21:00:25 #startmeeting product working group 21:00:26 Meeting started Mon Aug 1 21:00:25 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is carolbarrett. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:00:27 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:00:29 The meeting name has been set to 'product_working_group' 21:00:42 o/ 21:00:46 Hi Folks who is here for the product working group meeting? 21:00:51 o/ 21:00:52 You can find the agenda here: 21:00:54 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/product-team 21:01:01 Hi KrishR 21:01:12 Hi carolbarrett: 21:01:23 * MarkBaker here 21:01:35 Hi Markbaker 21:02:03 Hi Soyeh is here!' 21:02:25 Hi Soyeh 21:02:26 Hi everyone 21:02:31 Hi Shamail 21:02:32 o/ 21:02:36 Hi Leong 21:02:42 hi 21:02:44 Let's get started 21:02:56 #topic Upcoming meetings 21:03:38 There's a typo on the agenda - it should say 8/8 OpenStack Silicon Valley not 8/1... 21:04:14 Is anyone on this call going to be heading to OpenStack Silicon valley and unable to make this call on 8/8? 21:04:45 i'm not going to OpenStack silicon vallye 21:05:05 me neither 21:05:13 Not going to OSSV either 21:05:17 I'm passing as well 21:05:19 I will take silence to mean not going and can attend.. 21:05:26 Great - we'll keep next week's meeting 21:05:33 I'm not. 21:05:44 Then we will cancel 8/22 for our Midcycle 21:05:55 and Cancel 9/5 due to Labor Day holiday in US 21:06:03 Any questions on any of that? 21:06:11 carolbarrett: +1 21:06:29 Next topic... 21:06:35 #topic Midcycle Planning 21:06:36 carolbarrett, so we will not meet in NYC 8/22? 21:06:46 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/product-team#August_1.2C_2016_Product_Team_Meeting_Agenda 21:06:54 * MarkBaker missed last weeks call 21:07:04 I think carol means that we won't have the call, instead we meet 21:07:08 Markbaker: We will meet in NY for our midcycle, but will not have this call on that day 21:07:14 pchadwick +1 21:07:19 carolbarrett, got you - thanks 21:07:49 If you'd click on the etherpad link above, i'd like to talk through the agenda and prework 21:07:52 and timing 21:08:06 pls look at lines 24-39 in the etherpad 21:08:51 If you're planning to attend pls add your info to the attendee section starting at linke 3 21:09:19 meant: line 3 21:09:54 User Story owners: is 2 hrs enough time for review and discussion? 21:09:59 I removed my name, as I won't be able to join you 21:10:10 carolbarrett: should be 21:10:22 soyeh: bummer 21:10:46 OK - we'll plan for 2 hrs on that topic 21:11:04 for User Story Workflow - does 2 hrs seem like enough time? 21:11:20 shamail: What do you think? 21:13:05 I think 2 hours is plenty 21:13:16 too much? 21:13:20 It will mainly be a review 21:13:24 Yeah, 21:13:39 OK - we'll keep that at 2 hrs 21:13:48 I would recommend starting with 1.5 hours and we can discuss any open questions later 21:13:52 I don't think kenny is here, will check with him offline to validate time. 21:14:03 Shamail: Will there be pre-work for the topic? 21:14:04 Sounds good 21:14:18 pchadwick, KrishR: will there be prework for your user stories? 21:14:31 I would like to encourage people to read the wiki as a primer 21:14:36 Other than reading the story, no. 21:14:38 So that we can focus on Q&A 21:15:11 shamail, pchadwick: Can you send an email on the ML for this and include link to most recent info? 21:15:24 +1 21:15:32 Thank you 21:15:40 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam/User_Stories 21:15:47 Please read before the midcycle 21:15:58 #action shamail, pchadwick send email to ML for midcycle prework directions and links 21:16:00 carolbarrett: +1, will do 21:16:18 I see lots of activitiy in the etherpad on the Additional Topic 21:16:51 Pls add thoughts/questions on this, but we'll hold off on discussion til the 22nd - OK? 21:17:22 Are folks interested in going to dinner that night? 21:17:33 I would be carolbarrett 21:17:35 fine with me :-) 21:18:30 OK - I've added a section in the etherpad for dinner plans. Pls add your name there and we'll figure out where to go 21:18:54 Anything else on midcycle planning? 21:19:44 carolbarrett: assume we are talking about Monday night? 21:19:53 pchadwick: yes 21:20:19 lol - was paying attention to the ether pad and missed the original comment. 21:21:12 markbaker: are you flying in on Sunday? or Monday? 21:21:44 Let's move along... 21:21:58 #topic Ops Midcycle 21:22:06 Has anyone seen an agenda for this yet? 21:22:35 carolbarrett, Sun, but I will make it as late as I can to minimise disruption to Sun 21:22:49 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/NYC-ops-meetup 21:22:50 Not yet, I emailed Tom and Matt J. today 21:22:56 markbaker: understand, dinner will be Monday night 21:23:02 link has the brainstorming 21:23:03 shamail: Thanks. 