21:06:01 <adrian_otto> #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting 21:06:02 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Aug 11 21:06:01 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:06:03 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:06:05 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting' 21:06:40 <dimtruck> o/ 21:07:16 <adrian_otto> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Solum#Agenda_for_2015-08-11_2100_UTC Our Agneda 21:07:24 <adrian_otto> #topic Roll Call 21:07:26 <adrian_otto> Adrian Otto 21:07:31 <muralia> murali allada 21:07:36 <devkulkarni> Devdatta Kulkarni 21:07:39 <adrian_otto> hello dimtruck, muralia, devkulkarni 21:07:44 <dimtruck> hello! 21:07:48 <muralia> hey adrian 21:07:51 <devkulkarni> hi adrian 21:08:03 <adrian_otto> #topic Announcements 21:08:11 <adrian_otto> Any announcements from team members? 21:08:47 <adrian_otto> #topic Review Action Items 21:08:51 <adrian_otto> (none) 21:08:53 <rods> hello! 21:09:02 <devkulkarni> hi rods 21:09:05 <adrian_otto> #topic Blueprint/Task Review and Discussion 21:09:41 <adrian_otto> (devkulkarni) Update on app resource. 21:09:50 <adrian_otto> Resource implemented by Ed. Resource implementation already merged. I am currently working on adding functional tests. 21:09:57 <adrian_otto> I = devkulkarni 21:09:57 <devkulkarni> so yes.. 21:10:15 <devkulkarni> the resource implementation for app resource is already in master 21:10:24 <devkulkarni> I am currently working on functional tests. 21:10:35 <devkulkarni> requesting folks to keep an eye out 21:10:49 <devkulkarni> will be good to have review feedback on patches 21:10:55 <muralia> nice 21:11:16 <devkulkarni> thanks muralia.. will be good to have you take a look at the patches 21:11:21 <adrian_otto> (devkulkarni) Update on workflow resource implementation 21:11:29 <devkulkarni> so on this one.. 21:11:33 <adrian_otto> #link https://github.com/stackforge/solum-specs/blob/master/specs/liberty/app-resource.rst Spec 21:11:46 <devkulkarni> the spec has been merged a while back 21:11:49 <adrian_otto> workflow resource, or app resource? 21:11:54 <devkulkarni> workflow resource 21:12:07 <devkulkarni> code for app resource is merged in master 21:12:23 <devkulkarni> code for workflow resource is in WIP patches 21:12:30 <devkulkarni> both items were started by Ed 21:12:35 <devkulkarni> I am continuing both the items 21:12:46 <muralia> what work is remaining devkulkarni? 21:13:15 <devkulkarni> muralia: so several things are remaining on workflow resource.. 21:13:32 <devkulkarni> 1) need to complete the resource definition and the crud methods 21:13:52 <devkulkarni> 2) need to connect the resources to our main engine (worker, deployer) 21:14:08 <devkulkarni> those are minimum to get an end-to-end picture complete 21:14:12 <devkulkarni> after that.. 21:14:21 <devkulkarni> 3) need to add 'history' 21:14:38 <devkulkarni> 4) also, move 'logs' resource from assembly to app 21:14:59 <devkulkarni> right now, Ed's WIP patches are for step 1 above 21:15:07 <muralia> ok 21:15:11 <devkulkarni> and those are not complete yet 21:15:39 <adrian_otto> (devkulkarni) Update on Vagrant setup -- we are back to deploying apps on Vagrant. 21:15:40 <devkulkarni> I will be pushing those patches forward after adding functional tests to the 'app' resource is completed 21:15:52 <devkulkarni> ok on the Vagrant setup .. 21:15:52 <adrian_otto> vagrant works again 21:15:59 <devkulkarni> yes — that is the status 21:16:05 <muralia> nice 21:16:16 <devkulkarni> we are able to deploy apps on Vagrant setup again (was having issues due to nova-docker and neutron) 21:16:40 <devkulkarni> so anyone who wants to contribute to developing solum can use vagrant to get an end-to-end experience 21:17:00 <james_li> which docker version are we using in vagrant? 21:17:01 <devkulkarni> ping me if you want details about where to find vagrant repo 21:17:08 <devkulkarni> james_li: 1.7.0 21:17:16 <devkulkarni> with 1.7.1 it has been failing 21:17:22 <devkulkarni> I have submitted a patch to nova-docker 21:17:29 <devkulkarni> "it" == our vagrant setup 21:17:34 <james_li> ok. I was testing against 1.7.0 too 21:17:43 <devkulkarni> oh ok 21:17:47 <james_li> never work with 1.7.1 before 21:17:54 <devkulkarni> ok, that is good to know. 21:18:04 <devkulkarni> right now, till that patch gets merged in nova-docker 21:18:17 <devkulkarni> I have pinned our Vagrant environment to my fork of nova-docker 21:18:29 <devkulkarni> in which I have pinned docker version to 1.7.0 21:18:41 <adrian_otto> #topic Open Discussion 21:18:57 <adrian_otto> you may post your own topic