| *** dboik has quit IRC | 00:02 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:02 | |
| *** sigmavirus24 is now known as sigmavirus24_awa | 00:07 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 00:21 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:46 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 00:56 | |
| *** rm_work is now known as rm_work|away | 01:05 | |
| *** mwang2_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:09 | |
| *** mwang2 has quit IRC | 01:10 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 01:11 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 01:12 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 01:18 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:20 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 01:23 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:24 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 01:25 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:42 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 01:54 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:57 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:59 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 02:00 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:00 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 02:01 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 02:04 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 02:18 | |
| *** cpallares has quit IRC | 02:37 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:40 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 02:51 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:00 | |
| *** yapeng has quit IRC | 03:00 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:03 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 03:09 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:12 | |
| *** sballe has quit IRC | 03:12 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:36 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 03:39 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 03:40 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:43 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 03:47 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 03:47 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:48 | |
| *** mwang2_ has quit IRC | 03:54 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:58 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 04:03 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 04:03 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 04:04 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 04:09 | |
| *** klindgren_ has quit IRC | 04:13 | |
| *** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 04:19 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 04:20 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 04:42 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 04:55 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 05:09 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:14 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:18 | |
| *** bingoarunprasath has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:28 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 05:32 | |
| *** 7YUAAN3VY has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:52 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:56 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 06:01 | |
| *** 7YUAAN3VY has quit IRC | 06:11 | |
| *** rm_work|away is now known as rm_work | 06:43 | |
| *** bobmel_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 06:52 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 06:54 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 07:15 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 07:19 | |
| *** rm_work is now known as rm_work|away | 07:20 | |
| *** mhanif has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 07:26 | |
| *** mhanif has quit IRC | 07:31 | |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 07:58 | |
| *** ChuckC_ is now known as ChuckC | 08:52 | |
| *** bobmel_ has quit IRC | 09:25 | |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 09:26 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 09:44 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 09:49 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 10:43 | |
| *** cgoncalv1s is now known as cgoncalves | 10:43 | |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 11:05 | |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 11:09 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:11 | |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:16 | |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 11:44 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:53 | |
| *** VW__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:54 | |
| *** jemangs has quit IRC | 11:56 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 11:57 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:01 | |
| *** VW__ has quit IRC | 12:03 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:04 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 12:05 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:05 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 12:07 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:08 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 12:10 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 12:30 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:30 | |
| *** jemangs has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:41 | |
| *** gpruessmann has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:56 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 13:02 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:03 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 13:12 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:13 | |
| *** bingoarunprasath has quit IRC | 13:28 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 14:29 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:29 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:29 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:48 | |
| *** cpallares has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:56 | |
| *** sigmavirus24_awa is now known as sigmavirus24 | 14:57 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:02 | |
| *** yapeng_ is now known as yapeng | 15:05 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 15:07 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:13 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 15:30 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:33 | |
| *** cpallares has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:35 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 15:50 | |
| *** jlk has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:00 | |
| *** jlk has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:00 | |
| *** gpruessmann has quit IRC | 16:21 | |
