| *** heckj has quit IRC | 00:01 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:03 | |
| *** JordanRinke is now known as JordanRinke_AFK | 00:10 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** s1rp has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:13 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:13 | |
| *** s1rp has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:13 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 00:21 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 00:31 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:33 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 00:42 | |
| *** Binbin has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:42 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:54 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 00:56 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:57 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 01:06 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:10 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:17 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 01:30 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:33 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:43 | |
| *** msinhore has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:58 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 01:59 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 02:04 | |
| *** carlp has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:10 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:12 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 02:30 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:35 | |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 02:36 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 02:45 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:51 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 02:52 | |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:59 | |
| *** JordanRinke_AFK is now known as JordanRinke | 03:04 | |
| *** Binbin has quit IRC | 03:23 | |
| *** Binbin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:24 | |
| *** msinhore has quit IRC | 03:24 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:29 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 03:29 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 03:30 | |
| *** msinhore has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:32 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:36 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 03:45 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:58 | |
| *** nati has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:03 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 04:14 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:19 | |
| *** JordanRi1ke has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:27 | |
| *** ke4qqq has quit IRC | 04:27 | |
| *** JordanRinke has quit IRC | 04:27 | |
| *** ke4qqq_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:27 | |
| *** _cerberus_ has quit IRC | 04:28 | |
| *** _cerberus_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:28 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 04:30 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:43 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 05:02 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:07 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 05:14 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:18 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 05:30 | |
| *** msinhore has quit IRC | 05:39 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:41 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:42 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 05:49 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:52 | |
| *** exitdescription has left #openstack-meeting | 05:56 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 06:07 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:13 | |
| *** Binbin has quit IRC | 06:15 | |
| *** Binbin has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:20 | |
| *** nati has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 06:30 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:35 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 07:01 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:06 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 07:18 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:27 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 07:31 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:37 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 07:46 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:59 | |
| *** nati has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:04 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 08:07 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:39 | |
| *** nati has quit IRC | 09:32 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 09:43 | |
| *** Binbin has quit IRC | 10:06 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 10:31 | |
| *** nati has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:53 | |
| *** nati has quit IRC | 10:59 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:34 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 12:07 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:18 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:20 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:45 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 13:46 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:50 | |
| *** jkoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:55 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 14:07 | |
| *** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:13 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:16 | |
| *** msinhore has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:31 | |
| *** ke4qqq_ is now known as ke4qqq | 14:45 | |
| *** ke4qqq has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:45 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| *** jmelesky has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:03 | |
| *** jmelesky has quit IRC | 15:28 | |
| *** jmelesky has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:31 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:36 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 15:38 | |
| *** vladimir3p has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:55 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 15:57 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:09 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:24 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:40 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:10 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 17:12 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 17:16 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:17 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:19 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:53 | |
| *** gholt has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| *** Shubh has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:13 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 18:16 | |
| *** sjagarla has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:19 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 18:26 | |
| *** rminnear has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:29 | |
| *** sai has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| *** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:38 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:48 | |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 18:50 | |
