17:00:22 <devkulkarni> #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting
17:00:23 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Feb  2 17:00:22 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is devkulkarni. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:25 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:00:27 <devkulkarni> #topic Roll Call
17:00:28 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting'
17:00:31 <devkulkarni> Devdatta Kulkarni
17:00:34 <vijendar> o/
17:00:35 <muralia> murali allada
17:00:46 <devkulkarni> hey nice to see you murali
17:00:54 <devkulkarni> nice to see you vijendar
17:00:57 <muralia> good to see you guys too
17:01:26 <devkulkarni> here is the agenda for today:
17:01:33 <devkulkarni> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Solum#Agenda_for_2016-02-02_1700_UTC
17:01:42 <mkam> Melissa Kam
17:01:42 <devkulkarni> please take few minutes to go over the agenda
17:01:46 <devkulkarni> hi mkam
17:01:57 <james_li> james li
17:02:00 <devkulkarni> hi james_li
17:02:06 <james_li> Hi
17:02:10 <devkulkarni> here is today's agenda again: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Solum#Agenda_for_2016-02-02_1700_UTC
17:02:18 <devkulkarni> please take a minute to scan through it
17:02:32 <devkulkarni> will proceed in a minue
17:02:34 <devkulkarni> minute
17:03:14 <devkulkarni> alright.. lets begin
17:03:19 <devkulkarni> #topic Announcements
17:03:30 <devkulkarni> I have no prepared announcement today
17:03:39 <devkulkarni> do any of you have any announcement for the team?
17:04:10 <devkulkarni> ok
17:04:20 <devkulkarni> #topic Review Action Items
17:04:26 <devkulkarni> there was one action item from last meeting
17:04:34 <devkulkarni> devkulkarni1 to file a bug to track the use-case of deploying docker images directly from solum, without first having to associate those images with an app
17:04:47 <devkulkarni> I have completed this action
17:04:55 <devkulkarni> Here is the bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/solum/+bug/1540993
17:04:57 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1540993 in Solum "deploy-du-without-associating-with-an-app" [Wishlist,New]
17:05:20 <muralia> can you give us some context dev? why would we want to do that?
17:05:23 <devkulkarni> please weigh in with your comments if you have any thoughts/comments on it
17:05:36 <devkulkarni> muralia: good question
17:06:04 <devkulkarni> if you read the bug report, this is one of the first things that I have mentioned.. that we should evaluate first whether we need this functionality
17:06:12 <devkulkarni> it came about in our discussion last week
17:06:32 <devkulkarni> when we were talking about supporting a feature of deploying dus which have been created for an app
17:07:01 <devkulkarni> vijendar raised the question of what if already have a docker image, could we not directly deploy it?
17:07:13 <devkulkarni> should we first have to associate it with an app?
17:07:41 <devkulkarni> so that is the context basically.. I was thinking that from usability pov it might have some value
17:07:58 <devkulkarni> internally we would still associate an app with it
17:07:58 <muralia> ok. so we still need to explore this. sounds like exactly what magnum does.
17:08:12 <devkulkarni> actually that's right
17:08:39 <devkulkarni> vijendar any additional thoughts that you had on this?
17:08:59 <devkulkarni> muralia: yes, we need to investigate more whether this option makes sense for us in solum or not
17:09:19 <vijendar> devkulkarni: nothing to add
17:09:27 <devkulkarni> alright.. good question muralia
17:09:42 <devkulkarni> there was no other action item
17:09:48 <devkulkarni> so lets move on to the next topic
17:09:59 <devkulkarni> #topic Blueprint/Bug Review and Discussion
17:10:07 <devkulkarni> 1) Making p34 gate voting
17:10:11 <devkulkarni> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/solum/+spec/solum-python3
17:10:17 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273425/
17:10:22 <devkulkarni> let me give some context on this one
17:10:31 <james_li> devkulkarni: does eventlet support python 3 now?