| *** sballe has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:30 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:33 | |
| *** sigmavirus24 is now known as sigmavirus24_awa | 16:50 | |
| *** sigmavirus24_awa is now known as sigmavirus24 | 16:52 | |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 16:55 | |
| *** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:55 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:58 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:59 | |
| *** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:00 | |
| *** tholtzen has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:01 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:01 | |
| *** natarajk has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:03 | |
| vishwanathj | Hello | 17:03 |
|---|---|---|
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: bobmel: yamahata: anyone here ? | 17:04 |
| natarajk | Hi | 17:04 |
| SridharRamaswamy | natarajk: hi | 17:05 |
| SridharRamaswamy | looks we don't have a quorum yet :( | 17:05 |
| SridharRamaswamy | vishwanathj: hi | 17:05 |
| hareeshp | Hello | 17:05 |
| *** rm_work|away is now known as rm_work | 17:06 | |
| vishwanathj | SridharRamaswamy, natarajk, hareeshp, hello | 17:06 |
| SridharRamaswamy | hareeshp: hi, do you know if Bob plans to join this meeting | 17:06 |
| hareeshp | I will see if I can ping Bob | 17:06 |
| *** mwang2 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:06 | |
| hareeshp | I cannot reach Bob. So I guess he is away | 17:08 |
| hareeshp | Natarajk, since you are here, had a quick question | 17:09 |
| natarajk | hareeshp: sure | 17:09 |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:10 | |
| hareeshp | Does hotplugging or rather unplugging still working for you? | 17:10 |
| s3wong | sorry, late | 17:11 |
| s3wong | but it seems like the meeting hasn't started? | 17:11 |
| hareeshp | I saw that the Nova changes in the past months may break this | 17:11 |
| natarajk | It was working a week before a week back in our CI server | 17:11 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: waiting for u | 17:11 |
| natarajk | It was working a week back in our CI server | 17:11 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: really? bobmel is here too :-) | 17:11 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: we were just chatting | 17:11 |
| hareeshp | But r u running data plane tests too | 17:11 |
| natarajk | we run the tempest tests that do the ping | 17:12 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: we couldn't reach him, even though he shows in the meeting room | 17:12 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: yeah, I know yamahata probably would not be able to attend, not sure about bobmel | 17:12 |
| hareeshp | I see that Nova will now throw an error if you unplug | 17:12 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: can we start, perhaps have a short one ? | 17:13 |
| natarajk | hareeshp: I was waiting for the split to settle down. We will run all the tests now | 17:13 |
| *** klindgren has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:13 | |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: sure, let me bring up the agenda page first (to see what to talk about :-) ) | 17:13 |
| hareeshp | Ok. I will talk offline to you | 17:13 |
| s3wong | #startmeeting servicevm_device_manager | 17:14 |
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Dec 17 17:14:34 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is s3wong. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:14 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: servicevm_device_manager)" | 17:14 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'servicevm_device_manager' | 17:14 |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:14 | |
| s3wong | #topic announcement | 17:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "announcement (Meeting topic: servicevm_device_manager)" | 17:15 | |
| s3wong | I don't think there is much to announce, other than Neutron SAD has passed | 17:16 |
| s3wong | I noticed yamahata's spec for l3router vm was -2'ed by salv-orlando | 17:16 |
| s3wong | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105078/ | 17:17 |
| natarajk | s3wong: that's because spec is not needed for l2 and l3 plugins | 17:17 |
| natarajk | s3wong: because of vendor plugin decomposition | 17:18 |
| salv-orlando | natarajk: correct | 17:18 |
| salv-orlando | but it also true that I'm evil and feel pleasure in giving -2s | 17:18 |
| s3wong | natarajk: really? the comment seems to indicate that it lacks consensus and the topic has multiple blueprints that need to be consolidated | 17:19 |
| SridharRamaswamy | salv-orlando: LOL | 17:19 |
| natarajk | salv-orlando::) | 17:19 |
| natarajk | s3wong: i just checked the spec. It is for modular L3 plugin. I haven't reviewed this yet | 17:20 |
| s3wong | natarajk: sure | 17:20 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: to me that specs reads a bit like flavor framework for vm based l3 router | 17:20 |
| natarajk | s3wong: There was another spec for l3routervm plugin related to mccafee proposed by Isaku | 17:21 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: the topic sounds like ML3 :-) | 17:21 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: yep | 17:21 |
| *** mwang2_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:21 | |
| s3wong | natarajk: did that one get approved for Kilo? (do you have the link?) | 17:21 |
| SridharRamaswamy | so i'm not sure if decomposition would help in this case | 17:21 |
| natarajk | s3wong: the mccafee plugin should follow decomposition principle | 17:22 |
| natarajk | s3wong: I haven't reviwed the Modular L3 plugin spec yet | 17:22 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: is L3 service considered part of vendor driver, or service plugin? | 17:22 |
| hareeshp | I am also not sure how will the vendor plugins for l3 are going forward | 17:23 |
| natarajk | s3wong: L3ServicePlugin and reference implementation will be in-tree | 17:23 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: salv-orlando: correct me if i'm wrong, the current plan is to thin out l3 plugin as well | 17:23 |
| natarajk | s3wong: Vendor plugins that extend L3ServicePlugin should be out-of tree | 17:23 |
| SridharRamaswamy | natarajk: exactly | 17:24 |
| *** mwang2 has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| s3wong | natarajk: yes | 17:24 |
| hareeshp | But vendor plugins for services are in the services repo, right? | 17:25 |
| natarajk | correct | 17:25 |
| s3wong | natarajk: though I am curious to know if any vendor has implemented L3 Service only driver but has no Neutron core plugin implementation --- in that case, their L3ServicePlugin driver would remain in tree? :-) | 17:25 |
| SridharRamaswamy | but l3 still belong in neutron-core | 17:25 |
| s3wong | hareeshp: currently the service repos that were split are FW/LB/VPNaaS, so metering and L3Service remained to be part of Neutron repo | 17:26 |
