16:00:04 #startmeeting policy 16:00:08 ping raildo, ktychkova, rderose, htruta, hrybacki, atrmr, gagehugo, lamt, thinrichs, edmondsw, ruan, ayoung, morgan, raj_singh, johnthetubaguy, knikolla, nhelgeson 16:00:09 Meeting started Wed Jun 7 16:00:04 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is lbragstad. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:13 The meeting name has been set to 'policy' 16:00:16 o/ 16:00:18 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-policy-meeting 16:00:19 o/ 16:00:21 o/ 16:00:24 o/ 16:00:59 * johnthetubaguy lurks 16:01:10 o/ 16:02:23 #topic policy docs in keystone 16:02:44 o/ (sort of) 16:02:51 as mentioned in the keystone meeting yesterday - there is an effort to pick up the policy docs works 16:03:02 there isn't much left to document 16:03:04 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/keystone+branch:master+topic:bp/policy-docs 16:03:22 it's really just addressing the remaining comments and getting those patches across the finish line 16:03:31 then the policy-docs spec will be implemented 16:04:06 samueldmq: hrybacki and myself are working on addressing the comments, any reviews would be greatly appreciated 16:04:54 #topic policy specs and goals 16:04:58 hi all 16:05:08 we have a bunch of policy goals and specs in flight 16:05:50 it would be nice to merge the ones we agree with or provide feedback on them 16:06:00 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460344/ 16:06:08 ^ general policy goals document 16:06:16 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ 16:06:37 ^ roadmap for providing security via policy improvements (which I could probably update) 16:06:45 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460344/ 16:06:50 ^ global role assignments in keystone 16:07:33 those are all pretty neat imo, it would be great to get feedback from other projects too 16:07:43 we've been getting feedback, slow but sure 16:07:47 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/117949.html 16:08:07 yeah - project feedback on those would be good 16:08:30 maybe we can make a point to get on the meeting agenda for other projects to raise awareness? 16:08:53 lbragstad: that'd be great 16:09:16 i think the cinder meeting is taking place rightn ow 16:09:26 yep 16:09:46 ok - if we end this one early - i'll swing by and ask 16:09:58 otherwise i'll propose it for the agenda next week 16:10:55 I've also proposed a queens goal for moving policy into code and documenting it 16:10:56 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469954/ 16:11:20 since several folks here are familiar with that concept, any reviews there (keeping me honest) would be great 16:12:40 #action lbragstad to swing to get cross-project involvement on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468436/ 16:12:46 #undo 16:12:47 Removing item from minutes: #action lbragstad to swing to get cross-project involvement on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468436/ 16:12:50 lbragstad: that is for Queens correct? 16:12:58 #action lbragstad to get cross-project involvement on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468436/ 16:13:01 samueldmq: yes 16:13:26 nice, seems a good target, would be really hard if we were targeting Pike 16:13:41 samueldmq: which would impact keystone, but it would hopefully set us up for other policy improvements if we decide to start introducing better roles by default 16:13:53 which johnthetubaguy had some specs proposed to do 16:14:11 #undo 16:14:11 Removing item from minutes: #action lbragstad to get cross-project involvement on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468436/ 16:14:11 lbragstad: would be great to have a wiki page 16:14:25 stating where each spec sits in the roadmap 16:14:34 #action lbragstad to get cross-project involvement on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/460344/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/462733/ 16:14:45 * lbragstad has too many tabs open 16:15:20 samueldmq: yeah 16:15:39 have people been keeping up with the admin-ness (global roles) discussion? 16:16:53 lbragstad: what discussion? in the ML? or just considering the options (global roles vs admin project) and reviewing 16:17:05 samueldmq: yeah - the ML thread specifically 16:17:29 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/117419.html 16:17:54 how do people feel about the options and feedback we've gotten from operators? 16:19:50 lbragstad: I prefer #2, the new global role concept 16:20:04 looks like people are inclined to that one too 16:20:13 I think #2 seemed to be more accepted of the choices from what the response emails sounded like 16:20:21 samueldmq yeah 16:20:26 that seems to be the consensus on the thread 16:21:26 ok - so i'll propose that spec backlog instead of ongoing, since the work hasn't started yet 16:21:44 i'll carve out some time to start working on the implementation 16:21:52 and propose it early 16:22:16 my goal would be to try and have it in a place where we can merge the work as soon as queens opens for development 16:23:12 if anyone is interested in helping with that effort, let me know or leave a comment on the contributors section of the review 16:23:31 #action lbragstad to propose global roles to backlog in preparation for queens 16:24:45 i think that's about all i had for specs and goals 16:24:49 #topic open discussion 16:25:53 floor is open in case anyone has anything they'd like to discuss 16:27:23 alrighty - well looks like we can get some time back 16:27:29 thanks for coming! 16:27:31 #endmeeting