (it shows up on my calendar every week) 19:44:22 yah, just added that 19:44:24 yep, that annoys the hell out of me too 19:44:29 there were several folks in this irc last week 19:44:31 including me 19:44:43 and me... 19:44:47 :) 19:44:49 I’ve been posted on the mailing list pretty regularly ;) 19:44:56 and I keep getting the time wrong :-( 19:45:07 ok, i’ll take the item to clean that up 19:45:31 (i’m starting to think this is a chance for y’all just to point out where I’ve fucked up or missed something) 19:45:35 :P 19:45:49 anyway, i’ll make it happen :D 19:45:55 Well, in that case..... 19:45:56 #topic open floor 19:46:19 ok, so selfishly, if y’all haven’t voted yet, please consider me as a candidate :D 19:46:25 JJ Asghar 19:46:33 Your doing great and thanks for your hard work and I'm voting for you....and me....and Stephano 19:46:45 I’d love to continue this work and a macro level; and i think i can :D 19:46:55 rockyg: +1+ 19:47:04 j^2: i have done my bit for you 19:47:07 And please consider me, too. I think JJ and I could make a great team ;-0 19:47:11 :D 19:47:21 * jamespd makes notes 19:48:31 does this image make sense? 19:48:32 https://wiki.openstack.org/w/images/5/5a/Osops-tools-process.png 19:48:44 Guys, I'm gonna try to put together a spreadsheet of all the config opts out there, what the defaults are, where they get set/reset/changed, etc. If I can get it together before the midcycle, I'd love you guys to edit/comment 19:48:52 Itll be a google sheet 19:49:07 ok 19:49:18 j^2: yeah, I like the image. 19:49:24 jamespd: :D 19:50:28 Nova is making there stuff more consistent, so I think we can get global configs in N. and I like the image, too. Can you merge that in as a readme image (as opposed to readme.rst)? 19:50:48 rockyg: not sure tbh 19:51:09 getting that image up there was a lot harder then it should have been 19:51:35 The file would just a binary instead of text. It *should* work, but that doesn't mean it *will* 19:51:56 Can't do diffs across versions, but....don't really need that. 19:52:07 time check 8 mins 19:52:20 anyone who hasn’t spoken up, is there anything you’d like to talk about? 19:52:54 etherpad for what you want me to report to midcycle... 19:53:26 j^2, could you put something together for me? 19:53:29 rockyg: I'll likely be at midcycle as well 19:53:48 rockyg: yeah i’m not 100% sure on this tbh. what’s an email addy i can talk to you off line? 19:54:11 Great! and if we have a start of etherpad, we can discuss at next meeting. rockyg at gmail dot com 19:54:19 kk, will do 19:54:28 kewl! 19:54:59 I just try to juggle too many tasks to make things better....tend to drop/forget them 19:55:39 cool, anything else? 19:56:56 awesome, thanks everyone, i’ll put notes and all together 19:57:04 Doing a great job j^2 19:57:05 thanks j^2. 19:57:07 and send something to the the ML probably tomorrow 19:57:23 #endmeeting