| hareeshp | So if they have a dependency on l3, there are three repos now | 17:26 |
| salv-orlando | SridharRamaswamy: correct again | 17:26 |
| s3wong | OK, let's move on then :-) | 17:28 |
| SridharRamaswamy | salv-orlando: thx | 17:28 |
| s3wong | #topic workflow discussion | 17:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "workflow discussion (Meeting topic: servicevm_device_manager)" | 17:28 | |
| s3wong | did everyone get a chance to comment on the doc? | 17:30 |
| s3wong | #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xs8TvEVMszzND5uoWTHtd1tJnu7105Ekgq9hxiyXABQ/edit | 17:30 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: i provided some initial comments | 17:30 |
| s3wong | Looks like the last edit was Dec 2nd, so probably not much :-) | 17:30 |
| s3wong | I think once yamahata successfully migrates to US, we should have the webex session to talk about this | 17:31 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: that document badly needs a diagram to illustrate the flow | 17:31 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: thanks | 17:31 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: as i've been asking earlier, we need a clear(er) separation of layers between service-vm-api and the users (l3 plugins, etc) | 17:32 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: it does. TBH I still feel that the flow wasn't clear for the team in general | 17:32 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: agreed | 17:32 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: to me, Tacker should have the API for services (and users) to consume, and a plugin layer for different device/resource-mgmt to implement | 17:33 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: agreed, but there was some confusion while discussing this during kilo summit. | 17:34 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: so it will be better to document it and get everyone in the same page | 17:35 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: yes, hence we need to add our thoughts in the document | 17:35 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: can u help documenting that ? i can volunteer to throw in a diagram | 17:35 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: I suspect the coming webex session would be emphasizing on the general use case and architecture/workflow of Tacker, based on that document | 17:35 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: sure | 17:36 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: I will add a section at the bottom, and I welcome any team members to express his/her opinion on how you think Tacke should be in the document | 17:36 |
| s3wong | *Tacker | 17:37 |
| s3wong | since we are at K-1 now, and we need to get some consensus on how to proceed and what to (try to) accomplish in Kilo timeframe | 17:37 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: sounds good | 17:38 |
| hareeshp | S3wong: agreed | 17:38 |
| s3wong | so, please comment or update (by adding content) the document, and we can have discussion on email as well | 17:38 |
| s3wong | hareeshp: do you have write access to the doc? | 17:39 |
| vishwanathj | I will review the doc this week now that the SAD date has passed | 17:39 |
| hareeshp | Not sure. Will check and let you know | 17:39 |
| s3wong | vishwanathj: Thanks! | 17:39 |
| hareeshp | Irc Using a phone now :p | 17:40 |
| s3wong | I see that SridharRamaswamy, vishwanathj , and natarajk all have write access | 17:40 |
| s3wong | so let's have discussion on doc, and consolidate our thoughts on there directly | 17:41 |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| s3wong | hareeshp: seems like you were left out :-) | 17:41 |
| hareeshp | Och! | 17:42 |
| s3wong | hareeshp: do you want me to add you via your cisco email or gmail account? | 17:42 |
| hareeshp | Use Gmail, that's more convenient | 17:42 |
| s3wong | hareeshp: done :-) | 17:42 |
| hareeshp | Less spam ☺ | 17:43 |
| SridharRamaswamy | while we at it .. i'd like to know the commit / review process for the tacker stackforge repo | 17:43 |
| SridharRamaswamy | #link https://github.com/stackforge/tacker | 17:43 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: it should be the same as Neutron | 17:43 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: okay, Isaku or you have the approval privilege to merge a changeset ? | 17:44 |
| s3wong | instead of neutron, the project is tacker | 17:44 |
| s3wong | one example is here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/121327/ | 17:44 |
| s3wong | this is for tacker-spec, but you get the idea :-) | 17:45 |
| *** mfisch has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:45 | |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: sounds good, thanks | 17:45 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: yes, yamagata, bobmel. and I all have +2/+A privileges | 17:45 |
| s3wong | * yamahata | 17:45 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: and though it is a stackforge project, we would still like to follow the same OpenStack procedure as (1) file spec, (2) get spec approved, then (3) post patches...etc | 17:47 |
| SridharRamaswamy | s3wong: okay | 17:47 |
| SridharRamaswamy | make sense | 17:47 |
| s3wong | SridharRamaswamy: don't worry, we aren't as evil as neutron-cores :-) | 17:48 |
| s3wong | (at least I hope we aren't) :-) | 17:48 |
| SridharRamaswamy | LOL | 17:48 |
| s3wong | #topic Open Discussions | 17:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussions (Meeting topic: servicevm_device_manager)" | 17:48 | |
| s3wong | anything else you guys want to bring up for this week? | 17:49 |
| s3wong | next Wednesday is the 24th, do you guys still want to have a meeting? | 17:49 |
| vishwanathj | I am out next week | 17:49 |
| s3wong | vishwanathj: OK | 17:49 |
| SridharRamaswamy | i'd vote to skip meeting next two weeks.. | 17:49 |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 17:49 | |
| vishwanathj | +1 | 17:50 |
| natarajk | +1 | 17:50 |
| s3wong | OK --- consensus reached! | 17:50 |
| SridharRamaswamy | we can colloborate on google docs .. | 17:50 |
| s3wong | we will reconvene in 2015 | 17:50 |
| *** simon-AS5591 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:50 | |
| s3wong | the next meeting will then be Jan. 7th | 17:51 |
| vishwanathj | Happy holidays and a happy new year to all | 17:51 |
| s3wong | Yes, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year | 17:52 |
| *** mdorman has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:52 | |
| s3wong | Any other topic to discuss? | 17:52 |
| s3wong | See you guys next year! | 17:53 |
| s3wong | Please comment on the document | 17:53 |
| vishwanathj | ok, bye | 17:53 |