| *** Shubh has quit IRC | 18:50 | |
| *** Shubhangi has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:50 | |
| *** Shubh has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:51 | |
| Shubh | Hi Everyone | 19:08 |
|---|---|---|
| ttx | Shubh: o/ | 19:09 |
| sai | is that meeting started? | 19:09 |
| *** msinhore has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| *** foxtrotgulf has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:10 | |
| ttx | sai: the CI meeting ? | 19:10 |
| sai | yes | 19:10 |
| *** msinhore has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:10 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: around ? | 19:10 |
| heckj | IT's been all quiet today - nothing started | 19:10 |
| Shubh | Can anyone tell the specific format that we have to follow to create test cases | 19:11 |
| Shubh | ? | 19:11 |
| heckj | Shubh: termie had some great suggestions on it, and I think there was something stashed in the wiki or etherpad, but I don't have a link | 19:12 |
| ttx | Shubh: ping westmaas about it -- his team worked on examples | 19:12 |
| Shubh | okay .Thank you heckj and ttx | 19:13 |
| sai | what are the test cases we can do on openstack? | 19:13 |
| ttx | Looks like this meeting is missing its chair -- so I think it's safe to cancel it | 19:14 |
| heckj | Shubh: http://wiki.openstack.org/TestingGuideDraft , http://wiki.openstack.org/SmallTestingGuideDraft | 19:14 |
| heckj | ttx: any fancy hash tags for the bot to assert a meeting is cancelled? | 19:15 |
| ttx | heckj: nope -- we just don't start it :) | 19:15 |
| ttx | sai: we have unit tests in the code and various smoketest harnesses | 19:16 |
| ttx | sai: the meeting that should have happened this hour is about making all those smoketest harnesses converge. | 19:17 |
| sai | do we need install smoketest in our machine? | 19:17 |
| ttx | sai: no, smoketests are various deploy+run automated tests. | 19:17 |
| Shubh | So I can see in the example ,the unittest getting imported but can not find the unittest package anywhere in the nova | 19:18 |
| ttx | Shubh: that's standard Python: http://docs.python.org/library/unittest.html | 19:19 |
| sai | @ttx how to do the smoketest | 19:19 |
| ttx | sai: there is no single "smoketest", just various tests that different groups use. Not sure which one(s) are available to others | 19:20 |
| ttx | sai: we are still working on building a single official one | 19:20 |
| Shubh | ohh okay .good .I will try to import that in the example and then try to run it | 19:20 |
| ttx | sai: if you're interested in that, you can contact mtaylor. | 19:21 |
| sai | thanks ttx | 19:22 |
| Shubh | So ttx how did u executed or tested the unit test cases .Is it through the run_test.sh or through python as mentioned in the link | 19:25 |
| ttx | I use the run_tests.sh | 19:26 |
| Shubh | So we just have to import the unittest and the respective packages for the creating the unittest case | 19:26 |
| Shubh | am I correct | 19:27 |
| ttx | Shubh: we should have this discussion in #openstack, this channel is used for meetings, and one will start in 30min | 19:27 |
| Shubh | oh okay.I apologise .I thought this one is for Testing and CI | 19:28 |
| ttx | Shubh: unfortunately there is no meeting today, apparently. | 19:28 |
| Shubh | ohh okay. | 19:29 |
| Shubh | Thanks anyways .I appreciate your help | 19:33 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:36 | |
| *** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:47 | |
| *** zdeng has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:49 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:50 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:52 | |
| notmyname | /letsdothis | 20:01 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:01 | |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| jbryce | hello | 20:02 |
| jbryce | who all is here? | 20:02 |
| zns | jbryce: hi | 20:02 |
| johnpur | o/ | 20:02 |
| heckj | \o | 20:02 |
| ttx | o/ | 20:03 |
| Shubh | Hi | 20:03 |
| ewanmellor | \o/ | 20:03 |
| sjagarla | hi | 20:03 |
| sai | hi | 20:03 |
| jbryce | so 4 ppb members so far? | 20:03 |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:03 | |
| ttx | jbryce: a bit short. | 20:04 |
| *** jmckenty_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| jmckenty_ | sorry I'm late | 20:04 |
| jbryce | ttx: yep | 20:04 |
| ttx | jbryce: soren is in vacation so won't be around -- dunno for any other | 20:04 |
| notmyname | how many is quorum? | 20:04 |
| jbryce | 7 | 20:05 |
| jmckenty_ | How many are we? | 20:05 |
| ttx | 5 | 20:05 |
| notmyname | I count 6 | 20:05 |
| jbryce | 6 now actually | 20:05 |
| jmckenty_ | where's anotherjesse? | 20:05 |
| dendrobates | o/ | 20:06 |
| notmyname | I saw most of the anso people at rookie-o at rackspace yesterday | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | what about purrier? | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | I see ewanmellor | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | and dendrobates | 20:06 |
| ttx | jmckenty: he is here | 20:06 |
| notmyname | with dendrobates, I thinkwe are 7 | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | doesn't that make 7? | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | ah, cool | 20:06 |
| jbryce | it does now | 20:06 |
| jbryce | #startmeeting | 20:06 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 28 20:06:43 2011 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:06 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 20:06 |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB - agenda at the bottom | 20:06 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: can I suggest structured discussion on the project autonomy question? | 20:07 |
| jbryce | jmckenty_: sure | 20:07 |
| jmckenty_ | e.g., one person to present for, one to present against, and then discussion? | 20:07 |
| jbryce | any volunteers for either side? | 20:08 |
| jmckenty_ | Maybe using #info for relevant factoids | 20:08 |
| jmckenty_ | I'll present against autonomy | 20:08 |
| jmckenty_ | if no one else grabs it | 20:08 |
| notmyname | I'll volunteer for autonomy | 20:08 |
| ttx | jmckenty: I can help you with that. | 20:08 |
| notmyname | heh | 20:08 |
| jbryce | one thing to keep in mind to is that autonomy is kind of a gradient as well.... | 20:08 |
| jbryce | there are levels of autonomy | 20:08 |
| notmyname | of course | 20:08 |
| jmckenty_ | true enough, I think if we argue the extremes, | 20:08 |
| jbryce | but we can start with a flat for and against | 20:08 |
| ttx | yes, not sure it's a binary decision | 20:08 |
| jmckenty_ | we'll end up identifying an ideal mid-position | 20:08 |
| jbryce | notmyname: want to get it started since it was your topic? | 20:09 |
| ttx | (in fact, I'm wearing grey today) | 20:09 |
| jbryce | #topic Project autonomy | 20:09 |
| notmyname | sure | 20:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Project autonomy" | 20:09 | |
| notmyname | my thoughts, so as not to spam the channel: https://gist.github.com/1052036 (click the "raw" link to get nicely wrapped lines) | 20:09 |
| notmyname | it's short | 20:09 |
| jbryce | https://gist.github.com/1052036 - notmyname's summary of his position on project autonomy | 20:09 |
| ttx | "raw" doesn't work for me :) | 20:09 |
| notmyname | we've made several decisions already that have tended towards autonomy. I'd like to continue that and allow each project to choose their own tools for their own work | 20:10 |
| notmyname | ttx: https://raw.github.com/gist/1052036/33a6df89a37e6d29210806f61365c097a4b2e64b/gistfile1.txt | 20:10 |