21:23:27 I will try to make the 7AM Pacific Ops Meeting on Tuesday 21:23:42 We'll revisit this one next week 21:23:45 moving on 21:23:53 #topic CPL Updates 21:24:17 KrishR had volunteered to provide a Telemetry update 21:24:25 KrishR take it away! 21:24:39 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PWG_Telemetry_CPL_Update 21:24:57 summary is not much work on Ceilometer itself 21:25:07 carolbarrett, in that case count me in 21:25:10 focus has been on Aodh and the new Panko project 21:25:20 Panko = events split-out 21:25:25 markbaker: OK 21:26:07 Leong ahs been doing some additional work on scaling exercises using Gnocchi 21:27:00 What is the rationale for splitting out events from Ceilometer? 21:27:08 we'll need more work in Ceilometer itself next cycle to redirect events to Panko 21:27:13 to be precise... (not me) the ceilometer core developers are working on some gnocchi integration in my lab :-) 21:27:56 don't know the full explanation, but the telemetry team has been on the path of breaking up into multiple modules 21:28:00 to help scaling 21:28:58 So, referring to line 14 in the etherpad, if alarms, events, and samples are pulled out of Ceilometer, 21:29:02 what's left? 21:29:22 they've even stopped regular meetings....it's just collaboration on the irc channel 21:30:04 pchadwick: i guess Ceilometer becomes a "re-director" of sorts? 21:30:36 krishr: sounds less than interesting from a customer value. 21:30:45 I think it's just to facilitate collection of metrics? What you do with them and how you store them is being broken out (from collection and each other)? 21:31:05 shamail: yes, that's correct 21:31:36 ceilometer will continue to do the polling 21:31:45 OK - so Ceilometer collects and then hands off to others. 21:32:05 yes 21:32:14 +1 21:32:25 OK - thanks. 21:32:52 ahy other questions? dont have much more to add 21:33:26 krishr: not from me - thanks. 21:33:48 good discussion 21:34:01 Anyone want to volunteer for next week? 21:35:11 don't all shout at once! :) 21:35:24 Lol 21:35:36 We'll come back to that next week.... 21:36:03 #topic Project Navigator/Show which Distros contain which projects 21:36:15 shamail: Do you want to take this one? 21:36:15 carolbarrett: I already had my 15 minutes of fame. 21:36:42 Sure 21:37:00 carolbarrett, I cuod have a stab at Designate if you like 21:37:00 Can you please add the link from the agenda as well? 21:37:19 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/r.0749ed9d8a670d65c267145350accefa 21:37:22 Thanks 21:37:40 MarkBaker: Thanks - will put you on the agenda for next week. 21:38:13 We had an ops-tag meeting at the Austin Summit and one of the tags that we discussed adding was to show which services are available in which distributions 21:38:55 Is the etherpad locked? 21:39:13 (E.g. list whether or not a package is available for a particular distribution and its status (packaged but not officially supported, experimental, fully supported by the Distro provider, etc.)) 21:39:20 pchadwick: It works for me 21:39:23 This is a read only version of the etherpad 21:39:48 The read/write version is available from the ops-midcycle page (under Austin) 21:40:15 We (the ops-tag team) thinks this data would be valuable and make a great addition to the project navigator 21:40:59 However, this content isn't published in a centralized location so I wanted to ask whether your teams could help us gather and maintain this information? 21:41:31 I would be glad to start an email thread with those that are interested in learning more 21:41:32 shamail, of course 21:41:46 Thanks MarkBaker 21:41:54 shamail: yes 21:42:05 shamail, I would add that in our case included does not necessarily mean supported 21:42:09 Thanks! 21:42:25 so you may need to be a little more precise in syntax used 21:42:33 Exactly MarkBaker, we had the DEB packaging team with us and we discussed that at length 21:42:54 We definitely need to work on possibly statuses 21:43:15 i.e Murano is packaged and avaiilable in Ubuntu but we won't support it under SLA 21:43:25 I'll start a separate thread and try to identify participants from additional distributions too 21:43:50 We also have to deal with "tech preview" as well 21:43:58 For SUSE, there are likely 4: Deployed supported, deployed tech preview, Supported, packaged 21:44:03 * MarkBaker chuckles 21:44:55 Supported and Deploy Support were the two we had a hard time distinguishing eloquently 21:45:06 Thanks MarkBaker and pchadwick 21:45:18 and "supported if you pay enough or super strategic but pls don't tell anyone else" 21:45:26 I think that concludes this Topic for now carolbarrett! 