| s3wong | #endmeeting | 17:53 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 17:53 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Dec 17 17:53:44 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 17:53 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/servicevm_device_manager/2014/servicevm_device_manager.2014-12-17-17.14.html | 17:53 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/servicevm_device_manager/2014/servicevm_device_manager.2014-12-17-17.14.txt | 17:53 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/servicevm_device_manager/2014/servicevm_device_manager.2014-12-17-17.14.log.html | 17:53 |
| *** tholtzen has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** vishwanathj has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** natarajk has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:53 | |
| *** gfa has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:54 | |
| *** retr0h has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:56 | |
| *** dvorak has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:56 | |
| *** xavpaice has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:58 | |
| *** GeoffArnold has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:58 | |
| mfisch | okay time for the operators meeting | 18:00 |
| mfisch | I must confess to having never run an IRC meeting before so here goes | 18:01 |
| mfisch | #startmeeting | 18:01 |
| openstack | mfisch: Error: A meeting name is required, e.g., '#startmeeting Marketing Committee' | 18:01 |
| *** jlk has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| mfisch | #startmeeting Openstack Operators | 18:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Dec 17 18:01:21 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mfisch. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Openstack Operators)" | 18:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_operators' | 18:01 |
| *** serverascode___ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| *** hareeshp has quit IRC | 18:01 | |
| mfisch | anyone here for the ops meeting? | 18:01 |
| gfa | whoa, help included | 18:01 |
| mdorman | o/ | 18:01 |
| mfisch | I suspect it may be quiet | 18:01 |
| jlk | o/ | 18:01 |
| xavpaice | o/ | 18:01 |
| jlk | Here, while in a work stand up. | 18:01 |
| gfa | here | 18:02 |
| mfisch | welcome | 18:02 |
| dvorak | here | 18:02 |
| retr0h | here | 18:02 |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:02 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 18:02 | |
| mfisch | the agenda is here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-operators-meeting-171214-agenda | 18:02 |
| mfisch | I'd actually like to cover the mid-cycle meetup first | 18:02 |
| mfisch | Unless Tom is here, the info I have from last week is that Tom working to schedule it now | 18:03 |
| mdorman | cool | 18:03 |
| mfisch | Does anyone have anything more firm on a date and time? | 18:03 |
| mfisch | (that info is from Dec 9) | 18:03 |
| xavpaice | is there a location? | 18:03 |
| mfisch | not that I've heard | 18:03 |
| mfisch | I will email Tom and poke him again | 18:04 |
| mdorman | ask him to post on operators list if they still need a venue. if htat’s needed, i may see if we can host it in phoenix | 18:04 |
| gfa | i never went to a mid-cycle, is it better than summit? as an op | 18:04 |
| xavpaice | I'd offer in New Zealand but it's a bit far | 18:04 |
| mfisch | wfm but probably not my travel dept | 18:04 |
| mfisch | #action mfisch to email Tom Fifeld (sp) and figure out when the ops midcycle meet up is | 18:05 |
| mfisch | I'll just CC the list | 18:05 |
| mdorman | cool | 18:05 |
| *** mgagne has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:05 | |
| mfisch | #topic sample config files | 18:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "sample config files (Meeting topic: Openstack Operators)" | 18:05 | |
| mfisch | did anyone participate in the discussion yesterday that happened in the cross-project meeting? | 18:06 |
| mdorman | i did | 18:06 |
| * harlowja a little | 18:06 | |
| mfisch | I also did | 18:06 |
| mdorman | kris was sorta there | 18:06 |
| mfisch | so I believe that the outcome was that devs know its a problem for us and are actively investigating/proposing solutions | 18:06 |
| mfisch | but that no final agreement was reached | 18:06 |
| *** mhanif has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:06 | |
| jlk | I watched it, but didn't catch everything. | 18:07 |
| mfisch | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/crossproject/2014/crossproject.2014-12-16-21.01.log.txt | 18:07 |
| mdorman | yeah i think the outcome is that someone was going to reply to the operators thread with some potential solutions. to get a feeling for what people prefer | 18:07 |
| jlk | there was desire to define a way to easily generate the docs, that's common across all the projects | 18:07 |
| mfisch | I believe fungi owns the action | 18:07 |
| mdorman | right | 18:07 |
| mfisch | and that he's going to start the converstion on the ops list as well, I know many of us do not subscribe to dev | 18:08 |
| fungi | yep, i will | 18:08 |
| fungi | full plate, but hopefully later today | 18:08 |
| mfisch | I have to say personally that this issue has come a long way since the bug I commented on wrt this was summarily closed | 18:08 |
| mfisch | anything else on this mdorman or klindgren ? | 18:08 |
| mfisch | (i'd suggest reading the minutes for the first half of that link) | 18:09 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:09 | |
| mdorman | don’ think so. we’re happy with the progress as well | 18:09 |
| mdorman | at least the discussion is happening | 18:09 |
| fungi | in fairness, bugs opened without actionable solutions are often summarily closed. that doesn't mean they're non-negotiable and can't be reopened | 18:09 |
| harlowja | i'd hopefully be able to propose another idea, but i'll wait for the ML proposal thread ;) | 18:09 |
| klindgren | the only other hting - is I would like to not use tox do to do that generation | 18:09 |
| mfisch | I'm okay with many options, I dont usually want to make pain for the devs | 18:09 |
| klindgren | but if tox is jsut calling a script - I can call the script as well | 18:10 |
| harlowja | pain for devs is ok, lol | 18:10 |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| jlk | tox is doing things inside a venv which helps keep the systme from getting dirty | 18:10 |
| mfisch | whats the reason for no tox? I know I have mine | 18:10 |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| dvorak | seems like ideally the sample config files would both get generated the same way, and done centrally so everyone doesn't have to do it themselves. | 18:10 |
| retr0h | mfisch: tox keeps things clean in venv | 18:10 |
| klindgren | because tox install all the requirements for the service into a venv | 18:10 |
| fungi | i get the impression the main use case for not doing it under tox is so that the version you generate locally on your server only has the relevant options based on the versions of libraries you have installed | 18:11 |
| klindgren | and the versions tox installs via pip probably wont match what is installed on the system | 18:11 |
| klindgren | fungi, exactly | 18:11 |
