21:00:43 <carolbarrett> #startmeeting product_working_group
21:00:43 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Oct 17 21:00:43 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is carolbarrett. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:44 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:00:47 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'product_working_group'
21:00:47 <pchadwick> o/
21:00:50 <piet_> o/
21:00:52 <kencjohnston> o/ howdy
21:00:57 <MeganR> o/
21:01:34 <pchadwick> I can only see the first slide in the roadmap deck.
21:02:38 <CarolBarrett_> I'm back my web client crashed on me...
21:02:48 <CarolBarrett_> Who is here for the product WG meeting?
21:03:25 <pchadwick> o/ (again)
21:03:26 <KrishR> o/
21:03:28 <MeganR> o/
21:03:46 <kencjohnston> o/
21:03:51 <CarolBarrett_> The agenda for the meeting can be found here
21:04:02 <CarolBarrett_> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/product-team
21:04:17 <CarolBarrett_> Low turn out today, no surprise.
21:04:26 <CarolBarrett_> We've got a couple of things to cover.
21:04:53 <CarolBarrett_> After this meeting, aside from BCN, our next meeting will be 11/7
21:05:11 <CarolBarrett_> #topic Working Session in Barcelona
21:05:41 <CarolBarrett_> Hmmmm, not sure meetbot is working...
21:05:51 <CarolBarrett_> #endmeeting
21:06:10 <CarolBarrett_> Definitely not....
21:06:22 <Rockyg> Oops. just missed this.
21:06:36 <Rockyg> bug layoff at HPE today
21:06:54 <CarolBarrett_> It was a challenge to find a time for our working session in BCN that didn't have a lot of conflicts for attendees
21:07:01 <CarolBarrett_> Hi Rockyg
21:07:24 <CarolBarrett_> We are scheduled for 10/27 from 11:00 -12:30
21:07:32 <CarolBarrett_> Does everyone have that on your calendar?
21:07:36 <kencjohnston> I do
21:07:48 * pchadwick does
21:08:01 <MadhuKashyap> Yes
21:08:11 <MeganR> yes
21:08:20 <CarolBarrett_> excellent!
21:08:24 <CarolBarrett_> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PWG_Session_Oct16_BCN
21:08:31 <CarolBarrett_> That's the etherpad for the session
21:09:21 <CarolBarrett_> Looking for someone to lead the Ocata Goals discussion - any volunteers?
21:09:38 <kencjohnston> I'll signup
21:09:54 <pchadwick> I thought we decided that Ocata was mostly maintenance and we should focus on Pike?
21:10:21 <kencjohnston> pchadwick: Yikes, did we tell the project teams that? :)
21:10:24 <CarolBarrett_> The discussion topic was around goals for the WG during the Ocata cycle - sorry about that
21:10:37 <shamail> o/
21:10:42 <CarolBarrett_> LOL
21:10:47 <CarolBarrett_> Hi Shamail
21:10:56 <pchadwick> kencjohnston: hah
21:11:24 <pchadwick> kencjohnston: Lines 22/23 in the Etherpad.
21:12:03 <pchadwick> That said, I'm willing to help.
21:12:44 <kencjohnston> To CarolBarrett_ I think the Goals and Leads discussion is more about our goals as the PWG
21:12:56 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston: Agree
21:12:59 <pchadwick> makes sense
21:13:17 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: will you lead that discussion?
21:13:34 <CarolBarrett_> Never mind, kencjohnston beat you to it.
21:13:39 <CarolBarrett_> Thanks kencjohnston!
21:13:45 <kencjohnston> I'll add pchadwick as well. :)
21:13:57 <pchadwick> Well - you asked for volunteers - so yes.
21:14:17 <CarolBarrett_> Thanks to both of you!
21:14:18 <CarolBarrett_> If you have any other open discussion topics, pls add them to the etherpad too.
21:14:32 <CarolBarrett_> any questions/comments about the BCN working session?
21:14:55 <kencjohnston> none here
21:15:05 <pchadwick> No
21:15:19 <CarolBarrett_> OK - let's move on
21:15:35 <CarolBarrett_> #topic Roadmap Presentation content review
21:15:49 <CarolBarrett_> #link https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtM4AiszlEyak51cVZkUVVmMlU/view?usp=sharing
21:16:21 <CarolBarrett_> This is a draft, very interested in help to improve the content!
21:17:21 <CarolBarrett_> As you'll see, we created a couple of slides to cover the top 3-4 deliverables, focusing on value prop, for the top 8 projects
21:17:54 <CarolBarrett_> Could especially use help on those slides
21:18:41 <kencjohnston> Can you provide some brief rationale for the "Top 8" slides? Not on teh choice of the top 8, but why have a specific call out?
