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