| ttx | notmyname: firefox displays that in very long lines. But I can handle it. | 20:10 |
| jmckenty_ | So it seems like there are some buckets of "autonomy": | 20:10 |
| jmckenty_ | - Language | 20:10 |
| jmckenty_ | - Tools | 20:10 |
| jmckenty_ | - Release Cycle | 20:11 |
| jmckenty_ | - Philosophy | 20:11 |
| jmckenty_ | - Governance / Mgmt | 20:11 |
| jmckenty_ | Did I miss anything substantive? | 20:11 |
| notmyname | I see the project management (openstack packaging/release) as a separate project and should choose their tools too | 20:11 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: Philosophy kinda answers most of the others | 20:11 |
| jmckenty_ | Not really - I'm using philosophy to mean "Project goals", e.g. scale and strong opinions | 20:11 |
| jmckenty_ | aka who OpenStack will be useful for | 20:12 |
| jmckenty_ | useful == designed for == ideal for | 20:12 |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:12 | |
| jmckenty_ | There are actually a LOT of unique descriptions of openstack floating around now | 20:13 |
| jmckenty_ | the launchpad.net one, the openstack.org one, the original novacc.org one | 20:13 |
| jmckenty_ | Plus various things that have been said in the press (The operating system of the cloud, etc) | 20:13 |
| jmckenty_ | Launchpad says "simple to implement " | 20:13 |
| ttx | Note that our best project autonomy definition so far is what we agreed at: http://wiki.openstack.org/ProjectTypes | 20:14 |
| jmckenty_ | I agree with "so far", | 20:14 |
| jmckenty_ | since we dodged the question of language, of philosophy, and of tools | 20:15 |
| jmckenty_ | My strong (opinionated) position is this: | 20:15 |
| jmckenty_ | Rackspace and NASA partnered on OpenStack originally, in large part, because we both had written in python | 20:15 |
| jmckenty_ | A lot of the community engagement around OpenStack as a *unified* set of projects has been because of the language consistency | 20:16 |
| jmckenty_ | Community portability (e.g., the ability for developers to move easily from nova to swift to glance, etc) will rest on common coding standards, including language | 20:16 |
| jmckenty_ | And I think making that STRONGER rather than weaker will only help | 20:16 |
| jmckenty_ | We've already agreed on unified governance (according to the project types doc) | 20:17 |
| jmckenty_ | we *seem* to be converging on unified philosophy | 20:17 |
| jmckenty_ | we've agreed on unified release cycles and packaging | 20:17 |
| notmyname | * | 20:17 |
| jmckenty_ | If we agree on unified language, I'm happy to allow projects to have tool autonomyu | 20:18 |
| jmckenty_ | provided we can agree on QUALITY gates | 20:18 |
| jmckenty_ | e.g., everyone needs CI, everyone needs revision control, everyone needs review automation | 20:18 |
| jmckenty_ | everyone needs measurement of unit test coverage | 20:18 |
| ttx | i don't really see the point of having autonomous projects calling themselves OpenStack, I guess. "OpenStack" must mean something, and that something is what we have in common. | 20:18 |
| ttx | not just "being included in the release announcement" | 20:19 |
| jmckenty_ | Right, we're just clarifying what the common ground is | 20:19 |
| *** sjagarla has left #openstack-meeting | 20:19 | |
| jmckenty_ | I have a selfish reason, of course | 20:20 |
| ttx | I think it's one thing to diverge on code hosting... but for example differing on issue tracking (a user-facing tool) makes OpenStack look like a weird patchwork of separate pieces. | 20:20 |
| jbryce | on things like tools, i think it's important to consider the total audience of a specific tool | 20:20 |
| *** sai has quit IRC | 20:20 | |
| jmckenty_ | I'm trying to make nova, swift and glance work together in much closer ways | 20:20 |
| jmckenty_ | and having those three projects in different RCS makes it hard for me | 20:20 |
| notmyname | issue tracking is central to a dev workflow and should be chosen by those who use it (ie the devs for the project) | 20:20 |
| jbryce | something like the revision control system has a relatively small audience of the developers who are submitting code compared to issue-tracking/blueprints/release tracking which has developers, users, external tool builders | 20:21 |
| jbryce | issue tracking is not just a dev tool | 20:21 |
| notmyname | I agree with jmckenty_ about the quality gates, as long as they are descriptive guidelines rather than prescriptive requirements for projects | 20:21 |
| jbryce | it's used by many more people than just devs | 20:21 |
| ttx | jbryce: +1 | 20:21 |
| dendrobates | I would say that issue tracking is a qa tool used by multiple groups | 20:21 |
| johnpur | my view is that the dev community can drive the tools decision, but we need a *common* solution across openstack projects | 20:22 |
| notmyname | we only currently have unified release cycles and packaging in the sense of the 6-month releases | 20:22 |
| ewanmellor | notmyname: Sorry, I disagree. That's true as long as you're never expecting bugs that lie across components, but I fully expect bugs that need to move between Swift or Glance, or Nova and Quantum, or whatever. | 20:22 |
| jbryce | there are a lot of people who enter and consume information from the bug reports and blueprints who are not submitting code | 20:22 |
| jbryce | i'd rather that all be centralized in one place that we can point everyone too | 20:22 |
| ttx | ewanmellor: and accidentally, that's where Launchpad bugs really shine. | 20:22 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: let's avoid specific recommendations for the moment, if possible | 20:23 |
| jbryce | they want to know what's going on in "openstack" not have to track down the information from an arbitrary number of authoritative sources | 20:23 |
| ttx | jmckenty: sure -- was just pointing out what we already had. | 20:23 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: I think this is true, but also a major problem on the documentation and forums side as well | 20:23 |
| creiht | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Watches#Watching%20Another%20Project | 20:23 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: are you all right with all of us using the same system if it's github? | 20:24 |
| jmckenty_ | b/c that's certainly the ideal for me | 20:24 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: I think it raises the bar to entry for new projects | 20:25 |
| jmckenty_ | nova was born on github, and I think it would be great to go back there | 20:25 |
| notmyname | I prefer github for my own project(s) but I think those who actually contribute to the projects shouldbe the ones to make that choice | 20:25 |
| jbryce | jmckenty_: what happened to avoiding specific recommendations for now? | 20:25 |
| jmckenty_ | :p | 20:25 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx threw a gaunlet | 20:25 |
| ttx | jmckenty: we are drifting away from "autonomy" into the next topic :) | 20:25 |
| jmckenty_ | no, I think notmyname brought up autonomy originally only in the context of the github move, if I'm not mistaken | 20:26 |
| notmyname | yes, but it affects much more than code hosting or issues | 20:26 |
| jmckenty_ | can we agree that there's no sense in projects having autonomous philosophy or language? | 20:26 |
| jmckenty_ | e.g., if a project wants to be part of openstack, it needs to be cloud, and it needs to be simple to implement and massively scalable | 20:27 |
| jmckenty_ | and it needs to be in python | 20:27 |
| ttx | jmckenty: is "philosophy" what is described in http://wiki.openstack.org/ProjectTypes ? | 20:27 |
| notmyname | except for the last part, I like that | 20:27 |