now. 21:19:07 <devkulkarni> adrian_otto: ok 21:19:17 <devkulkarni> (devkulkarni) Discuss writing of spec for solum-magnum integration. We have a bp for it: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/solum/+spec/magnum-integration. Need a volunteer to lead the effort of writing the spec. 21:19:19 <dimtruck> devkulkarni: 1.8.0 just got released 21:19:29 <devkulkarni> dimtruck: thanks for the info 21:19:39 <devkulkarni> I will test whether nova-docker would work with 1.8.0 21:19:50 <james_li> dimtruck: what? 21:20:03 <devkulkarni> so last time we were talking about using magnum within solum 21:20:22 <devkulkarni> dimtruck and muralia seem to have some understanding of the topic 21:20:35 <devkulkarni> dimtruck, muralia: any thoughts on the spec? 21:20:49 <dimtruck> james_li: https://github.com/docker/docker/releases/tag/v1.8.0 21:21:02 <james_li> checking 21:21:05 <devkulkarni> thanks dimtruck 21:21:20 <adrian_otto> I could help with the magnum spec 21:21:31 <devkulkarni> that would be awesome adrian_otto 21:21:32 <muralia> not much to contribute right now. I've started working with magnum. i do like the idea of integrating with magnum and i'll work on the spec 21:21:47 <adrian_otto> but I may not be very fast, as I'm balancing a number of commitments. 21:21:51 <dimtruck> i'd like to help out too :) 21:21:56 <muralia> same here :) 21:22:05 <dimtruck> it'll probably be a slow'ish process since we're all still spinning up 21:22:09 <devkulkarni> adrian_otto, muralia, dimtruck: I understand 21:22:21 <dimtruck> but there's a definite potential of solum -> heat -> magnum flow that would help us a ton 21:22:23 <muralia> i think we should wait for the other resources to get merged first anyway 21:22:37 <devkulkarni> there is no rush (although I was thinking may be it will be a nice thing to have landed before Tokyo) 21:22:48 <devkulkarni> muralia: actually there is dependency imo 21:22:55 <muralia> i see 21:22:55 <devkulkarni> because the main change is going to be in the deployer 21:23:13 <devkulkarni> instead of using heat+nova-docker we will be using heat+magnum 21:23:19 <devkulkarni> i.e. the magnum resource in heat 21:23:24 <devkulkarni> at least that is my understanding 21:23:42 <devkulkarni> anyways — there is no rush 21:23:47 <muralia> hmm yes 21:23:59 <devkulkarni> adrian_otto, muralia, dimtruck: thanks for volunteering for the spec 21:24:36 <devkulkarni> ok that was all on that topic 21:24:38 <devkulkarni> I had one more 21:24:50 <devkulkarni> (devkulkarni) Pluggable deployer architecture (Please review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202254/2). We need this for several follow-up features (non-destructive app update, solum-magnum integration, HA architecture) 21:25:04 <devkulkarni> so this one is about pluggable deployer architecture 21:25:13 <devkulkarni> randallburt has submitted a spec 21:25:28 <devkulkarni> whenever you get a chance, please review it 21:25:51 <devkulkarni> for several follow-up features we need the pluggable deployer model 21:27:16 <devkulkarni> vijendar: you might want to take a look at that spec as well 21:27:28 <devkulkarni> vijendar: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202254/2 21:27:29 <vijendar> devkulkarni: sure 21:27:38 <devkulkarni> thanks vijendar 21:27:52 <devkulkarni> that is all on that topic 21:28:41 <adrian_otto> #link https://review.openstack.org/202254 Spec for deployer plugins 21:29:43 <adrian_otto> we talked about the use of flavors 21:29:58 <adrian_otto> I think that's a really bad idea, and I'm willing to -2 the spec if we don't change that 21:30:12 <devkulkarni> adrian_otto: yes — we did talk about that 21:30:28 <devkulkarni> sure, I think that is ok 21:31:01 <devkulkarni> I know that randallburt had a couple of other suggestions 21:31:12 <devkulkarni> I will follow up with him 21:31:18 <adrian_otto> consensus on topology in the review comments 21:31:36 <adrian_otto> we converged on "template" when we discussed this in a previous team meeting 21:31:55 <devkulkarni> yes, that is correct 21:32:14 <devkulkarni> so one of the action items could be to change the spec 21:32:28 <devkulkarni> to reflect this agreement (use "template") 21:34:07 <adrian_otto> ok, I reviewed with a -1 asking for that change 21:34:18 <devkulkarni> nice 21:34:30 <adrian_otto> anythign else to covera s a group today? 21:34:39 <devkulkarni> that was all on my list 21:34:43 <adrian_otto> great 21:35:12 <adrian_otto> our next team meeting will be Tuesday 2015-08-18 at 2100 UTC 21:35:14 <adrian_otto> see you then! 21:35:18 <devkulkarni> thank you adrian_otto 21:35:18 <adrian_otto> #endmeeting