| fungi | however, if we ship sample configurations from upstream, our ci will likely generate them under tox just because that's simple. we can still make sure tox isn't required | 18:11 |
| mfisch | I dont quite understand the scope of the libraries problem, how many config options come from libs? | 18:11 |
| mgagne | fungi: for such use cases, if you would override requirements.txt with your own pinned versions, that would be great | 18:11 |
| xavpaice | in that way, tox is independant of the distro - isn't that a good thing? | 18:11 |
| mgagne | mfisch: oslo.db, oslo.messaging?, keystonemiddleware | 18:12 |
| mfisch | thx | 18:12 |
| jlk | if there is concern about generated docs not matching system, that's definitely an argument against upstream providing pre-generated docs | 18:12 |
| fungi | xavpaice: independent of the distro is a good thing if your services you're configuring are also independent of the distro | 18:12 |
| mfisch | jlk: there's also value for me in seeing changes over time | 18:13 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: looks to not be a good thing if your distro has older versions of libs than the ones found on pip, you won't have a sample config file fitting *your* environment | 18:13 |
| klindgren | I would say you *might* not | 18:13 |
| klindgren | I dont have a handle on how bad it would/could be... | 18:13 |
| xavpaice | I thought requirements.txt can be set to specific versions - in which case we set a min supported version there | 18:13 |
| jlk | can tox be taught when making the venv to include system libraries when possible? | 18:13 |
| mfisch | klindgren: is your use case more package building? thats a bit different from mine | 18:13 |
| xavpaice | doesn't help if newer versions change things though | 18:14 |
| fungi | right, the point being that if you regenerate samples yourself then you have the option to generate them in the environment you're configuring, rather than using samples generated in an abatract/artificial environment disconnected from your deployment | 18:14 |
| dvorak | so sounds like there are two issues, first being generating reference level configs and config docs for specific releaes (plus probably master), and the other being able to easily generate sample config files for specific environments | 18:14 |
| mfisch | agreed | 18:14 |
| mgagne | I think we have 2 or 3 use cases: those running against distro lib versions, ones running against trunk, ones running against pinned versions of libs | 18:14 |
| harlowja | an idea; why haven't people thought that configs shouldn't change between major versions of packages? | 18:14 |
| mgagne | harlowja: when should they change then? | 18:14 |
| harlowja | *sorry in-between major versions | 18:15 |
| jlk | harlowja: wouldn't that effectively prevent /any/ changes from config files happening? | 18:15 |
| jlk | ah | 18:15 |
| harlowja | they can change in the next major versions | 18:15 |
| fungi | the third thing which was brought up was an ability to see how the samples change over time, though i'm not sure that's 100% tractable since it's nonlinear/branching depending on library releases not tied to the application being configured | 18:15 |
| retr0h | don't think we started the meeting btw | 18:15 |
| retr0h | #startmeeting openstack-operators | 18:15 |
| openstack | retr0h: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. Use #endmeeting first. | 18:15 |
| mfisch | I did it | 18:15 |
| retr0h | or maybe we did :) | 18:15 |
| mfisch | retr0h: I started it | 18:15 |
| retr0h | mfisch: awesome - ignore me | 18:15 |
| harlowja | jlk example, configs don't change for oslo.messaging in oslo.messaging 1.0 -> 1.999 (for example) | 18:15 |
| xavpaice | it would be good to see changes in the configs, for when we upgrade packages | 18:15 |
| mfisch | yes | 18:15 |
| harlowja | just as u wouldn't expect an API to change, configs are somewhat like an API | 18:15 |
| xavpaice | +1 | 18:16 |
| jlk | harlowja: I can buy that, if we're talking about "not changing in stable/juno" | 18:16 |
| xavpaice | usually the release notes are pretty good in that respect | 18:16 |
| harlowja | depends, oslo libraries don't really have stable/juno, but have version numbers | 18:16 |
| mgagne | Should a git repository be the only place/reference for those sample config files? We have a matrix of possibilities. I don't see git answering this need if we have a plethora of combinaison. | 18:16 |
| fungi | harlowja: definitely a topic for the oslo team to spearhead. i'm not at all opposed to option stability | 18:16 |
| jlk | but for versions that are essentially "next release" that could be different, or the other thing will happen, the version nubmers will just change more frequently. | 18:16 |
| dvorak | to clarify, they shouldn't change in a non-backwards compat way. You can clearly introduce new options w/o breaking things in some cases. | 18:16 |
| mfisch | I think lots of operators are not using stable branches | 18:16 |
| harlowja | fungi it seems to be they would self-stabalize over time anyway | 18:17 |
| xavpaice | I'm OK with adding new items, just not changing/deprecating existing items except on a major version change | 18:17 |
| harlowja | fungi and this whole thing might be mute... | 18:17 |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:17 | |
| mgagne | mfisch: I'm using stable branches =) | 18:17 |
| fungi | harlowja: one can only hope, but we seem to grow wider faster than we grow higher | 18:17 |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:17 | |
| harlowja | stop eating so much icecream! | 18:17 |
| harlowja | lol | 18:17 |
| harlowja | *wider faster joke... | 18:17 |
| mfisch | okay so we should wrap this topic up. I think my advice would be to clearly state the use case you have in the TBD ML thread | 18:18 |
| fungi | har | 18:18 |
| dvorak | probably makes sense to concentrate on something managable to start with, I agree with fungi that this could get out of control pretty easily. | 18:18 |
| mfisch | I'm not sure they all got through yesterday it was pretty noisy | 18:18 |
| mfisch | anything else on this one? | 18:18 |
| dvorak | personally I'd be happy to just see reference level sample configs for each project release + master | 18:18 |
| fungi | dvorak: yeah, so my plan is to outline the discussion so far and request use cases to go along with any preferences people are indicating | 18:19 |
| dvorak | wfm | 18:19 |
| klindgren | someone else mentioned having config files for libs | 18:19 |
| mgagne | klindgren: that's the main pain point of sample config files in tree | 18:19 |
| *** alop has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:19 | |
| klindgren | mgagne, this was more like oslo.db has its own ocnfig file | 18:19 |
| alop | gah, sorry I'm late | 18:19 |
| klindgren | so nova/neutron config doesn't change based upon included libs | 18:20 |
| klindgren | up version of included libs* | 18:20 |
| mgagne | klindgren: "the resulting content of a sample config file highly depends on the installed versions of those libraries." | 18:20 |