| jbryce | i can agree on philosophy. i think that is the foundation that binds openstack together. | 20:27 |
| dendrobates | notmyname: which last part? | 20:27 |
| jmckenty_ | great. So what we're talking about is autonomy of TOOLS | 20:27 |
| notmyname | dendrobates: python | 20:27 |
| jbryce | but how long is openstack going to last and grow? i hope for years maybe decades....i don't want to commit to 1 language forever | 20:27 |
| ttx | jmckenty: Openness, Transparency, Commonality, Integration, Respect of release deadlines, Facilitation of downstream distribution ? | 20:28 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: to be part of openstack, a project should subscribe to the openstack philosophy | 20:28 |
| ttx | or a subset thereof ? | 20:28 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: I think the last is dangerous | 20:28 |
| jmckenty_ | e.g., WHICH downstream? | 20:28 |
| jmckenty_ | or how MANY downstreams | 20:28 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: why not? | 20:29 |
| ttx | jmckenty: read that as "when contacted, the project devs should make their best to help downstream distributors" ? | 20:29 |
| jmckenty_ | fair enough, though | 20:29 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: fair enough | 20:29 |
| jmckenty_ | dendrobates: do you have a position on language? | 20:30 |
| ttx | i.e. if slackware comes knocking at our door, we should try to help them as much as we reasonably can. | 20:30 |
| notmyname | is openstack a single thing with subsystems or a collection of independent projects that work together for some level of integration and releases? I think the second | 20:30 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: so you're saying linux distros are the only downstreams? | 20:30 |
| ttx | I think the first. | 20:30 |
| dendrobates | jmckenty: I think python is good enough for almost all situations | 20:30 |
| jmckenty_ | What if someone wants to put openstack on an ASIC? | 20:30 |
| ttx | jmckenty: no, that was just an example :) | 20:30 |
| ttx | jmckenty: Puppet/Chef could also be considered downstreams. | 20:30 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname and ttx: I think the first as well | 20:30 |
| jbryce | i think somewhere in the middle. it's a collection of projects that can be used independently, but that will benefit from commonality. | 20:31 |
| jbryce | i'm wearing my grey shirt today, too. = ) | 20:31 |
| ttx | jbryce: but that make sense as a whole, right ? | 20:31 |
| jmckenty_ | can we each think of a comparable package? | 20:31 |
| jmckenty_ | e.g., ubuntu would be the second, right? | 20:32 |
| notmyname | I see the packaging of openstack as another openstack project (meta project?). so I think that they should be able to choose tools they want. and the other projects should do what's possible to integrate (bug watches, code mirroring, etc) | 20:32 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: My goal is to have it much more tightly integrated | 20:32 |
| jmckenty_ | I think it's the primary differentiator of OpenStack from other attempts | 20:32 |
| *** alandman has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:32 | |
| vishy | notmyname: we could just fork all three projects and put them into a new project called openstack | 20:33 |
| dendrobates | jmckenty: +1 | 20:33 |
| jmckenty_ | vishy: I don't think you're allowed to use the spoon word | 20:33 |
| vishy | notmyname: but i think the idea is collaboration | 20:33 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: is there a project that you think of as a comparable? | 20:34 |
| notmyname | vishy: I think collaboration is they key | 20:34 |
| *** Tv_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:34 | |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: I don't like trying to relate to other projects (it's like X except for Y) because we all have different perspectives on what X actually is. let's say what we want, not what we want it to be like | 20:34 |
| jbryce | when people want to get involved, it's much easier if there's more commonality rather than having to track their way around 10 projects that are using 100 combinations of revision control, issue tracking, roadmap tracking, release management. it's about much more than just the wishes of the few developers we have today. | 20:34 |
| ttx | jmckenty: I'd say something like "Linux kernel subsystems with slightly more independence for subsystem maintainers" | 20:34 |
| jmckenty_ | I just find it easier to understand people's perspectives with an example | 20:35 |
| ttx | jmckenty: but as notmyname says, the metaphor is always bad | 20:35 |
| gholt | If you have one set of "rules" you may have a lot fewer than 10 projects. ;) | 20:35 |
| heckj | or too subjective to be ultimately useful | 20:35 |
| jmckenty_ | dendrobates et al: the thinking on a single language, aside from the cross-community aspects I mentioned earlier, it also keeps system dependencies down (and attendant security issues), coding conventions stronger, etc. | 20:36 |
| ttx | So we have two options, #1 is "openstack is a single product made aof a lot of independent, but cooperating, components" and #2 is "a collection of independent projects that work together for some level of integration and releases" | 20:37 |
| jmckenty_ | But I agree we have the potential need for C / Erlang / etc. for very low-level performance concerns, which is why we dodged this before | 20:37 |
| dendrobates | jmckenty: I agree. That was one of the original reasons | 20:37 |
| jbryce | gholt: raw quantity of projects is not a specific goal of mine...with that said, i would propose something similar to what we already agreed on for revision control | 20:37 |
| ttx | we saw with the Burrow/erlang discussion that there is a lot of value in keeping the dev community around a single language | 20:37 |
| jbryce | in the different categories of tools we have options that projects can choose from that tie in well with the processes and overall systems to manage releases and information | 20:37 |
| jbryce | e.g. revision control can be bzr or git, issues can be launchpad or something that ties into launchpad mirroring (with the onus of making the mirroring work on the project team that wants to use the other tool), etc | 20:38 |
| eday | ttx: that switch back was more for lack of performance gains :) | 20:38 |
| creiht | ttx: How many people are actively developing on burrow? | 20:38 |
| eday | creiht: just me so far! and one patch form some other guy | 20:38 |
| ttx | creiht: I actually plan to help ;) | 20:38 |
| * eday is getting lonely | 20:39 | |
| ttx | There is always somethign else to do though -- my point is that if I had to learn Erlang that remote possibility would even be less likely | 20:39 |
| eday | so, we started some of this discussions after the last summit, http://etherpad.openstack.org/PQ7dy5in2B, if we want to add autonomy specifics there | 20:39 |
| creiht | ttx: big community there ;) | 20:39 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: did I miss some previous decision on git issues v2.0, or has it not come up yet? | 20:39 |
| gholt | So, say Swift was it's own non-OpenStack project, but considered needed by OpenStack as a whole. How would it be incorporated? | 20:39 |
| eday | at the time I though we had decided more integrated/less autonomous | 20:39 |
| *** ymht has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:40 | |
| jmckenty_ | eday: this ended up being http://wiki.openstack.org/ProjectTypes right? | 20:40 |
| *** ewanmellor has quit IRC | 20:40 | |
| jmckenty_ | which we ratified | 20:40 |
| ttx | jmckenty: at ODS we said we'd consider issue tracking once/when/if code hosting is migrated | 20:40 |
