22:00:21 #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting 22:00:22 Meeting started Tue Aug 5 22:00:21 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:00:24 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 22:00:26 The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting' 22:00:33 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Solum Our Agenda 22:00:44 #topic Roll Call 22:00:47 Adrian Otto 22:00:53 Murali Allada 22:00:55 tom blankenship 22:00:56 Ravi Sankar Penta 22:00:57 James Li 22:01:18 Ed Cranford 22:02:32 o/ 22:02:56 welcome everyone! 22:03:11 #topic Announcements 22:03:21 (none prepared, any from the team?) 22:03:55 I am on ETO this week, and will be returning to work on Monday 22:04:17 but I have not checked in much in the past few weeks, so I wanted to touch down with you today 22:04:37 Ed, did we have action items from last week? 22:04:45 #topic Review Action Items 22:04:45 oh let me go check 22:04:51 tx 22:05:25 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/solum/2014/solum.2014-07-29-16.03.html 22:05:35 just one, ravips to add testing docs to repo 22:05:48 ok, status of that? 22:06:41 I did not add testing docs to the repo, I was able to update the wiki directly 22:06:51 updated https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/Testing, please review 22:07:34 ravips: so to add something to the repo, we need to submit it through Gerrit for review. Did you attempt that? 22:07:58 I did not find the corresponding rst file in the repo 22:08:00 I think the original attempt was to update the docs, and it was assumed that the repo was the route for that 22:08:13 but the wiki is just a wiki, there's no repo behind it 22:08:19 ok 22:08:28 so we can consider that action item complete 22:08:50 if we do have a gap in our docs, lets submit a bug ticket and then submit patches against that to resolve the gap 22:09:04 do we want to move our wiki content to rst files or leave it in wiki for editing? 22:09:08 Do members of our team feel the Wiki is sufficient? 22:09:37 most projects use rst files 22:09:44 not really wiki 22:09:45 I think if something feels like it belongs in the repo, and it's not changing rapidly, then we should put it in the repo docs, and link to that from the wiki 22:09:51 as they get forgotten 22:09:53 asalkeld: +1 22:09:58 i like having the wiki offhand as a reference 22:10:15 at worst we just copy and rstify the wiki to INSTALLING.rst and call it good 22:10:21 no dibs on that 22:10:42 ya, im ok with copying the same to rst 22:10:42 my 2 cents is that the Wiki is sufficient. 22:10:44 when to use wiki vs rst vs dockbook https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/HowTo#What_Docs_Go_Where.3F 22:10:45 it's not a big issue, I like our readthedocs tho' 22:11:15 http://solum.readthedocs.org/en/latest/ 22:11:56 ravips: according to that guideline this really is RST content for us, yeah? 22:12:12 yeah, I think RST is better for us 22:12:56 ravips: are you willing to take a new action to put that into RST? 22:12:58 I will create rst files for the existing content this week 22:13:07 it's okay if you table it for later 22:13:23 the action item could just be to file the bug ticket if you want to revisit it another time 22:13:41 ok i withdraw my 2 cents.. and let's put it in the repo :) 22:13:53 they'll have to be manually updated in the future should something change so it's understood that it's ongoing 22:14:14 so which is to become the authority, the repo or the wiki? 22:14:23 #action ravips to submit a bug ticket to track conversion of testing related Wiki content to RST, when convenient. Entered as a wishlist item. 22:14:51 datsun180b: the RST would be authoritative, and we can put links to it in the wiki for convenience 22:15:06 thanks, just wanted it in writing 22:15:15 the rationale is that our team should be comfortable merging patches 22:15:32 if we have content sourced by non-developers, we can look at alternate approaches 22:15:39 ok, next topic 22:15:56 #topic Blueprint/Task Review 22:16:03 #link https://launchpad.net/solum/+milestone/juno-2 Juno Development Tasks 22:16:14 Subject: Pipelines 22:16:27 updates on this? 22:16:58 adrian_otto, it's in and works 22:17:16 did a demo over the weekend 22:17:17 at pyconau 22:17:20 asalkeld: sweet! 22:17:24 nice 22:17:25 oh, that's awesome 22:17:36 so unittest is not in 22:17:49 but build and build_deploy are in and work 22:17:50 i was about to ask about de-fire-brigading those methods 22:18:00 asalkeld: is there a video or anything you could share? 22:18:10 since build calls to unittest and then deploy 22:18:12 tomblank, they will be uploading soon 22:18:13 of the pyconau demo? 22:18:23 https://www.youtube.com/user/PyConAU 22:18:25 asalkeld: great, thanks! 22:18:38 all kinds of talks there 22:18:46 interesting one about zerovm 22:18:51 ok, so what are our next steps with Pipelines, add the unittest module? 22:18:58 adrian_otto, yip 22:19:08 and ui 22:19:13 do we already have an assignee? 