| fungi | right, i think if there are good software development reasons to switch that model then they will be likely to happen, but don't want to have the tail wagging the dog where configuration defines software rather than the other way around | 18:20 |
| xavpaice | would be nice to reduce some of the duplication between config files though | 18:21 |
| klindgren | mgagne, right - for those options that come from librarys. | 18:21 |
| *** mhanif has quit IRC | 18:21 | |
| klindgren | BUt no reason why nova couldn't keep up a nova.conf that has everything specific to nova in it | 18:21 |
| gfa | i bet the version change in oslo.db will only change the options related to db, so the rest of the config file is 'static' for a fixed version of nova/neutron | 18:21 |
| klindgren | right | 18:21 |
| klindgren | gfa ^^ exactly | 18:22 |
| mfisch | a nova.conf that had all the nova specific stuff would help | 18:22 |
| gfa | so projects can ship all the config file but db, options | 18:22 |
| mfisch | I mean it would solve most if not all of the things I've dug into in the past year | 18:22 |
| alop | Isnt' that what the configuration reference is for? | 18:22 |
| fungi | again, that's software design issues, so out of scope for the sample config publishing discussion, but definitely something good to talk to the oslo devs about | 18:22 |
| mgagne | true, if we could have an online tool to generate the config file of the project and then you could select the lib versions you have and then combine the resulting configs. | 18:22 |
| alop | I don't look at sample configs, specificaly because they are bad, I rely on the reference on the docs site | 18:23 |
| jlk | that sounds.... fragile | 18:23 |
| klindgren | eitherway - someone brought it up on the cross-project discussion | 18:23 |
| klindgren | so I was jsut brining up here as well | 18:23 |
| klindgren | bringing* | 18:23 |
| mfisch | next topic? | 18:24 |
| mfisch | or do we have more here | 18:24 |
| alop | next | 18:24 |
| mfisch | skipping around again | 18:24 |
| mfisch | #topic mailing list | 18:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "mailing list (Meeting topic: Openstack Operators)" | 18:24 | |
| mfisch | I've noticed since I joined the ML that we still get some traffic thats essentially people who've never used openstack before. | 18:25 |
| mfisch | Does that belong on our ML and is it at a problem level? | 18:25 |
| alop | I think we get CC'd a lot | 18:25 |
| mdorman | personally i don’t think it’s an issue at this point | 18:25 |
| alop | like, people write to openstack@lists, and openstack-operators, etc | 18:25 |
| alop | yeah | 18:25 |
| mfisch | ok | 18:25 |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:26 | |
| mfisch | it has been quieter in terms of those messages, so moving on! | 18:26 |
| mfisch | #topic packaging | 18:26 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "packaging (Meeting topic: Openstack Operators)" | 18:26 | |
| xavpaice | I think the traffic level on the list is still pretty low, and if we need can can always gently direct people to the right ml | 18:26 |
| mdorman | i just try to not respond to stuff that’s not appropriate for the list | 18:26 |
| mfisch | re packaging: There was some ML Threads about packaging coming out of the paris discussions | 18:26 |
| alop | I actually think it's a great forum, because we're the ones who may likely have the answer | 18:26 |
| dvorak | alop: nod, I think mfisch is talking about the "my first openstack" questions that come along occassionally. | 18:27 |
| mfisch | I'm not sure what the next steps are or if anyone is working on it | 18:27 |
| gfa | yes we may have the anwser, but IMO if you don'y know MTU you should not be doing openstack+gre | 18:27 |
| * mfisch reverts the topic | 18:28 | |
| alop | sorry | 18:28 |
| alop | packaging | 18:28 |
| mfisch | np | 18:28 |
| mfisch | this is my first meeting | 18:28 |
| xavpaice | re packaging, I wasn't at Paris, but I'm keen to be involved | 18:28 |
| alop | so, I missed the convo in Paris (stuck in the nova thing) | 18:28 |
| mfisch | the tl;dr was that lots of us are packaging | 18:28 |
| xavpaice | it seems to me there's a bunch of people making packages | 18:28 |
| mfisch | and we're all using different tools | 18:28 |
| alop | and we want to make blessed generic packages? | 18:29 |
| mfisch | we're using Jenkins debian glue I know klindgren uses anvil | 18:29 |
| harlowja | + yahoo + cray | 18:29 |
| mfisch | anvil sounds awesome except we dont use RHEL or its cousins | 18:29 |
| xavpaice | we use ubuntu's tools, but with our own repos (stable + selected patches) | 18:29 |
| harlowja | mfisch ya; i'll avoid the diving deep into anvil, but its not designed just for RHEL :) | 18:30 |
| mgagne | I feel that most distro tools feel like a huge Rube Goldberg machine. And I feel the need to simplify it a bit to fit my own particular needs | 18:30 |
| mfisch | There's also the philosophy argument. A guy from Redhat and to some extent the debian guy on the ML (who's name I cannot remember) both were wondering why ops are doing packaging | 18:30 |
| harlowja | meh | 18:31 |
| mgagne | Thomas Goirand it is | 18:31 |
| mfisch | The resistance is duplication of effort and for some folks support issues I guess | 18:31 |
| xavpaice | that's a good point though | 18:31 |
| alop | because, both of those entities are slow to deliver changes upstream | 18:31 |
| mfisch | absolutely | 18:31 |
| xavpaice | we package cos we don't want to wait for distro packages to arrive | 18:31 |
| mgagne | true | 18:31 |
| klindgren | That and I have my own patches that I need ot run with as well | 18:31 |
| dvorak | also, I don't really want my openstack services to be directly tied to the version of my operating system, which is kind of the case today with ubuntu | 18:31 |
| klindgren | to* | 18:31 |
| mgagne | The distro tools also don't answer our need to fork a project and apply our own custom patches. | 18:31 |
| klindgren | plus they drop support for stuff | 18:31 |
| klindgren | like juno is RHEL7 only | 18:32 |
| mfisch | even if the distro packages the day it lands in a backport you might have 2 weeks to get it there | 18:32 |
| klindgren | iirc Ubuntu dropped havana support at 2013.2.3? | 18:32 |
| xavpaice | yup | 18:32 |
| dvorak | mfisch: and you may have to take some other patch that you don't want. | 18:32 |
| mfisch | yeah | 18:32 |
| alop | Case in point, You find a bug, you report, you even submit a patch for it. The community may debate it for 6 months, meanwhile, your production is broken | 18:32 |
| mfisch | nor do I have time to look at all the changes that come in the new package | 18:32 |
| dvorak | lack of granulaity is a big issue, aside from speed and local patches | 18:32 |
| mfisch | alop: thats absolutely happened here | 18:32 |
| alop | here too | 18:32 |
| klindgren | here too | 18:33 |
| harlowja | that sounds impossible | 18:33 |
| harlowja | haha | 18:33 |