21:19:42 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston: We wanted to provide some specific info for the audience about the newton release, in addition to educating them about the roadmap, where to findit and how to read it
21:20:09 <kencjohnston> OK, so this is kinda like "highlights from the newton release" got it makes sense.
21:20:26 <CarolBarrett_> Yes, that's it.
21:20:36 <CarolBarrett_> Is there something we can do to make that more clear?
21:20:55 <CarolBarrett_> Also, do people agree or have other thoughts on the top 3 for each project?
21:21:02 <pchadwick> And we wanted it to focus on customer value props.
21:21:25 <pchadwick> Some of the line items from the PTLs are pretty low level.
21:21:51 <kencjohnston> Maybe in the title slide  that says "newton highlights" have a sub-heading that says "A culmination of the OpenStack release notes for the top/core eight projects."
21:21:57 <kencjohnston> and link to the full release notes.
21:22:13 <pchadwick> Makes sense
21:22:35 <CarolBarrett_> That's good!
21:22:42 <kencjohnston> is glance in or out of the top 8?
21:22:52 <Arkady_Kanevsky> hello, sorry for being late
21:22:58 <kencjohnston> culmination isn't the right word, "abbreviated" "distillation"?
21:23:13 <pchadwick> Cliff notes?
21:23:21 <KrishR> i would think Glance belongs above Telemetry in the Top 8
21:23:28 <kencjohnston> Cliff Notes for the OpenStack Release Notes
21:23:40 <kencjohnston> KrishR: Glance is in the backup section
21:23:47 <shamail> That’s a good idea kencjohnston
21:24:39 <CarolBarrett_> We looked over the glance info, but weren't able to translate it into strong customer value props, so we decided to focus on the other 8
21:25:06 <kencjohnston> makes sense, CarolBarrett_ I agree with that decision.
21:25:41 <CarolBarrett_> Glad to hear that
21:26:04 <Arkady_Kanevsky> +1. The only key glance delivered was usage of conder as backend of glance.
21:26:09 <Arkady_Kanevsky> And that still doe snot work
21:26:10 <KrishR> CarolBarrett: am ok with that decision
21:26:43 <pchadwick> It also added some Hyper-V disk support which is admittedly a corner-case.
21:27:19 <Arkady_Kanevsky> do we want to have a slide that tie them together? like CI, refstack?
21:27:46 <pchadwick> I think we are trying to cut down on the slides, no?
21:27:53 <CarolBarrett_> What's the feedback on the items listed for the other 8 projects?
21:27:59 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: +1
21:29:15 <kencjohnston> CarolBarrett_: It appears that some speak to operator value, but others are more Openstack developer value.
21:29:18 <Arkady_Kanevsky> Agree on fewer slides.
21:29:26 <pchadwick> carolbarrett: which slides are the ones that you consider closest to done?
21:29:28 <kencjohnston> For instance - Horizon "Angular actions return a structured object."
21:29:45 <pchadwick> That one did not get my vote.
21:30:07 <pchadwick> I'm assuming that most of the people that come to our session are operators more than developers.
21:30:13 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston: good point
21:30:24 <Arkady_Kanevsky> But we still need to say verbally that there other pieces that are on community roadmap that are required and being done to deliver on themes to support all projects
21:30:31 <CarolBarrett_> pcahdwick: I think all of the value prop slides are WIP
21:30:41 <kencjohnston> The Neutron ones all appear to be good and geared towards operators/app developers
21:30:51 <Arkady_Kanevsky> CarolBarrett +1
21:31:07 <pchadwick> For some reason - I have 15 or 16 slides in the deck, and some of them repeat.
21:31:17 <CarolBarrett_> Arkady_Kanevsky: we'll make that point through slides 7-11
21:31:22 <kencjohnston> We talk about "convergence mode" in Heat a lot, I which we had a better way of explaning the value here. "Self Healing/Updating Stacks"?
21:31:28 <kencjohnston> s/which/wish
21:31:29 <pchadwick> Ah - I see that they are the builds.
21:31:45 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: You're looking at the presentation deck, which includes manual build slides
21:32:01 <kencjohnston> Nova looks good, keystone looks good
21:32:05 <pchadwick> carolbarrett: yes, thanks.
21:32:18 <Arkady_Kanevsky> still 25 build sldies
21:32:22 <CarolBarrett_> Slide 15 and 20 will not be in the final deck
21:32:25 <kencjohnston> AODH - "Batch" ?