| notmyname | I don't subscribe to the idea of developer portability. in practice, having devs that move between projects is exceedingly rare and there will always be learning curves, even if tooling is identical | 20:40 |
| eday | (not saying I necessarily agree, just stating what was previously "decided") | 20:40 |
| ttx | notmyname: Glance being an exception rater than the rule ? | 20:40 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: that's how I remembered it | 20:40 |
| creiht | I'll offer the opinion that if you make too strict of rules, you may miss out from contributions from the broader community as a whole, including projects | 20:41 |
| ttx | jmckenty: so in Boston in October. | 20:41 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: I respectfully disagree. | 20:41 |
| *** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: maybe on a day-by-day basis, but I've seen a TON of long-term migration between projects | 20:41 |
| eday | jmckenty_: ahh, yes. so it did | 20:41 |
| jmckenty_ | creiht: if that's a trade-off for a quality bar, I'm okay with it | 20:41 |
| creiht | the problem is, programming language != quality | 20:42 |
| gholt | It's more a trade off for "not how I want it" bar. :) | 20:42 |
| creiht | we are all for high quality projects | 20:42 |
| jmckenty_ | sure, but <n> X language ~= low quality, in general | 20:42 |
| dendrobates | creiht: no but familiarity with the language helps spot quality problems | 20:42 |
| jmckenty_ | you end up with a shallow review group | 20:42 |
| jmckenty_ | a shallower set of tools | 20:43 |
| ttx | jbryce: vote/decision/action ? 15min left. | 20:43 |
| creiht | and most programming languages have the tools that help meet high quality standards, including the standards you summarized at the beginning | 20:43 |
| creiht | dendrobates: that is quite the strawman | 20:43 |
| jmckenty_ | creiht: can you name a multi-language project that has high quality? | 20:43 |
| creiht | I'm not talking about a multi-language project | 20:43 |
| creiht | gets back to philosophy | 20:43 |
| jmckenty_ | and if you say Eucalyptus, I'm going to vote to have you ejected from the PPB :P | 20:43 |
| dendrobates | creiht: just poorly typed. see jmckenty's comment instead | 20:44 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: if openstack recommends something, like python or bzr or launchpad, but allows projects to choose, that's fine. it's up to the projects to do the extra work required to integrate well | 20:44 |
| creiht | I've already been ejected from the PPB :{ | 20:44 |
| creiht | :P | 20:44 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: re: CI and code quality sutff | 20:44 |
| jmckenty_ | right, that was the context that I brought it up in - 1 project, 1 language, a reasonably *minimal* set of tools | 20:44 |
| creiht | I would argue that most projects are going to have a core team that focus on that specific project | 20:44 |
| ttx | Did we lose our chair ? | 20:45 |
| jmckenty_ | which can include multiple choices when necessary for dev workflow | 20:45 |
| creiht | jmckenty_: how much cross-polination is there between nova and swift now? | 20:45 |
| jbryce | ttx: no | 20:45 |
| ttx | ah! | 20:45 |
| creiht | almost none | 20:45 |
| jmckenty_ | creiht: I don't want to be a dick, but if you're not on the PPB, you're kind of out of turn | 20:45 |
| creiht | I believe this is an open meeting | 20:45 |
| *** clayg has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| gholt | Oh, is this only for representatives? | 20:45 |
| jmckenty_ | ah, my bad. | 20:45 |
| creiht | but you don't have to listen to me, just offering my opinion | 20:45 |
| jbryce | jmckenty_: we've allowed external input in other meetings | 20:46 |
| creiht | indeed | 20:46 |
| jbryce | i'm not sure where the vote would be on this | 20:46 |
| jmckenty_ | k, I have a hard time keeping track of the ppb members | 20:46 |
| jbryce | we have different definitions of autonomy | 20:46 |
| jbryce | jmckenty_: http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB - all listed there | 20:46 |
| notmyname | I'm not sure that we even have soemthing that can be voted on | 20:46 |
| jbryce | right | 20:46 |
| creiht | jmckenty_: They are listed on a wiki page somewhere :) | 20:46 |
| heckj | swift and nova never cross polinated much, but glance is a bit different in that respect | 20:46 |
| ttx | jbryce: #1 is "openstack is a single product made aof a lot of independent, but cooperating, components" and #2 is "a collection of independent projects that work together for some level of integration and releases" ? | 20:46 |
| creiht | glance is also a very simple project | 20:47 |
| creiht | imho | 20:47 |
| jmckenty_ | heckj: I'm working on some crazy swift things right now, | 20:47 |
| *** murkk has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:47 | |
| jmckenty_ | and I'm a nova dev | 20:47 |
| creiht | not at the same level as nova or swift | 20:47 |
| heckj | creight: no argument there | 20:47 |
| jmckenty_ | ditto for 0x44 | 20:47 |
| gholt | jmckenty_: Really? Care to share with the Swift guys? :) | 20:47 |
| creiht | jmckenty_: it would be nice if that was done in the open ;) | 20:47 |
| ttx | jbryce: I think the question of "single product" vs. "collection of independent projects" is the central one | 20:47 |
| jbryce | ok | 20:47 |
| jmckenty_ | creiht: it's on github | 20:47 |
| jmckenty_ | ;) | 20:47 |
| creiht | you know since we are supposed to be a community and all | 20:47 |
| gholt | hahahahhaha | 20:47 |
| jbryce | can we pause the discussion for a minute | 20:48 |
| heckj | I would posit that you'd get more benefit longer term from more cross pollination, so encouraging that is useful/beneficial to the project | 20:48 |
| jmckenty_ | sure | 20:48 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: sure | 20:48 |
| jbryce | let's take a vote on the options ttx laid out in terms of a general philosophy on autonomy | 20:48 |
| jmckenty_ | +1 for #1 | 20:49 |
| ttx | +1 for #1 | 20:49 |
| jbryce | #topic VOTE: #1 is "member:openstack is a single product made aof a lot of independent, but cooperating, components" and #2 is "a collection of independent projects that work together for some level of integration and releases" | 20:49 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "VOTE: #1 is "member:openstack is a single product made aof a lot of independent, but cooperating, components" and #2 is "a collection of independent projects that work together for some level of integration and releases"" | 20:49 | |
| jbryce | +1 for #1 | 20:49 |
| jmckenty_ | +1 for #1 | 20:49 |
| johnpur | +1 for #1 | 20:49 |
| notmyname | +1 for #2 | 20:49 |
| ttx | +1 for #1 (for the record) | 20:49 |
| jmckenty_ | dendrobates: ? | 20:49 |
| eday | +1 for #2 | 20:49 |
| jmckenty_ | ewanmellor: ? | 20:49 |
| dendrobates | +1 for 1 | 20:50 |
| jmckenty_ | vishy: ? | 20:50 |
| ewanmellor | +1 for #1 | 20:50 |
| *** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:50 | |
| * vishy is thinking | 20:50 | |
| * jmckenty_ smacks vishy in his thinking-hole | 20:50 | |
| vishy | I don't like forcing people to collaborate via policy | 20:50 |
| vishy | because it leads to ill-will | 20:51 |
| jmckenty_ | the doukhobors did it | 20:51 |
| ttx | vishy: it's not about forcing... it's about openstack being a single product or a collection of indep projects. | 20:51 |
| vishy | it is though | 20:51 |
| jmckenty_ | they designed their villages to force people to run into each other on a daily basis | 20:51 |
| vishy | we're forcing detractors to take on our model of how things should work | 20:51 |