| mfisch | After upstream ignored it for 3 weeks it landed, then they ignored my backport for 4 more weeks. | 18:33 |
| mdorman | i feel like we all generally understand the reasons for doing our own patching | 18:33 |
| klindgren | backports are a *PAIN* | 18:33 |
| xavpaice | I suspect that's why we all do our own packages | 18:33 |
| mfisch | agreed | 18:33 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: yep | 18:33 |
| jlk | yeah | 18:33 |
| jlk | every place I've seen does their own fashion of packages | 18:33 |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:33 | |
| mfisch | so the paris talk was basically is there a way we can share what we do better? | 18:33 |
| jlk | either actual OS packages, or python venvs, or containers using one or the other. | 18:33 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:34 | |
| xavpaice | so the barrier to package tools being more generic for us is the differences between RHEL based distros and Debian based? | 18:34 |
| mgagne | I don't mean to diminish the work of Thomas but he kind of missed the point about *our* needs as operators | 18:34 |
| dvorak | mgagne: and was a bit rude | 18:34 |
| harlowja | xavpaice i'll just throw this out there (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87875/ was a start of debian buliding for anvil; its not impossible...) | 18:34 |
| mfisch | mgagne: agreed, we're not competing with debian, we have different needs | 18:35 |
| dvorak | mfisch: I'd think common tooling would be the biggest thing. We're all going to have local packages at different times | 18:35 |
| *** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:35 | |
| mgagne | dvorak, mfisch: I can understand his frustration and need to vent but there was no opening about actually understanding our needs and answering it | 18:35 |
| xavpaice | harlowja: I'll have to read that in detail :) | 18:35 |
| mfisch | even common for ubuntu would help, sounds like most RHEL derivatives just use anvil | 18:35 |
| harlowja | xavpaice also https://github.com/stackforge/anvil/commit/d435f548276 which adds venv building to anvil | 18:35 |
| harlowja | *or at least the start of that building... | 18:36 |
| dvorak | we use jenkins debian glue, and it seems better than using the native tools it wraps, but it's still a pain in the butt | 18:36 |
| mfisch | So broadly I'd like to propose that we resurrect this discussion on the mailing list with the goal of setting an agenda/goal/etc for the mid-cycle meetup | 18:37 |
| xavpaice | our changes to the ubuntu packages are so minor, that we can just use the source packages, and rebuild with our forked repo - easy for us but not particularly transportable | 18:37 |
| mgagne | furthermore, we might have completely different philosophy around compat and versioning requirements. Installing in a venv is fine for some operators, it's not for Debian/Ubuntu/RHEL. | 18:37 |
| harlowja | mfisch +1 | 18:37 |
| dvorak | xavpaice: that's basically what we're doing also, plus git-upstream | 18:37 |
| mfisch | xavpaice: do you pull from upstream ubuntu for the debian/ folder when you do updates or just fork it once? | 18:37 |
| mdorman | sounds like a good plan mfisch | 18:37 |
| gfa | xavpaice +1 | 18:37 |
| xavpaice | regular plans | 18:37 |
| xavpaice | s/plans/pulls | 18:38 |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 18:38 | |
| xavpaice | I was playing with applying extra patches via quilt but it was hard to maintain | 18:38 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: it's awful | 18:38 |
| gfa | i would like to share backports, i don't have many for icehouse but i had more in havana time | 18:38 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: that's my current workflow | 18:39 |
| jlk | I really feel that any established environment is going to have a system already in place to manage patches | 18:39 |
| gfa | i would like to see a dump-your-backport repo | 18:39 |
| xavpaice | our devs in house use our copy of the upstream repo and add their own patches, but if quilt adds stuff they don't see it's hard to test properly | 18:39 |
| jlk | and convergence is going to be... hard | 18:39 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: even with gbp-pq | 18:39 |
| jlk | RAX public cloud has one thing, rax private cloud has another, Blue Box has one (two), etc.. etc... | 18:39 |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 18:39 | |
| dvorak | jlk: well, people come to it on their own terms, or stick with what they have. the problem right now is that there isn't anything but completely canned packages or roll your own. something in the middle might be nice | 18:40 |
| jlk | yeah, that's just hard to do without strong opinions | 18:40 |
| mgagne | jlk: goes to show that nobody feels the existing solutions answer their needs | 18:40 |
| mfisch | The goal of operators was not to bless a one true way of doing anything like packaging but instead to share | 18:40 |
| jlk | mgagne: many of the solutions are made behind closed doors to satisfy a product before being made public | 18:40 |
| mfisch | take someone's elses work flow and fork it for your needs | 18:40 |
| jlk | yeah | 18:40 |
| mgagne | jlk: hehe, devs/operators' life | 18:40 |
| mfisch | for packaging that might mainly be documenting stuff in a wiki or blog post rather than writing a new tool. It might also be contributing your enhancements to whatever your upstream is | 18:41 |
| jlk | I agree it would be nice to point at $something as a framework for consuming upstream source, adding in downstream changes, and producing an artifact at the end. | 18:41 |
| jlk | queue fight over who's existing $thing becomes the reference. | 18:42 |
| mfisch | agreed | 18:42 |
| mgagne | jlk: true, those are the main challenging when starting packaging, there is no true reference/tutorial | 18:42 |
| xavpaice | a wiki with some discussion of options and how others have achieved their goal would be good though | 18:42 |
| jlk | superuser articles perhaps | 18:42 |
| xavpaice | leaves the reader to make their own decision, but with information | 18:42 |
| mfisch | sounds like an action is brewing | 18:42 |
| alop | jlk: I was just thinking that | 18:42 |
| jlk | on how each provider is managing their downstream changes and artifacts. | 18:42 |
| dvorak | jlk: I'd be interested in just hearing what other people are doing at this point. I know anvil sounds like it works well for a lot of people, but I don't know the workflow, pain points, etc. | 18:42 |
| klindgren | I want to hear from someone using giftwrap as well | 18:43 |
| mfisch | the best part of the conference is going to a CI discussion and realizing hey we're not totally off base on the made up way we use | 18:43 |
| mfisch | any preference for wiki vs superuser (blog) in this? | 18:44 |
| mfisch | we could always start with blog and migrate the info or vice-versa | 18:44 |
| xavpaice | can anyone write a superuser article? | 18:44 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: everyone should IMO | 18:44 |