17:11:01 <devkulkarni> james_li: good question. don't have answer.. let me give a context first about this
17:11:21 <devkulkarni> so victor stannier had registered a blueprint in september of last year to convert solum to python 3
17:11:30 <devkulkarni> he had submitted several patches to make this happen
17:11:39 <devkulkarni> most of those patches have been merged
17:12:05 <devkulkarni> recently, victor submitted another set of patches for addressing some oslo related issues
17:12:21 <devkulkarni> while working on those patches he realized that tox -e py34 was passing
17:12:36 <devkulkarni> so he submitted a patch to our project config to make the py34 gate voting
17:12:46 <devkulkarni> and before we could discuss as a team that patch was merged
17:12:51 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273425/
17:12:54 <devkulkarni> here is that patch
17:13:35 <devkulkarni> I commented on the patch that we need to discuss this, but now since the patch has merged, we will still discuss it whether we are ready for python3
17:13:47 <devkulkarni> so that is the context
17:14:02 <devkulkarni> james_li: you raised a very good point
17:14:12 <vijendar> probably there should be at one +2 from the project core before any patch gets merged
17:14:17 <devkulkarni> jame_li: would you mind adding this question/note to that patch above?
17:14:30 <vijendar> atleast*
17:14:39 <devkulkarni> vijendar: yes, that is typically the expectation.. but looks like infra folks moved forward in this case without that
17:15:27 <devkulkarni> vijendar: I have mentioned on that patch that we will discuss this as a team and decide whether we are ready for python3
17:15:46 <devkulkarni> if we don't feel we are ready, we will submit a patch to revert the change (make it non-voting)
17:16:04 <devkulkarni> what are you alls thoughts?
17:16:46 <james_li> devkulkarni: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Python3
17:16:50 <james_li> looks like yes
17:17:01 <james_li> eventlet 0.17.3 now fully support Python 3
17:17:08 <muralia> nice.
17:17:12 <muralia> we should be ok then
17:17:30 <devkulkarni> thanks james_li for the pointer
17:17:47 <devkulkarni> good that you remembered about eventlet james_li
17:18:43 <devkulkarni> looking through that list, are there any other libraries that we should be concerned about?
17:19:31 <devkulkarni> don't seem like we are using any of the others which are not python 3 compatible
17:19:35 <devkulkarni> so we should be okay
17:20:07 <devkulkarni> so we ok in making the py34 job as voting then?
17:20:08 <james_li> lot of other openstack projects already py3 compatible
17:20:15 <james_li> devkulkarni: yes
17:20:22 <devkulkarni> vijendar: ?
17:20:26 <devkulkarni> mkam:?
17:20:37 <muralia> +1
17:20:50 <devkulkarni> thanks muralia and james_li
17:21:08 <devkulkarni> vijendar: what is your position on this?
17:21:21 <vijendar> since it is already merged, let's keep it
17:21:38 <vijendar> if we run into any issue, we can always make non voting later…right?
17:21:42 <devkulkarni> alright.
17:22:47 <devkulkarni> if we run into issues due to python 3 syntax etc, we will have to now try to fix them by using the appropriate syntax
17:23:23 <devkulkarni> if there are libraries that are available only in python < 3 version then we cannot use them
17:23:25 <devkulkarni> etc
17:23:35 <vijendar> ok
17:23:49 <devkulkarni> our really last resort will be to make the gate non-voting
17:23:54 <devkulkarni> lets see how it goes
17:24:12 <devkulkarni> alright, good discussion on this particular topic
17:24:19 <devkulkarni> lets move on to some reviews
17:24:31 <devkulkarni> 1) Saving workflow result
17:24:36 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269842/
17:24:53 <devkulkarni> vijendar: do you want to provide some context about this patch?
17:25:27 <vijendar> on completion of workflow execution, we need a column on workflow table to store the result
17:25:44 <vijendar> for example, if there is an error we can store stack trace
17:26:16 <james_li> vijendar: do we already have a log pointer?
17:26:30 <james_li> user can check all the logs about testing, building and deploying
17:26:36 <vijendar> on sucess, we may want to store some result. For example, with magnum integration we may want to store containers info etc..
17:26:52 <vijendar> james_li: right. user can always go to logs for detailed info
17:27:17 <devkulkarni> james_li: the success use case is where the workflow results column provides immediate benefit
17:27:18 <vijendar> this is for providing quick info on the workflow status
17:27:34 <muralia> i see a status column though. how is this different?