| jmckenty_ | it kept conflict from festering | 20:51 |
| jbryce | the policies can be flexible and include multiple viable options | 20:52 |
| vishy | I would prefer if we convince them to change their view | 20:52 |
| *** pandemicsyn has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:52 | |
| jmckenty_ | vishy: the irony to me is that we moved nova to launchpad so that swift and nova would be on a common platform | 20:52 |
| vishy | my personal view is #1 is more valuable | 20:52 |
| jbryce | but the tools need to roll into an integrated view and experience for all the audiences | 20:52 |
| heckj | jbryce: +1 | 20:52 |
| vishy | so +1 for #1 | 20:52 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: we were both on git to start with! neither one of us wanted LP | 20:53 |
| vishy | anotherjesse says +1 for #1 | 20:53 |
| jmckenty_ | There's some crazy crack-rock there that we should sort out at some point | 20:53 |
| jmckenty_ | anyway | 20:53 |
| jbryce | #info philosophy is "openstack is a single product made aof a lot of independent, but cooperating, components" - vote 7-2 | 20:53 |
| vishy | I'll make a caveat that I don't think we should be heavy-handed on our plicies | 20:53 |
| jbryce | vishy: +1 | 20:53 |
| vishy | * policies | 20:53 |
| dendrobates | vishy: I appreciate your concerns. We do not want to be too pedantic | 20:53 |
| jmckenty_ | jbryce: shall we vote on supporting multiple sets of tools (minimal sets) with equivalent function and strong integration? | 20:54 |
| jmckenty_ | or is that a given? | 20:54 |
| jbryce | well, that's item 3 on the agenda | 20:54 |
| jmckenty_ | ah, right | 20:54 |
| jbryce | #topic Possibility for core projects to choose their own code hosting (free choice, no choice, or set of options vetted by PPB ?) | 20:54 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Possibility for core projects to choose their own code hosting (free choice, no choice, or set of options vetted by PPB ?)" | 20:54 | |
| jmckenty_ | and we still have 6 minutes left | 20:54 |
| jbryce | we've got 5 minutes | 20:54 |
| jmckenty_ | +1 for set of vetted options | 20:54 |
| ttx | ok, I can explain the options | 20:54 |
| notmyname | jmckenty_: one project implies single code hosting and single toolset? | 20:54 |
| jmckenty_ | no, I think it implies that as an ideal | 20:54 |
| jbryce | i'm for a vetted set of options | 20:54 |
| jmckenty_ | but I think dev productivity trumps that | 20:55 |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:55 | |
| jmckenty_ | I would make it a target to have everything in single hosting and toolset by the end of next year, | 20:55 |
| *** masumotok_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:55 | |
| jmckenty_ | since it may involve writing the damn hosting platform to not suck | 20:55 |
| ttx | basically "free choice" means the project choose and the integration tools must catch up, "no choice" is a bit out of fashion nowadays... and "set of options" allow to check for integration feasibility | 20:55 |
| ttx | ...beforehand. | 20:55 |
| ttx | I obviously vote for "vetted set of options" | 20:56 |
| *** johnpur has quit IRC | 20:56 | |
| dendrobates | I like a vetted set of options | 20:56 |
| ttx | since neither of the extreme positions sound like a good idea to me | 20:56 |
| jbryce | let's do an actual vote on it before we run out of time | 20:56 |
| *** scotticu1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:56 | |
| jmckenty_ | #topic VOTE on integration tools | 20:57 |
| jmckenty_ | +1 for vetted set | 20:57 |
| ttx | +1 for vetted set | 20:57 |
| jbryce | +1 for vetted set | 20:57 |
| *** JordanRi1ke is now known as JordanRinke | 20:57 | |
| vishy | +1 | 20:57 |
| dendrobates | +1 vetted set | 20:58 |
| eday | +1 for no choice - if we're going to be a "single project", lets not fragment. (we can still change the set, but keep it consistent) | 20:58 |
| ttx | (so, currently LP is the only option, but github should soon be an option, if mtaylor and termie work on it this week :) | 20:58 |
| jbryce | vishy: +1 for which? | 20:58 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I'm not sure we're going to be doing much work this week - but it's coming real soon now | 20:58 |
| jmckenty_ | ttx: I'd suggest that PPB / jbryce should make that more important than anything else they're doing | 20:59 |
| vishy | vetted | 20:59 |
| *** Shubh has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| jbryce | so 5 for vetted, 1 for no choice | 20:59 |
| jmckenty_ | notmyname: ? | 20:59 |
| ewanmellor | +1 for no choice -- I don't want to have to train my devs on git and bzr | 20:59 |
| ttx | ewanmellor: note that we can actually turn "vetted" into "no choice" when we consider adding github to the set. | 20:59 |
| notmyname | +1 for no choice to be consistent with the previous vote (but I disagree with that ;-) ) | 20:59 |
| *** gholt has left #openstack-meeting | 20:59 | |
| jbryce | ok...we're out of time | 21:00 |
| creiht | well that was convenient | 21:00 |
| * jaypipes is a sad puppy for missing this... | 21:00 | |
| jbryce | #info vetted set wins with 5 votes, no choice received 3 votes | 21:00 |
| dendrobates | I change my vote to no choice. I agree with Ewan | 21:00 |
| jbryce | that ties it up. we can discuss further next meeting. we've got to hand the room over for the larger team | 21:01 |
| jbryce | #info no final result | 21:01 |
| jmckenty_ | I'll change to no choice if it's github | 21:01 |
| jbryce | #endmeeting | 21:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 21:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 28 21:01:23 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-20.06.html | 21:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-20.06.txt | 21:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-20.06.log.html | 21:01 |
| ttx | jaypipes: you can still retrospectively say what you would have voted for :) | 21:01 |
| *** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| johnpur | back! | 21:01 |
| jaypipes | ttx: reading back through the logs.. | 21:02 |
| ttx | ok... let's get started for the next meeting | 21:02 |
| *** jwilmes has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| jmckenty_ | what's on the docket? | 21:02 |
| jbryce | honestly, i think we need to discuss it more as well... | 21:02 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 28 21:02:51 2011 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 21:02 |
| *** spectorclan_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| *** scotticu1 has left #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| ttx | Welcome to the OpenStack weekly team meeting... | 21:03 |
| ttx | Today's agenda is at: | 21:03 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/TeamMeeting | 21:03 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:03 | |
| *** jwilmes has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| ttx | notmyname: any proposed date for 1.4.2 yet ? | 21:03 |
| *** clayg has left #openstack-meeting | 21:03 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| notmyname | 1.4.2 will be between 7-20 and 7-29 | 21:03 |
| notmyname | it's set in LP now for 7-20 | 21:04 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| ttx | notmyname: perfect! | 21:04 |
| ttx | notmyname: Other announcements or comments ? | 21:04 |
| notmyname | progress is going well | 21:04 |
| notmyname | container sync is almost done | 21:04 |
| notmyname | stats/logging has been split out | 21:04 |
| notmyname | several bugs fixed | 21:05 |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:05 | |
| notmyname | access log delivery is almost done | 21:05 |
| notmyname | good stuff all around | 21:05 |
