14:00:06 #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting 14:00:07 Meeting started Wed Aug 3 14:00:06 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is devkulkarni1. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:08 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting' 14:01:52 0/ 14:01:56 hi zhurong 14:02:05 hi devkulkarni1 14:02:12 lets wait to see if anyone else joins us 14:02:31 devkulkarni1 sure 14:08:07 looks like pt_15 is not around today 14:08:37 yep, maybe busy with something 14:09:14 zhurong: I saw you have reviewed the app create patch 14:09:16 cool 14:09:35 I know that pt_15 wanted to sync up with you about it 14:09:46 were you two able to touch base on it? 14:11:31 devkulkarni1 create need your more help about the create field 14:12:01 you need pay more attention to this 14:12:24 I see.. ok I will ping pt_15 about it 14:13:14 there was one more patch that is missing imo.. it is to deploy the created application.. 14:13:28 it corresponds to the 'solum app deploy ' command 14:14:21 hi everyone 14:14:24 once that is there, all the app patches should be good 14:14:27 sorry I'm late 14:14:27 hi pt_15 14:14:35 no worries 14:14:44 zhurong and I were just discussing about your patches 14:15:05 pt_15: looks like app create is blocked on my input? 14:15:08 lets discuss 14:15:15 yeah, I actually had a question regarding that 14:16:20 the thing is that since there are multiple ways to actually create the app like app file, or actually giving details as it is 14:16:41 what exactly should be done regarding having required and not-required fields 14:16:49 I see 14:17:30 and even when app file is given, other details can still be given right? 14:18:25 pt_15 just use the select for the create app way, select app file, chose the file, select details, show the app create detail field 14:19:58 to begin with, we can concentrate on following fields to take input directly from the user in one tab: name, languagepack, version, github url of app, run_cmd, test_cmd (this is optional, but we should show it in the ui).. in a sub-tab we can add an option to select an app file 14:20:42 devkulkarni1: however, will the fields be required then? 14:22:03 in the tab from which you are taking per-field input, the required fields are: name, languagepack, version, github url, run_cmd. in the tab from which you will take the app file as input, the only required field will be app file location 14:22:28 does that make sense? 14:22:29 oh ok, cool 14:22:42 zhurong: is there a way of making tabs in the form ui? 14:23:17 tab or something else.. 14:23:34 basically, we should have two different ways to provide inputs 14:23:47 one which allows us to specify the required fields 14:23:58 zhurong: regarding the options you mentioned to select the method of input 14:24:00 another which allows us to specify app file 14:24:27 is something of this possible within horizon framework? 14:24:28 how does that work? again, is there a way provided by horizon to do this? 14:25:31 pt_15 just use select choice 14:26:30 two ways, select one of them, only show this way's fields 14:27:37 zhurong: oh ok, is there any docs for horizon where I can take reference for this from? 14:28:09 I find a example for you pt_15 14:28:31 zhurong: oh cool, thanks a lot! :D 14:28:36 +1 14:28:54 pt_15: any other patch needs clarifications? 14:29:02 devkulkarni1: also I had a question regarding lp create 14:29:11 sure 14:29:17 actually regarding where description for lp comes from? 14:29:32 since it is never explicitly given when creating an lp 14:29:45 pt_15 see the upload image form, there can select image url and image file 14:31:32 zhurong: oh ok, I'll take a look at that :) 14:32:48 pt_15: good question.. in the cli there used to be a flag that could be supplied with lp create to set description.. but I don't recall if we have used it much.. so don't know if it still works.. for now, I suggest you create a bug for future reference to set the description when creating a lp through ui 14:34:16 pt_15: does that make sense? 