21:32:43 <pchadwick> Batch processing to improve throughput.
21:32:57 <pchadwick> Somehow got truncated in translation.
21:32:58 <kencjohnston> pchadwick: OK, those words are better. :)
21:32:59 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston: we're struggling with the translation for telemetry. Can you help?
21:33:29 <kencjohnston> I'd suggest not breaking out into Ceilometer and AODH and keeping them as they are
21:33:36 <kencjohnston> the composite rules for aodh are for alarming right?
21:33:46 <shamail> yep
21:33:49 <kencjohnston> So "Composite rules for alarms"
21:33:51 <pchadwick> Yes - If and/or
21:33:56 <kencjohnston> and delete the "Batch"
21:34:08 <pchadwick> slide 29 had the first pass
21:34:15 <kencjohnston> then the four are just Magnum Support, New Meters, Message batch processing and Composite rules for alarms
21:34:21 <Arkady_Kanevsky> what about Gnocchi that is part of telemetry?
21:34:48 <KrishR> kencjohnston: +1
21:34:51 <kencjohnston> Don't list the subproject names, no one wants to have to know them.
21:34:59 <kencjohnston> Although now I'm hungry...
21:35:14 <pchadwick> arkady_kanevsky: There were no releaes notes for Gnocchi.
21:35:23 * pchadwick looked
21:35:24 <Arkady_Kanevsky> then why are we separate cilometer and AODH?
21:35:43 <pchadwick> First pass - I am ok with not making the distinction
21:35:45 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston +1
21:36:16 <Arkady_Kanevsky> pchadwick - OK
21:36:59 <Arkady_Kanevsky> In that case I prefer not to list ceilometer and AODH as separate sections under telemetry
21:37:34 <CarolBarrett_> Can you all help with Neutron too? Would like more impactful benefits
21:37:37 <Arkady_Kanevsky> that will avoid gnocchi question
21:37:40 <pchadwick> Yes.
21:37:43 <CarolBarrett_> Ditto Swift
21:38:20 <kencjohnston> I actually like the Neutron ones
21:38:41 <kencjohnston> Swift I like them as well accept for the last one
21:38:42 <kencjohnston> because it is cut off
21:38:58 <shamail> I am going to have to drop to prep for a 6P meeting.  I look forward to seeing all of you next week!  Carol, did we confim Thursday w/ Erin?
21:39:14 <pchadwick> I agree on the Swift ones - they are straight forward.
21:39:24 <kencjohnston> what is the final line on the last one?
21:39:41 <CarolBarrett_> Shamail: Yes, Our working session is the 27th from 11:00 -12:30
21:39:41 <pchadwick> performance improvement for erasure coding
21:39:50 <kencjohnston> ah perfect
21:39:52 <shamail> Thank you!
21:40:12 * shamail out.
21:40:24 <pchadwick> Since we are going to end up doing a bunch of builds, cutting the number of slides seems less relevant
21:40:49 <pchadwick> Perhaps we do 2 projects a slide which gives a bit more room
21:40:56 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: +1; It's about making the content better suited to presentation
21:41:08 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick - could do that
21:41:29 <CarolBarrett_> Do we have the right items for Horizon?
21:41:40 <pchadwick> Carolbarrett: I agree on relevance - it is just that at some point we lose some signal.
21:42:42 <kencjohnston> I think the only really relevant Horizon item is the last one "Support for managing neutron L3 agent hosts"
21:42:52 <pchadwick> kencjohnston: +1
21:43:13 <pchadwick> and possibly Admin dashboard for floating IPs.
21:43:25 <kencjohnston> Unless there is a specific user improvement that the other three provide
21:43:37 <kencjohnston> oh if we have Admin dashboard for Floating IPs that is great
21:43:45 <CarolBarrett_> What about the ability to operate Horizon without Nova or Glance?
21:44:13 <kencjohnston> CarolBarrett_: I saw that, does that mean previously Horizon would fail if no Nova endpoint was available?
21:44:22 <pchadwick> Is that what "standalone Horizon" means?
21:44:31 <david-lyle> yes
21:44:34 <david-lyle> re: Horizon
21:44:35 <CarolBarrett_> kencjohnston: I'm assuming so
21:44:40 <CarolBarrett_> thanks David-lyle
21:44:45 <david-lyle> we used to required nova and glance
21:44:52 <david-lyle> in addition to keystone
21:45:09 <david-lyle> but for say a swift/keystone deployment horizon will now work
21:45:10 <kencjohnston> david-lyle: is the primary use case there for swift deployments
21:45:24 <david-lyle> kencjohnston: yes
21:45:37 <david-lyle> but also some clouds have variable service catalogs
21:45:38 <pchadwick> Can we just say Horizon supports Swift-only deployments
21:45:50 <david-lyle> depending on the users roles and what they're logging into
21:45:55 <kencjohnston> pchadwick: +1
21:46:08 <david-lyle> *user
21:46:19 <CarolBarrett_> Theoretically, wouldn't it be possible for people to use Horizon in other custom configs?