21:45:35 Lol MarkBaker 21:45:52 Thanks Shamail 21:46:02 Markbaker; +1 21:46:24 #topic Opns 21:46:26 next up is Opens - I'll come back to the Membership topic if we have no opens 21:46:29 #topic Opens 21:46:38 * MarkBaker has a topic 21:46:41 anyone have something to share 21:46:46 * shamail does too 21:46:47 MarkBaker - go ahead 21:47:31 shamail - you'll be next 21:47:36 so as many of you know, IBM has launched an Interop challenge with the goal of building a set of workload templates that work cross distribution 21:48:06 yep 21:48:28 The basis of this challenge is to try and address a user need to have workload portability across distributions 21:49:02 this is a noble goal and I'd like to ask the group if we can write a user journey to articulate this need 21:49:30 and set a roadmap for the likely milestones beyond the initial challenge 21:49:38 thoughts? 21:50:01 MarkBaker: +1, capturing the multiple layers of considerations for true interop/portability would be good to document/discuss 21:50:01 I haven't heard anything since the initial contact from IBM ~a month ago. 21:50:02 if anyone needs background on the initiative then happy to provide link to slides etc.. 21:50:14 Has there been follow up? 21:50:27 pchadwick: there was a poll, first meeting is supposed to be this Wednesday at 10A EST 21:50:32 pchadwick, not yet 21:50:43 shamail: did not see the poll. 21:50:46 1400 UTC 21:50:52 I can forward the invite if you didn't get it 21:51:11 Anyone else need it? 21:51:16 Thanks - but I have a conflict then. 21:51:24 pls forward that to me as well shamail, thanks! 21:51:26 I'll if we can cover. 21:51:27 Np 21:51:45 Please forward - I'll see if we can cover. 21:51:48 whilst it is possible that driving the interop is beyond the scope of product working group, it would be helpful for us to define the problem at least 21:51:49 Will do leong 21:51:53 Sure thing pchadwick 21:51:53 problem/need 21:52:10 MarkBaker +1 21:52:16 +1 markbaker 21:52:20 +1 21:52:27 Anything else on this one? 21:52:42 AR: to create a user story on distro interop? 21:52:48 I am happy to work on it, I guess I am looking for help from anyone else interested 21:53:07 markbaker: I can help 21:53:33 I'll help MarkBaker, +1 to Leong's suggested AR 🤓 21:53:33 pchadwick, thanks! 21:53:43 :) 21:53:46 #action Mark Baker, Shamail, others Create a user story on distro interop 21:54:07 We can touch base on this at the midcycle, maybe over lunch or... 21:54:16 Shamail: Go with your open 21:54:28 Can someone get me tickets to Hamilton? 21:54:31 Sorry, I digress. 21:54:48 I wanted to share a discussion from the dev ML 21:54:51 +1 21:54:56 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-August/100558.html 21:55:23 There is a topic about setting community/project wide goals by the TC moving forward 21:55:35 i saw that email thread as well 21:55:42 +1 21:55:47 The initial ones are things that are already in flight but future ones may encompass multiple release efforts 21:55:55 * MarkBaker didn't really understand it tho 21:56:05 I suggested possibly creating user stories or using the tracker to track progress on the goals 21:56:39 There seems to be a good opportunity for alignment and for the PWG and SWG to share documentation and tracking techniques :) 21:56:49 it seems that the comment at the end is that our user stories don't have a very good "definition of done" 21:57:15 Can we get (or does it make sense) to get the developers to feed that into the stories. 21:57:16 I would agree with that pchadwick 21:57:38 We have usage scenarios but they are looking for implementation-level "done" qualifiers 21:58:00 +! 21:58:02 +1 21:58:18 In our current workflow, that fits into the implementation plan but that's a good question pchadwick 21:58:22 also no "timebound" 21:58:40 shamail, I'm not saying it makes sense 21:58:43 What is stopping us from including a final "read out" of the proposed plan and acceptance criteria 21:58:46 a goal will not be a goal if there is no timebound associated :) 21:58:54 leong: +1 21:59:09 There is a balance between having something that is readable/usable by the broader community 21:59:18 And something that can be put on a Trello card. 21:59:23 The user stories could simply be another artifact describing a goal, the tracker might still be useful though 22:00:02 True pchadwick 22:00:33 I just wanted to share the discussion/topic here in case anyone has a good intersection (or not) between stories and goals 22:01:10 An open-ended open-topic :) 22:01:14 That's all I had 22:01:37 We can talk about this as part of the workflow topic at our midcycle 22:01:47 +1 22:01:52 We're at the top of the hour - thanks everyone for joining 22:02:04 #endmeeting