| *** jwilmes has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:05 | |
| ttx | cool. Anyone has questions on Swift ? | 21:05 |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 21:06 | |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 21:06 | |
| ttx | ok, then, moving on to... | 21:06 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:06 | |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:06 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: Hi! | 21:06 |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:07 | |
| ttx | diablo-2 milestone-proposed branch was merged from trunk and test packages were produced | 21:07 |
| *** cynb has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:07 | |
| ttx | Packages up for testing at: https://launchpad.net/~glance-core/+archive/milestone-proposed | 21:07 |
| *** reldan has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:07 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: Looking at https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/diablo-2 you have 4 open milestone-critical issues listed already | 21:08 |
| ttx | jaypipes: do you still plan to get them all fixed by Thursday ? or does this need to be cleaned out ? | 21:08 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 21:08 | |
| ttx | hrm. Looks like we lost Jay. vishy: you around ? Maybe we can do Nova first... | 21:09 |
| vishy | i see jay typing away | 21:09 |
| vishy | but sure | 21:09 |
| vishy | :) | 21:09 |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| ttx | vishy: throw soething at him. Mentos usually work well. | 21:10 |
| jaypipes | ttx: ten things at once... | 21:10 |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:10 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: welcome to the world of management :P | 21:10 |
| dabo | so do darts | 21:10 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I updated glance's d2 early this morning (or late last night, can't remember). I'll revisit them tonight. | 21:10 |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:10 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: ok, just keep the list focused to what you actually want to include in d2 so that I can track how far we are from completion | 21:11 |
| ttx | n the deferred blueprints side, I guess we should defer refactor-stores to d3 ? | 21:11 |
| ttx | ... | 21:12 |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 21:12 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 21:13 | |
| ttx | Ok, I'll be back with this, let's do Nova. | 21:13 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:13 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:13 | |
| ttx | vishy: yo | 21:13 |
| *** smk has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:13 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:13 | |
| vishy | k | 21:13 |
| ttx | diablo-2 milestone-proposed branch was also merged from trunk and test packages were produced | 21:14 |
| vishy | just moving some blueprints :) | 21:14 |
| ttx | You can grab them at: https://launchpad.net/~nova-core/+archive/milestone-proposed | 21:14 |
| ttx | Please test and let us know if anything is utterly broken | 21:14 |
| *** smk has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| ttx | vishy: any bug that you'd like to make milestone-critical and fixed before Thursday ? | 21:14 |
| vishy | i haven't found any yet | 21:14 |
| vishy | but I i'm going to email the list to see if anyone else has any | 21:15 |
| ttx | cool. I'll throw some tests up tomorrow, time permitting. | 21:15 |
| ttx | On the deferred blueprints side... Unless you object I'll defer all those to d3: | 21:15 |
| * ttx refreshes | 21:15 | |
| *** katkee has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:15 | |
| ttx | system-usage-records, administrative-vms, kvm-block-migration, nova-virtual-storage-array | 21:16 |
| ttx | I think unittest-examples should be considered complete... westmaas ? | 21:16 |
| dragondm | usage records just merged | 21:16 |
| ttx | dragondm: ow, that was a bit late. Unless vishy wants to push it in diablo-2 | 21:17 |
| vishy | ttx: yep | 21:17 |
| westmaas | I think we can do that, I'm working with anne to figure out where it should be. | 21:17 |
| ttx | vishy: could you propose a merge to milestone-proposed with that in and get it approved ? | 21:17 |
| ttx | the sooner the better :/ | 21:17 |
| vishy | dragondm: any reason you would need it in d2? | 21:17 |
| vishy | It is an isolated set of changes so i don't mind, but best to minimize potential for breakage | 21:18 |
| ttx | vishy: i'll let you two discuss that offline | 21:18 |
| dragondm | I'm not sure it's a crashing priority. your csll. | 21:18 |
| ttx | westmaas: What about error-codes ? | 21:19 |
| ttx | westmaas: pushed to d3 ? Or completed as-is ? | 21:19 |
| westmaas | _cerberus_: I think we still have work on this one, right? | 21:19 |
| dragondm | (sorry about the late merge, btw, there was some bzr weirdnes that delayed it from yesterday) | 21:19 |
| ttx | mtaylor: should I push testing-jenkins-integration & testing-smoketests-documentation to d3 as well ? Or does it just not make sense ? | 21:20 |
| westmaas | _cerberus_: is that bp still valid? | 21:20 |
| mtaylor | ttx: it just doesn't make sense - I'm working on the new ones at this moment (the discussion here turned to Themes/Epics) | 21:20 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I will have this solved in the next 30 minutes | 21:21 |
| ttx | mtaylor: ok | 21:21 |
| _cerberus_ | westmaas: no clue, TBH | 21:21 |
| westmaas | haha | 21:21 |
| westmaas | cool | 21:21 |
| *** ameade has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:21 | |
| westmaas | sounds done to me? | 21:22 |
| ttx | westmaas: if nobody knows what would be left to do on this one... maybe means it's completed after all :) | 21:22 |
| westmaas | concur! | 21:22 |
| ttx | will mark done. And file the remaining issues as bugs anyway. | 21:22 |
| ttx | vishy: anything you wanted to mention ? | 21:22 |
| *** johan_-_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:23 | |
| vishy | yes | 21:23 |
| vishy | just a warning which i will repeat on the ml | 21:23 |
| vishy | I decided to push multinic to after freeze so we maintain stability | 21:24 |
| vishy | but when it merges (in the next few days) it will likely break some things including other hypervisors | 21:24 |
| tr3buchet | we can start pushing bugs for updating skipped tests etc | 21:24 |
| ttx | vishy: there is no such thing as a freeze, so please merge now :) | 21:25 |
| vishy | I'd like to have all of the issues fixed by d3 | 21:25 |
| ttx | (d3 is open) | 21:25 |
| vishy | yes, there are just a couple of issues still to be addressed and it will go in | 21:25 |
| vishy | sorry i should have said after milestone branch | 21:25 |
| ttx | ok :) | 21:25 |
| vishy | that's it | 21:25 |
| ttx | Questions on Nova ? | 21:25 |
| ttx | jaypipes: are you back ? | 21:26 |
| spectorclan_ | ttx: he is asking questions here | 21:26 |
| ttx | spectorclan: eh. | 21:27 |
| *** zykes- has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:27 | |
| ttx | Let's go to open discussion and plug him back when available | 21:27 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:27 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:27 | |
| ttx | Anything/anyone ? | 21:27 |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 21:27 | |
| spectorclan_ | Developer Summit - looks like the Boston Intercontinental Hotel; will confirm tomorrow | 21:27 |
| ttx | classy. | 21:28 |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:28 | |
| spectorclan_ | ttx: soon we will be at the Ritz | 21:28 |