17:27:56 <vijendar> status colum says just sucess or fail
17:28:13 <vijendar> but this column can store short description of the status
17:28:28 <muralia> I see
17:28:43 <devkulkarni> or, list of running containers when we go to multi-container apps
17:28:58 <vijendar> devkulkarni: correct
17:29:12 <muralia> ok. makes sense.
17:29:36 <muralia> got my +2
17:29:38 <devkulkarni> good discussion.. you can review it now or later
17:29:41 <devkulkarni> cool
17:29:50 <devkulkarni> next one is
17:29:51 <vijendar> muralia: thanks
17:29:53 <devkulkarni> 2) App parameters
17:29:58 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/267182/
17:30:09 <devkulkarni> vijendar: again, could you provide some context on this one
17:30:26 <devkulkarni> james_li this is a follow-on patch to the previous parameters patch which is now merged
17:30:34 <james_li> ic
17:30:47 <vijendar> devkulkarni: sure
17:30:48 <dimtruck> o/ sorry i'm late :(
17:30:56 <devkulkarni> hi dimtruck
17:30:58 <james_li> BTW +1 on the short result one :)
17:31:09 <vijendar> james_li: thanks
17:31:10 <devkulkarni> james_li: awesome
17:31:29 <vijendar> current parameters file is a flat list
17:31:34 <james_li> dimtruck: you are welcome :)
17:31:40 <vijendar> with this patch, we are grouping them into sections
17:32:46 <james_li> how are params logically grouped into sections?
17:33:40 <james_li> params for user apps; for solum; for ...
17:33:54 <devkulkarni> james_li: are you asking in syntactically or semantically?
17:34:19 <james_li> guess latter
17:34:24 <muralia> also, i see that we are reading user and solum params in the patch, but not any other section.
17:34:30 <devkulkarni> I think the params file can have whatever sections that user wants — there could be some sections which are pre-defined by us
17:35:12 <devkulkarni> muralia: this is the first step in the direction to allow us to provide any number of sections in the future
17:35:15 <vijendar> muralia: correct. downstream plugins/patches can pass some custom parameters and read/use them
17:35:19 <muralia> ok
17:35:23 <devkulkarni> james_li: going back to the point
17:35:36 <james_li> oh devkulkarni: you are saying like a config file [default]... [oslo]... ?
17:35:46 <devkulkarni> we could have some sections that have pre-defined meaning
17:35:51 <devkulkarni> right, something along those lines
17:36:09 <james_li> got it
17:36:17 <devkulkarni> I think currently we are using 'user_params' and 'solum_params' as having pre-defined meaning..
17:36:22 <devkulkarni> right vijendar?
17:36:23 <devkulkarni> cool
17:36:26 <vijendar> devkulkarni: correct
17:36:41 <devkulkarni> we definitely need to call this out in our documentation
17:36:44 <james_li> for multi dependent services
17:37:17 <devkulkarni> vijendar: in a separate patch or in your current patch, would you mind updating this http://docs.openstack.org/developer/solum/getting_started/index.html
17:37:29 <devkulkarni> the docs currently don't go into much details about parameters
17:37:36 <vijendar> devkulkarni: sure. will do in a separate patch
17:37:42 <devkulkarni> now will be a good time to update those
17:37:45 <devkulkarni> sounds good
17:38:01 <devkulkarni> james_li: please continue your thought
17:38:22 <devkulkarni> if I were to guess your question..
17:38:23 <james_li> devkulkarni: it makes sense, now I get the point
17:38:31 <devkulkarni> cool
17:38:57 <muralia> james_li: im ok with this change, but will let you review. you've got more thoughts on this.