| mfisch | well they let me do it, so yeah | 18:44 |
| xavpaice | just wondering if there's a barrier, like being a foundation member, or a certain size of deployment, etc | 18:44 |
| mgagne | xavpaice: as there won't be one tool to show/explain | 18:44 |
| jlk | I don't think there is a barrier | 18:45 |
| mfisch | no barrier | 18:45 |
| xavpaice | excellent, suits me then | 18:45 |
| mfisch | xavpaice: ping me and I'll get you a name where you can get more info | 18:45 |
| xavpaice | thanks | 18:45 |
| xavpaice | maybe I should just chat to tom? | 18:46 |
| mfisch | #action everyone to document their packaging process for sharing purposes | 18:46 |
| mfisch | xavpaice: allison@openstack.org | 18:46 |
| * xavpaice thanks mfisch | 18:46 | |
| mfisch | okay final topic | 18:46 |
| mfisch | by fiat I have cancelled the meeting on Christmas day | 18:46 |
| jlk | +1 | 18:47 |
| mfisch | I wont be around much on new years eve either | 18:47 |
| mfisch | so I'm voting to cancel that too | 18:47 |
| xavpaice | +1 | 18:47 |
| mdorman | i think that’s reasonable | 18:47 |
| mfisch | see you guys on Jan 7 then | 18:47 |
| mfisch | anything else? | 18:48 |
| mdorman | can you make a note to announce the next meeting a few days ahead on the ML? | 18:48 |
| mfisch | yes. Was yesterday's announce too late? | 18:48 |
| xavpaice | did we want to discuss the shared ops tools discussion on the ML? | 18:48 |
| mdorman | mfisch: no that was fine | 18:48 |
| mfisch | yes, lets do that xavpaice | 18:48 |
| mfisch | xavpaice: can you kick off the convo? | 18:48 |
| xavpaice | the tl;dr was that we all have tools for things like monitoring, graphs, etc | 18:49 |
| xavpaice | there's a github for sharing some of these, but not much content | 18:49 |
| xavpaice | some discussion around stackforge and some around an official OpenStack project | 18:49 |
| mfisch | xavpaice: yeah I'm not sure what the future of said repo is, I think that it might go away at some point | 18:49 |
| xavpaice | I'd be sad about that | 18:50 |
| mfisch | I'd like to get Michael Chapman here to follow-up on that one | 18:50 |
| xavpaice | unless it moved to stackforge | 18:50 |
| xavpaice | might be a bit early for him, it's not even 8 here in NZ and we're two hours ahead | 18:50 |
| mfisch | I think that stackforge is the theory, I wont say plan b/c I've not heard in awhile | 18:50 |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:51 | |
| mfisch | okay folks, see you guys back in #openstack-operators | 18:51 |
| mfisch | going once... | 18:51 |
| mdorman | the concern about stackforge is that you have to do gating and what not | 18:51 |
| mdorman | but yeah, can follow up on that discussion later. | 18:52 |
| xavpaice | cool | 18:52 |
| mfisch | agreed | 18:52 |
| mfisch | thanks all | 18:52 |
| mfisch | #endmeeting | 18:52 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 18:52 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Dec 17 18:52:32 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:52 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_operators/2014/openstack_operators.2014-12-17-18.01.html | 18:52 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_operators/2014/openstack_operators.2014-12-17-18.01.txt | 18:52 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_operators/2014/openstack_operators.2014-12-17-18.01.log.html | 18:52 |
| *** xavpaice has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:53 | |
| *** mdorman has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:53 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| *** praneshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:54 | |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:54 | |
| *** gfa has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:55 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 18:55 | |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:56 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:56 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| *** GeoffArnold has quit IRC | 18:57 | |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:57 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| *** ajmiller has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:08 | |
| *** jamespd has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:17 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| *** retr0h has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:23 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| *** VW_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:25 | |
| *** mhanif has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:33 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 19:39 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:40 | |
| *** mfisch has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:40 | |
| *** vishwanathj has quit IRC | 19:42 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 19:45 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| *** mhanif has quit IRC | 19:57 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 20:01 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:09 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:24 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 20:27 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:29 | |
| *** mgagne has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:43 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:46 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 20:53 | |
| *** VW__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:26 | |
| *** VW_ has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:28 | |
| *** VW__ has quit IRC | 21:30 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:32 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:59 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 22:12 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:12 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:16 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** jamespd has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:29 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 22:42 | |
| *** harlowja has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:44 | |
| *** Rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:05 | |
| *** praneshp has quit IRC | 23:09 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:10 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 23:10 | |
| *** sigmavirus24 is now known as sigmavirus24_awa | 23:26 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:34 | |
| *** praneshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:35 | |
| *** praneshp_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:38 | |
| *** praneshp has quit IRC | 23:39 | |
| *** praneshp_ is now known as praneshp | 23:39 | |
| *** ajmiller_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:41 | |
| *** IPPhoneGuy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:51 | |
| *** ajmiller_ has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!