09:32:24 <BobBall> #startmeeting XenAPI
09:32:25 <openstack> Meeting started Wed May 11 09:32:24 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is BobBall. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
09:32:26 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
09:32:28 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'xenapi'
09:32:38 <BobBall> johnthetubaguy, jianghuaw_, huazhihao ping :)
09:32:58 * johnthetubaguy waves
09:33:07 <jianghuaw_> Good morning Bob and johnthetubaguy.
09:33:08 <BobBall> Sorry for the late start all
09:33:30 <BobBall> #topic Blueprints / Reviews
09:33:42 <BobBall> jianghuaw_: I guess the VGPU blueprint is up first?
09:34:16 <jianghuaw_> we got a +2 on the vgpu BP.
09:34:45 <jianghuaw_> #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280099/
09:34:55 <BobBall> This is the one that you suggested looked reasonable but needed a closer check johnthetubaguy
09:35:48 <jianghuaw_> yes. johnthetubaguy: could you have a check on it again.
09:35:51 <BobBall> Any time you could give that to review it would be great
09:36:00 * BobBall would love to get the spec approved before the deadline...
09:36:25 <BobBall> which is approaching a lot faster than I thought it would
09:36:44 <BobBall> It's worth pointing out that these specs are in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-nova-priorities-tracking in priority order
09:37:20 <BobBall> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280099/7 - XenAPI: support VGPU via passthrough PCI
09:37:23 <BobBall> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/274045/5 - Xenapi: a new VDI store via streaming
09:37:26 <BobBall> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304377/ - Xenerver compute driver support neutron security group
09:37:29 <BobBall> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/277452/ - XenAPI independent hypervisor (fixing interaction layer between Nova + Hypervisor)
09:37:56 <BobBall> Please do let us know if there is anything we can do to give you more time to review these specs johnthetubaguy
09:38:06 <huazhihao> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/bare-vhd-image
09:38:16 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: something to do with making days longer, would be awesome
09:39:13 <johnthetubaguy> for clarity, my current priorities are all the OSIC roadmap items
09:39:35 <johnthetubaguy> but as always, I am doing other reviews too
09:39:56 <BobBall> So I've been thinking about the bare-vhd-image... we should talk about that huazhihao - I think we'd need Cinder changes too.
09:40:37 <BobBall> OSIC priorities are certainly interesting; although I am concerned that much of them are focused around improving things for libvirt+kvm
09:40:38 <huazhihao> Thanks
09:40:55 <BobBall> (or generic things of course)
09:41:27 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: they are focusing on libvirt+kvm, yes
09:41:44 <johnthetubaguy> why cinder changes for the bare-vhd-image?
09:41:51 <johnthetubaguy> for the extracting images into volumes?
09:42:12 <BobBall> Yes - I don't want to introduce another case where the type of image works for most things but not boot from snapshot
09:42:58 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, its related to the longer term discussion around why cinder and nova both have their own code to talk to glance and download/extra images
09:43:11 <BobBall> Very much
09:43:38 <johnthetubaguy> os-brick like thing for glance, was my thinking
09:44:09 <BobBall> Indeed
09:44:17 <BobBall> OK - anything else we should cover on specs?
09:45:13 <BobBall> Awesome
09:45:17 <BobBall> #topic Bugs
09:46:30 <BobBall> I don't think there are any new bugs that we care massively about, are there?
09:46:30 <BobBall> The only important one I know of is https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1566622 - which Corey is working on
09:46:32 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1566622 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "live migration fails with xenapi virt driver and SRs with old-style naming convention" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Corey Wright (coreywright)
09:47:07 <BobBall> I'm going to take silence as a good thing :)
09:47:20 <BobBall> #topic AOB
09:47:25 <BobBall> Is there anything else we need to cover?
09:47:50 <jianghuaw_> Again we need some cores help to review this change:
09:47:54 <jianghuaw_> #link: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/242846/
09:48:32 <johnthetubaguy> this should now appear on the review dashboard that we are trying out
09:48:57 <jianghuaw_> Great. thanks.
09:49:03 <johnthetubaguy> I guess its still very much a prototype, but trying out new ways to raise these kinds of changes for people to look at
09:49:17 <BobBall> First things first - johnthetubaguy - I know we talked about it before, but can you confirm you still agree this is a bugfix not a specless BP or similar?
09:49:49 <BobBall> For a bugfix we have time but if it needs a BP then it's more urgent
09:52:55 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: its a good question, its boarder line
09:53:28 <johnthetubaguy> BobBall: I was going to say raise a specless BP for this, but then that makes you run up against the non-priority feature freeze, and it is a bit bug fixey
09:55:45 <BobBall> Hopefully very bug fixey :)
09:57:12 <BobBall> Do you have a call on it johnthetubaguy?  Or is that a question I should ask someone else?
09:58:48 <johnthetubaguy> its worth asking around for a second optinion
09:58:59 <johnthetubaguy> opinion
09:59:19 <BobBall> Is yours bugfix based on the above?
10:00:24 <johnthetubaguy> yeah, I think its OK as a bug fix
10:00:33 <johnthetubaguy> mostly because its single virt impact anyways
10:00:33 <BobBall> ok, thanks.
10:00:40 <BobBall> Yeah, true
10:00:42 <johnthetubaguy> reno can cover any details you need to communicate anyways
10:02:07 <BobBall> ok
10:02:07 <BobBall> I think we're done
10:02:07 <BobBall> #endmeeting