17:39:07 <devkulkarni> so, please review this patch
17:39:19 <devkulkarni> there is a related patch on the cli side
17:39:24 <devkulkarni> lets first discuss about that
17:39:24 <james_li> sure doing today
17:39:24 <vijendar> thanks muralia james_li devkulkarni
17:39:54 <devkulkarni> looks like CLI patches are next in our list
17:39:59 <devkulkarni> 3) CLI Patches
17:40:07 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/267809/
17:40:12 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/272827/
17:40:18 <devkulkarni> first one is related to parameters
17:40:29 <devkulkarni> second one is related to requirements update
17:41:55 <devkulkarni> will give few minutes for you to review patches
17:43:21 <devkulkarni> next we have couple of patches from james_li
17:43:26 <devkulkarni> 4) Converting bash scripts to Python
17:43:30 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/196498/
17:43:34 <devkulkarni> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/192928/
17:43:42 <devkulkarni> james_li: thanks for addressing my comments
17:43:56 <devkulkarni> you got my +2 on both
17:44:15 <devkulkarni> will let others review it in next couple of days
17:44:28 <devkulkarni> should be good to merge after that
17:44:31 <muralia> ya. will take some time. this is a big patch
17:45:00 <devkulkarni> sure, that will be ok muralia .. these patches are not blocker for any other work right now
17:45:03 <james_li> devkulkarni: cool
17:45:25 <devkulkarni> but will be good to have them merged as they have been waiting on some other changes for several months now
17:45:41 <devkulkarni> those changes (in oslo) merged recently, unblocking these patches
17:46:00 <devkulkarni> alright, so that is the end of our regular agenda
17:46:05 <devkulkarni> #topic Open Discussion
17:46:12 <devkulkarni> I have two topics
17:46:18 <devkulkarni> 1) Austin summit
17:46:25 <devkulkarni> We have submitted two talks -- one by ashishjain and devkulkarni, another by vijendar and devkulkarni. Will post the links when I have them.
17:46:32 <devkulkarni> Talk submission: February 2, 2016 11:59pm PST
17:46:38 <devkulkarni> so the deadline is tonight
17:46:56 <devkulkarni> I think dimtruck and mkam are also submitting something?
17:47:35 <devkulkarni> have you guys registered for the summit yet?
17:47:39 <mkam> we an infrastructure security talk
17:47:53 <devkulkarni> I see.. that will be interesting talk
17:48:18 <devkulkarni> please share the link when you get it, we all can vote
17:48:46 <devkulkarni> the topics of the two talks that we have submitted are:
17:49:03 <devkulkarni> 1) with ashishjain we are investigating how to use Jenkins for CI and Solum for CD
17:49:20 <devkulkarni> ashishjain has built a poc for this
17:50:13 <devkulkarni> 2) with vijendar we are talking about how to deploy to bare metal (something like rackspace's carina service)
17:50:34 <devkulkarni> we will also highlight other aspects of solum
17:50:54 <devkulkarni> if you want to submit something, today is the deadline
17:51:16 <devkulkarni> let me know if you want to brainstorm ideas, or need any help with any feature to make the submission
17:51:47 <devkulkarni> so that was one topic
17:52:12 <devkulkarni> the other topic I had was solum getting a place as part of the IndiaHacks hackthon
17:52:15 <devkulkarni> here is the link:
17:52:15 <devkulkarni> https://www.hackerearth.com/sprints/open-source-india-hacks-2016/
17:52:40 <devkulkarni> basically, this is a month long hackathon on various open source projects
17:52:49 <devkulkarni> it is happening all over India
17:52:57 <devkulkarni> anyone can participate apparently
17:53:20 <devkulkarni> ashishjain was instrumental in getting solum as one of the projects for this hackathon
17:53:33 <devkulkarni> we are the only openstack project on it
17:54:04 <devkulkarni> I am excited about this.. hopefully we will get good exposure and also get new contributors
17:54:44 <devkulkarni> another related point is, there is a global openstack hackathon in early March
17:55:06 <devkulkarni> ashishjain has registered to represent solum at this global bug fix day
17:55:13 <devkulkarni> it is a bug fix day, not a hackathon
17:55:28 <devkulkarni> there was an email regarding this bug fix day on the openstack dev mailing list sometime back
17:55:44 <devkulkarni> ashishjain will be representing us in Bangalore
17:56:53 <devkulkarni> that is all that I had for us today
17:57:11 <devkulkarni> any one has any other topic to discuss / thoughts to share?
17:59:37 <devkulkarni> just saw email about git restack
17:59:51 <devkulkarni> vijendar: looks useful to the problem that we were discussing sometime back
18:00:23 <devkulkarni> its on openstack-infra mailing list
18:00:30 <vijendar> devkulkarni: ok
18:00:43 <devkulkarni> will forward it.. alright.. looks like it is time
18:00:47 <devkulkarni> thanks all for joining today
18:00:50 <devkulkarni> see you next week
18:00:52 <muralia> bye
18:00:55 <devkulkarni> #endmeeting