14:02:08 #startmeeting puppet-openstack 14:02:09 Meeting started Mon Feb 9 14:02:08 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is EmilienM. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:02:12 er yes 14:02:12 The meeting name has been set to 'puppet_openstack' 14:02:16 #topic Review last week's Action items 14:02:23 spredzy sent an email on the ML to communicate about the trello -> done 14:02:23 crinkle to post puppet-openstack slides to the ML -> DONE (slides are shared) 14:02:23 Core-team to review and reduce backlog - http://goo.gl/L6eDRe 14:02:23 sbadia gardening in the launchpad bugs 14:02:23 People should review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/150108/ - still WIP 14:02:57 sbadia: all items have been addressed except the LP - any update? 14:03:09 for LP bugs, it's a wip, with matt) 14:03:18 ok 14:03:19 matt was added to the bug team 14:03:24 great thing 14:03:39 crinkle: you can roll the next topic ! 14:03:44 and for openstack LP team, I suggested to dan to give the owner bit to colleen 14:03:55 EmilienM: I think the chair has to #topic 14:03:59 ok 14:04:04 #topic keystone v3 14:04:24 #link Blueprint WIP: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/150108/ 14:04:37 crinkle: any details? 14:04:50 it's still WIP from richm afaik 14:05:20 I left some questions on the blueprint patch 14:05:34 so far I think it's looking good 14:06:32 great 14:06:54 I think we can move forward 14:07:02 okay 14:07:12 #topic summit 14:07:31 dprince and I submitted a presentation about TripleO and Puppet 14:07:49 that means we have 2 talks (registered) related to Puppet 14:07:57 #link TripleO/Puppet #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-puppet-vancouver-summit-proposal 14:08:27 I've submitted a talk on the puppet providers 14:08:35 oh great 14:08:39 crinkle: any link? 14:09:08 #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xQnfp2HAE7VKW3DzGhypDJOZiOWMVkkVxbiqLus5K-g/edit?usp=sharing 14:09:11 sorry it's in google 14:09:49 looks cool 14:10:41 yup +1! 14:11:07 next? 14:11:48 crinkle: I think it's early to start talking about design sessions 14:12:04 so #summit is closed except if someone else wanted to say something 14:12:24 crinkle: I don't have any other topic, we can start open discussion maybe 14:12:33 EmilienM: there are more topics in the wiki agenda 14:12:48 oops 14:13:07 indeed 14:13:12 #topic Future parser support 14:13:30 So puppet 4 is around the corner and I'd like the modules to be ready 14:13:53 so I added a card to the trello board for future parser support 14:14:20 FYI I use the future parser extensively and for the most part things are fine I think 14:14:21 it would be good for someone to go through the modules with the future parser turned on and correct errors 14:14:25 oh good 14:14:26 this came up over the weekend, this might be worth doing as in intermediate step - http://www.camptocamp.com/actualite/getting-code-ready-puppet-4/ 14:14:50 has lints to some puppet-lint extensions that check puppet4 compat items 14:14:55 err, links :) 14:15:31 we could add a puppet future parser syntax validation test to jjb as well 14:16:09 I agree that's what we want to long term, just figured if there are a lot of failures, then the lint checks might be a way to break it up into smaller units of work 14:16:13 nibalizer: maybe as non-voting to start 14:16:46 are the dependecy modules (mysql, mongo, etc ) future compatible? 14:17:09 mysql/postgresql are, unsure about mongo/rabbitmq 14:17:52 I can say that I'm pretty sure rabbit is good 14:18:00 cool 14:19:01 crinkle: maybe we could ensure travis is testing it on dep modules before all 14:19:39 EmilienM: oh that reminds me why this is tricky 14:19:45 I think it requires rspec-puppet 2.0 14:19:54 so we need to fix our tests to run with rspec-puppet 2.0 14:19:58 and unpin it 14:20:01 hehe 14:20:21 :-) (I'm working on it) 14:20:40 so work items are 1) fix rspec tests for new rspec-puppet, 2) add jenkins job to test on future parser 14:20:49 and if mdorman_ is right then there shouldn't be much work after that 14:21:07 agreed 14:21:15 sbadia: any status/progress? 14:21:19 and I'll look into getting the puppetlabs modules on rspecpuppet 2.0 and testing on future parser 14:21:46 sbadia: I see https://trello.com/c/eHXc1Ryd/4-investigate-the-necessary-change-to-be-rspec-puppet-2-0-0-compliant 14:22:03 EmilienM: I just finished ou composition layer, but it's not related to puppet-openstack team :) 14:22:10 I can only speak for the mods I actually use, but if that subset is any indication I think the rest of them should be minor fixes 14:22:11 crinkle: sounds like a good plan 14:22:21 EmilienM: I think I can finish this for this week 14:24:11 crinkle: are we done with this topic? seems like we have a plan 14:24:19 #action sbadia to fix rspec-puppet tests 14:24:40 #action someone (nibalizer) to add jjb for future parser 14:24:43 okay done 14:24:59 #topic Minor releases 14:25:14 I was wondering whether we should make minor releases 14:25:22 it's been kind of a while since 5.0 14:25:28 but I know we're still working on keystone v3 support 14:25:38 so should we wait for that or make releases soonish? 