21:46:43 <kencjohnston> "Support for Swift Only Users"?
21:46:58 <kencjohnston> I get david-lyle's point, if you have a cloud with Nova but you don't want to provide access to that endpoint to a set of keystone users who should only use swift
21:47:05 <kencjohnston> they couldn't use horizon before
21:47:06 <pchadwick> Yes, and we can say "and other custom configurations"
21:47:11 <notmyname> FYI hurricanerix is interested in swift+horizon work. I just told him y'all were talking about it in here
21:47:19 <hurricanerix> o/
21:47:36 <CarolBarrett_> So how do we want to capture that in a short 1 liner?
21:48:00 <pchadwick> Horizon support for Swift Only Users
21:48:09 <pchadwick> (... and other custom configs)
21:48:23 <kencjohnston> pchadwick: +1
21:48:37 <CarolBarrett_> Got it - thanks!
21:48:53 <pchadwick> So, I have 3 for Horizon now,
21:49:01 <pchadwick> ...Swift only
21:49:06 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: yes
21:49:14 <pchadwick> ... manage Neutron L3...
21:49:27 <pchadwick> ... floating IPs \
21:50:32 <CarolBarrett_> 4 in total
21:50:39 <Arkady_Kanevsky> Carol for the future PTL questionare we need to ask them for top 3.
21:51:15 <CarolBarrett_> Arkady_Kanevsky: Agree. Also think we should put more effort into gettting the Ops value prop
21:51:28 <Arkady_Kanevsky> for operators not developers.
21:51:33 <Rockyg> ++
21:51:39 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick:The 4th one i have is Plugin access to Keystone Tokens
21:51:58 <pchadwick> OK
21:52:13 <CarolBarrett_> Any other comments?
21:52:21 <CarolBarrett_> This has been very helpful!
21:53:15 <CarolBarrett_> IF you do have other thoughts, pls send them to me and I'll work with Pete and Shamail to finalize the deck
21:53:27 <CarolBarrett_> The last topic for today is planning for the Ops Meetup
21:53:39 <CarolBarrett_> #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/barcelona-2016/summit-schedule/global-search?t=Ops+Summit%3A
21:54:31 <CarolBarrett_> Are User Story Owners set for sessions that relate to your user stories? Does anyone need coverage?
21:54:53 <KrishR> CarolBarrett: I need coverage
21:55:01 <kencjohnston> KrishR: I can cover fleet
21:55:05 <KrishR> requesting kencjohnston to cover for me on Fleet
21:55:12 <kencjohnston> KrishR: :)
21:55:19 <KrishR> :)
21:55:23 <CarolBarrett_> thanks kencjohnston
21:55:31 <CarolBarrett_> Any other coverage needed?
21:56:33 <CarolBarrett_> I'll take that to mean no...
21:56:44 <CarolBarrett_> We have a couple of mins left - any opens?
21:57:00 <kencjohnston> none here, thanks CarolBarrett_ !
21:57:02 <piet_> Yeah
21:57:11 <Rockyg> nope
21:57:18 <pchadwick> What is the assumption on the Feedback to PWG session?
21:57:24 <MeganR> Safe travels everyone!
21:57:37 <Arkady_Kanevsky> see you in barcelona
21:57:42 <kencjohnston> MeganR: +1
21:57:44 <pchadwick> ciao
21:57:49 <CarolBarrett_> pchadwick: Shamail is leading that...it's based upon the questions we got from PTLs during the roadmap update cycle.
21:57:59 <CarolBarrett_> Would be good to have other PWG folks attend to help out too
21:58:04 <pchadwick> OK - I appear to have an analyst meeting then :(
21:58:23 <CarolBarrett_> I'm hoping to cover that session.
21:58:38 <CarolBarrett_> See you in Barcelona!
21:58:42 <CarolBarrett_> #endmeeting
21:58:45 <pchadwick> I'll put it on my agenda and see what I can do
22:00:16 <CarolBarrett_> meetbot is broken, not sure how to free up the channel for the next group...
22:01:00 <piet_> What does "yeah" mean in Spanish?
22:27:32 <anteaya> #endmeeting