14:34:45 devkulkarni1: yeah, I'll do that :) 14:35:25 pt_15: I wanted to discuss about one more patch, which is currently missing 14:35:45 devkulkarni1: sure 14:36:01 it is to deploy an app .. it corresponds to 'solum app deploy ' command 14:37:01 from the cli, this call makes a POST request to workflows resource which is under app .. /apps//workflows 14:37:19 i actually have submitted a patch for that (although it requires a bit ok work): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/345180/ 14:37:53 ah I see.. this is from the set which you had submitted earlier 14:38:41 ok good.. so the patch is there.. now you probably need to test it in your setup 14:39:15 devkulkarni1: yeah, I have tested it, but it requires a bit of work currently 14:39:54 pt_15: sure.. just wanted to bring it up so that we don't forget. good that you already have the patch 14:40:19 btw, is lp create patch blocked only blocked on the description field issue that we discussed earlier? 14:40:41 I'm late 14:40:49 hi caowei 14:40:54 nice to see you 14:40:56 hi 14:41:02 we have pt_15 and zhurong with us as well 14:41:02 me too 14:41:17 devkulkarni1: yeah, so I'll fix that today, it'll be top priority, so we can get that merged asap :) 14:41:23 hi caowei :) 14:41:32 pt_15: +1 14:41:50 hi 14:42:04 pt_15: ping me once the patch is ready 14:42:14 hi pt_15 14:42:28 devkulkarni1: sure, I will :) 14:43:05 pt_15: I saw your working, that's great 14:43:28 thank you caowei :) 14:44:45 caowei: did you see my comment on your latest patch? also, your earlier patch has got -1 from Jenkins, which probably you have already noticed 14:46:18 hi shivaSR 14:46:29 we have zhurong, caowei, and pt_15 as well 14:46:44 hi shivaSR 14:46:47 Hi Dev, Hello to everyone else as well. 14:47:35 shivaSR: welcome.. do you want to quickly update others about your use-case and interest in solum 14:48:12 Sure, So I am adding support to solum to deploy applications in unikernels. Specifically the rumprun unikernel 14:48:29 At this point my implementation is as follows: 14:49:13 I build a base image using default solum code (a lp rather) 14:49:32 hi shivaSR :) 14:49:50 In the language pack I have the tools required to compile application code into the rumprun unikernel via a compile.sh script 14:49:57 hi pt_15 ;0 14:50:00 ;) 14:50:37 then I modified the default build-app script in solum to extract the unikernel executable and upload it to glance. 14:51:02 devkulkarni1: please help to look https://bugs.launchpad.net/solum/+bug/1609334 14:51:02 Launchpad bug 1609334 in Solum "deployer LOG_DIR Initialization" [Undecided,New] - Assigned to caowei (caowei-e) 14:51:07 The id of the uploaded image is returned to solum for it to handle deployment of the application on nova as implemented by you guys 14:51:52 However, as devkulkarni and I were discussing yesterday it appears that heat does not yet have support for glance V2 so this breaks my process since I need properties only included in glance v2. 14:51:54 shivaSR: did you run into any hurdles with build-app in these steps? or was it alright 14:52:12 caowei: ack. will take a look 14:52:20 dev, it was pretty straight forward actually 14:52:37 shivaSR: nice.. glad to hear that 14:52:44 shivaSR: about the heat issue.. 14:53:05 I was going to suggest to check with the heat team if it is indeed the case that heat is not yet supporting glance v2 14:53:43 most likely they might be supporting it and there might be some modification/tweak that we need to make in the HOT 14:54:11 Yea, this morning I was reading up on it. It appears that heat in fact does not support the v2. I messaged the heat guys to find out the exact details. 14:55:08 oh okay.. hmm is that a blocker for you? does your workflow in nova need the kernel-id? 14:55:58 yes it is. I may try to figure out a way to modify the code as a temporary workaround. to get the solum side of things working. But as it is heat needs to be updated. 14:56:25 good morning vijendar 14:56:33 devkulkarni1: hi 14:56:46 shivaSR: how about a workaround in nova so that you don't need to have kernel-id? 14:57:02 vijendar: we have shivaSR, pt_15, zhurong and caowei with us 14:57:18 Hi all! 14:58:00 yes, thats where I intend to add the workaround. However, kernel-id seems to be standard way to tell nova which glance image is the kernel for a particular image. 14:58:15 ah I see 14:58:42 solum workaround will be to not use glance version 1, which should be straight forward 14:58:54 so looks like heat is a blocker for your currently 14:59:06 yup. 14:59:12 you might have to add support for glance v2 in heat (at least in your setup) 14:59:36 alright.. we are almost at the end of our meeting time.. we can continue the discussion in solum channel 14:59:43 thanks all for joining today 14:59:47 see you next week 14:59:50 #endmeeting