14:26:33 I'd say it depends on the number of backports there have been 14:27:26 Unfortunately I think it's hard to say without going through them and seeing if people might be effected, or if the backports are more cosmetic things like Gemfile fixups 14:28:24 for keystone there have been quite a bit of backports, for others there has been less development 14:28:33 so probably wait a bit then 14:28:49 Sorry I'm late 14:28:49 it's about halfway through the cycle, that seems like a reasonable time to start thinking about it though 14:28:51 crinkle: I would wait until Kilo release 14:29:14 EmilienM: we don't want to never release minor releases 14:29:25 crinkle: ah minor, indeed 14:29:36 sorry, yes minor 14:30:12 I would go for it now 14:30:37 there is no huge blocker 14:30:50 crinkle: our modules are in good shape now, so why not? 14:31:25 well as dvorak pointed out there haven't been that many changes except in keystone 14:32:25 ok so no minor release then.. 14:32:36 i think wait a few more weeks 14:32:43 ok 14:32:44 crinkle: anything else? 14:32:54 #action revisit minor releases in a few weeks 14:32:57 EmilienM: not for me 14:33:03 #topic Open Discussion 14:33:31 I'd like to get people's thoughts on non-vendor packaging. What do people think about supporting tools like giftwrap, or virtual envs? 14:33:57 dvorak: how is it related to Puppet/OpenStack ? 14:34:00 I realize it's potentially a mine field, since there are a million ways to do it, but I think there are a fair number of operators doing their own thing in this area 14:34:11 EmilienM: supporting different package names and such 14:34:32 EmilienM: supporting it in the puppet modules 14:35:03 I think that would be cool 14:35:07 adds a lot of complexity though 14:35:23 We have a need to our own packaging and don't want to just copy what Canonical has, so I'm going to be doing some work on probably making giftwrap work with the designate module. I'm curious if it's worthwhile to bother trying to keep that in contributable form 14:35:58 Designate doesn't really have packaging for anything but Debian, so I think there is more utility for projects not yet fully baked 14:37:20 I don't know if this is an issue for other newer projects or not 14:37:36 I think the tempest module uses virtualenvs 14:38:35 yep tempest module can use packages or git/virtualenvs 14:38:38 crinkle: that you can disable - I dit the patch, because we have a package 14:38:41 did* 14:39:35 is there any action to take, can we go ahead? 14:39:52 I think dvorak is still looking for opinions 14:40:09 it's a good thing to have imo 14:40:37 +1 from me 14:40:52 That's basically all I was looking for, was whether or not it's acceptable in theory. I realize a lot of it depends on the details 14:41:24 dvorak: do you want to run/continue the discussion on the ML so people can be involved in that work - it seems like we agree to have something like this in our modules 14:41:32 We're planning to go down this path for all of our services, but Designate is what we're doing in the short term as a test case 14:41:51 EmilienM: That seems reasonable 14:41:57 great 14:42:09 On a different note, I was wondering if modulesync could support gerrit? (else how feasible would it be) so we could handle the Gemfile and dependencies in a single place for every modules. Since stackforge/puppet-* is getting bigger and bigger. < crinkle ? 14:42:22 #action dvorak starts discussion on ML about custom packaging support in our Puppet modules 14:42:43 spredzy: I'd love to accept a pull request to support gerrit, but I'm not sure how feasible it is 14:42:44 spredzy: +1 14:42:45 That sounds like a good idea spredzy 14:42:46 spredzy: +1 14:43:07 or a puppet-requirements repo 14:43:13 like they have with Python modules 14:43:28 so our modules could fetch this repo to build puppetfile + .fixtures.yaml 14:43:31 I'd actually like it for mostly internal use :) 14:43:40 I can take a first look at it and then we can asses how feasible it is. I mean I am thanksfull for sbadia this week and the pinning of rspec-core, but this can be made much better 14:43:59 EmilienM, it seems that the puppet community is going with modulesync as a best practice 14:43:59 crinkle: it's only a git+ssh url 14:44:11 from what I can read online, so might be a good idea to follow it imo 14:44:36 sbadia: but the process of doing a git-review is different than just git-push 14:44:42 so it's a little more complicated 14:45:08 indeed 14:45:14 crinkle: git review is actually just a fancy wrapper around git push 14:45:24 you can actually just push to a special ref to submit the review 14:45:32 I'll create a card, and people can put their finding there, until we get to a nice PR for crinkle to merge 14:45:41 we can use internal gerrit refs/for/ 14:45:45 but yes 14:46:13 spredzy: thx! 14:46:23 #action spredzy take a first look at how to integrate modulesync with gerrit 14:46:51 w00t a lot of things this week :) 14:46:58 :) 14:47:02 my brain starts to crash 14:47:06 \o/ 14:47:53 seems like we are ending the meeting 14:47:59 if there is anything else, rise your hand! 14:49:04 crinkle: sbadia: can I close? 14:49:13 sure 14:49:15 for me yes :) 14:49:18 #endmeeting