22:19:23 not yet 22:19:39 also need some integration with the infra stuff 22:19:53 i'm guessing the rpc methods in worker need to be updated 22:20:18 asalkeld: are you referring to integration with the build farm resources? 22:20:56 I'm investigating UI and horizon integration 22:20:59 yip 22:21:02 we need to get the outputs from the infra farm heat stack and feed that into the mistral context 22:21:14 (pipeline_handler) 22:21:37 muralia, even something simple to start with would be good 22:21:55 and integrates with mistal UI 22:22:01 and heat stacks 22:22:09 yup. I'm taking what paul was working on to help us create a simple mistral workflow and use that 22:22:22 ok, good. 22:22:33 any more thoughts on Pipelines before we advance to the next topic? 22:22:46 no, I am done 22:23:06 Subject: Build Farm 22:23:28 what's happened here in the past few weeks? 22:24:04 guest agent reviews 22:24:21 and some docker setup stuff 22:24:25 anything we should touch base on together today? 22:24:41 (not a good time for julienvey I guess) 22:24:57 I think he is/was out on vacation 22:25:07 stannie not in 22:25:38 ok, will come back to that next week 22:25:46 Subject: Private git repo integration (ravips) 22:26:07 ravips: how is this coming along? 22:26:18 completed the task last week, need code reviews from the team: https://review.openstack.org/105605 , https://review.openstack.org/109468 , https://review.openstack.org/111846 22:26:44 ok, good! 22:26:59 ravips, were you able to figure out why the f20 gate keeps failing? 22:27:26 yes, look at this change https://review.openstack.org/111846 22:27:32 Jenkins did not vote on 109468? 22:27:51 probably waiting for us to move on it first 22:28:10 i see a +1 from jenkins 22:28:12 adrian_otto: barbican was not installed on devstack and that causing functionaltests to fail 22:28:14 oh nevermind, i see muralia there 22:28:42 ravips: I see, so 109468 addresses that? 22:28:43 muralia was talking about the same issue, https://review.openstack.org/111846 should fix jenkins problem 22:29:01 cool. i think most people were waiting for jenkins to +1 before they revire. 22:29:49 then i need +1 for 111846 :) 22:30:14 ok, so I aded a +2 on 109468 22:30:19 I've been testing your code ravi. I'm having a few issues with hookinh up the trigger url with my git repo to test git push, but seems to be working. good stuff. 22:30:38 muralia: that's exciting! 22:30:49 This is going to be a really slick feature. Let 22:31:12 Let's help ravips finish it up by getting those reviews in 22:31:26 can do 22:31:31 we dont support branches yet though. solum will always pull from master. 22:31:46 muralia: lets chat on solum after the call about the issues you faced 22:32:09 muralia: we might want to track our caveats like that one in tech tebt task/bug tickets 22:32:11 i added some code to unittest-app and slugtester to pave the way for specifying branches 22:32:24 ravips: sure. 22:32:25 sweet 22:32:29 yup. will add bugs. 22:32:35 muralia: tx!! 22:32:44 any more on the subject of private repos? 22:32:52 i'm done 22:33:10 I think we are finished checking in on chained trust things, right asalkeld? 22:33:26 is there anything outstanding there we should be keeping track of? 22:34:06 no 22:34:17 #topic Open Discussion 22:34:24 thanks asalkeld 22:34:58 i finally got the Solum CAMP API spec in for review 22:35:06 https://review.openstack.org/112154 22:35:12 thanks Gil 22:35:37 sorry for the multiple commits - i should have used —amend 22:36:04 no problem, we can sort it all out. glad you're on the contrib list now 22:36:16 we have 20+ bugs that needs to be triaged 22:36:34 ravips: I will get that in order starting on Monday 22:36:39 yeah, i just threw one on the pile yesterday--deploys have been failing for me 22:36:45 anything urgent that I should fit in before I come back to work? 22:36:49 adrian_otto: ok, thanks 22:37:27 you are welcome to start in on a bug even before triage between now and then 22:37:41 please don't perceive that as a showstopper. 22:38:38 ok, I suggest we wrap up a bit early today 22:39:11 next week there will be some news on the dev list about the addition of Containers as a new project in the OpenStack compute program 22:39:11 no quarrel from me 22:39:13 sorry I’m late :) 22:39:21 so please keep an eye out for that. 22:39:34 adrian_otto: sounds good. thanks for taking the time off from your holiday (ETO) to chair the meeting. 22:39:54 the Containers team met at the Midcycle meetup, and presented to the nova team to drive early consensus on an approach to adding containers as a first class resource in OpenStack. 22:40:15 tomblank: you are welcome. Thanks for helping out when I was away before. 22:40:19 zerovm in there too? 22:40:32 asalkeld: not yet 22:40:47 might not be as easy to model 22:40:53 zerovm might not fit into that plan 22:41:00 but it's worth thinking about 22:41:13 zerovm fits best into swift I think 22:41:41 anyway, thanks for attending everyone. I look forward to getting back to normal again next week. 22:42:03 I have to go, kids to school ... 22:42:09 anyone need to chime in for attendance before I end meeting? 22:42:29 thanks everyone! 22:42:31 #endmeeting