| ttx | spectorclan: I won't stop until we have a design summit on the ISS. | 21:29 |
| *** zns has quit IRC | 21:29 | |
| *** zdeng has quit IRC | 21:30 | |
| ttx | ok, sounds like everyone is very busy with other things, so I'll close now | 21:30 |
| *** spectorclan_ has left #openstack-meeting | 21:31 | |
| *** spectorclan_ has quit IRC | 21:31 | |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 21:31 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 28 21:31:53 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:31 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-21.02.html | 21:31 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-21.02.txt | 21:31 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-21.02.log.html | 21:31 |
| ttx | Thanks everyone :) | 21:32 |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| *** ymht has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| *** creiht has left #openstack-meeting | 21:35 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:36 | |
| jaypipes | ttx: sorry man, nah... | 21:39 |
| *** bcwaldon has left #openstack-meeting | 21:40 | |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:42 | |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:42 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 21:43 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:43 | |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 21:44 | |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:44 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 21:45 | |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 21:45 | |
| *** ryu_ishimoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:48 | |
| *** midodan has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:51 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 21:56 | |
| *** jamesurquhart has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:57 | |
| *** ameade has quit IRC | 21:58 | |
| *** johan_-_ has left #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| *** Jamey has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| *** Jamey has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| danwent | hello netstack team | 22:00 |
| salv-orlando | hello | 22:00 |
| danwent | dendrobates has a conflict, cannot attend | 22:01 |
| troytoman | howdy | 22:01 |
| *** Jamey has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| jamesurquhart | Hey | 22:01 |
| markvoelker | o/ | 22:01 |
| danwent | anyone else we know we need to wait for? | 22:01 |
| danwent | everyone with an agenda item seems to be here | 22:01 |
| danwent | #startmeeting | 22:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 28 22:01:37 2011 UTC. The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 22:01 |
| jamesurquhart | Ram is presenting to Cisco's world-wide engineers on OpenStack right now, so he won't make it. | 22:01 |
| danwent | cool | 22:01 |
| somik | hello all | 22:01 |
| danwent | (that he is presenting) | 22:01 |
| danwent | agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings | 22:02 |
| Jamey | hi | 22:02 |
| *** Shubhangi has quit IRC | 22:02 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:02 | |
| danwent | #topic netstack updates | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "netstack updates" | 22:02 | |
| danwent | since dendrobates is out we will skip incubation discussion | 22:02 |
| danwent | incubation is tied to us getting hudson access, as well | 22:03 |
| danwent | though we're still trying to figure out the details. | 22:03 |
| danwent | anything else that is general netstack? | 22:03 |
| danwent | #topic quantum | 22:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "quantum" | 22:03 | |
| danwent | general status, we're in a unit test/ system test/ bugfix stage right now. | 22:03 |
| danwent | making good progress I feel. | 22:03 |
| danwent | Three specific points on the agenda | 22:03 |
| danwent | Mark Voelker's team has volunteered to take on the GUI blueprint | 22:04 |
| danwent | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-client-gui | 22:04 |
| danwent | As part of that work, they will also take a crack at unifying the client code into a library | 22:04 |
| markvoelker | Two quick updates there.... | 22:04 |
| *** rminnear has quit IRC | 22:05 | |
| danwent | this library can be used by the GUI, cli, unit tests, and other services (e.g., donabe) that will orchestrate quantum | 22:05 |
| danwent | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-client-library | 22:05 |
| danwent | take it away mark | 22:05 |
| markvoelker | 1.) We've mocked up a little UI just to get a feel for where we'll going...we'll push that out somewhere later this week once we tie up a few loose ends | 22:05 |
| danwent | very cool | 22:05 |
| *** pandemicsyn has left #openstack-meeting | 22:06 | |
| markvoelker | One point where we could use some feedback is how/where to deal with extended attributes (QoS, ACL's, etc) so we can discuss that once folks can see it | 22:06 |
| *** alekibango has quit IRC | 22:06 | |
| salv-orlando | is this UI integrated in Openstack dashboard or a separate gui? | 22:06 |
| markvoelker | I'll set up an etherpad | 22:06 |
| markvoelker | The plan is to do a separate Django module that will be part of the Dashboard. | 22:06 |
| somik | that sounds like the right approach | 22:07 |
| *** eperdomo has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:07 | |
| danwent | k, anything else to add on the GUI or client lib front? | 22:07 |
| markvoelker | Second update: we'll be working on the refactor starting later this week. May be a tad slower than we'd have liked as one of our engineers is unexpectedly traveling out of the country. | 22:07 |
| markvoelker | That's all for me | 22:08 |
| *** alekibango has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:08 | |
| danwent | thanks mark. will be great to have a GUI. | 22:08 |
| danwent | Next topic is API authn/authz | 22:08 |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:08 | |
| danwent | Salvatore wrote a blueprint here: http://wiki.openstack.org/QuantumAuthSpec | 22:08 |
| danwent | I'd like to thank him for a very clearly written blueprint, very easy to follow | 22:09 |
| danwent | salvatore, what is your preferred mechanism for feedback? | 22:09 |
| *** ewanmellor has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| danwent | (I know you don't like etherpad ;P) | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | email, possibly | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | or launchpad answers | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | etherpad is cool, but lacks notification | 22:09 |
| danwent | agreed. | 22:09 |
| danwent | launchpad answers is a clever idea. | 22:10 |
| danwent | maybe give that a try? | 22:10 |
| salv-orlando | launchpad answsers are probably better than emails | 22:10 |
| danwent | do you want to ask a question, then post the link? | 22:10 |
| danwent | so we can have a thread? | 22:10 |
| salv-orlando | yes, sure | 22:10 |
| danwent | or do you want to handle individual questions. | 22:10 |
| salv-orlando | I can post a general question, and then people can submit specific question as well. | 22:10 |
| danwent | great | 22:11 |
| danwent | Third and final quantum topic: nova changes and quantum integration. | 22:11 |
| danwent | Seems like the multi-nic code is still going through merge, but it very close now | 22:11 |
| ryu_ishimoto | right | 22:11 |
| danwent | ryu's branch is: https://code.launchpad.net/~midokura/nova/network-refactoring | 22:12 |
| ryu_ishimoto | it is, and i have merged it into the refactoring branch to test it out with the current version of multi-NIC | 22:12 |
| ryu_ishimoto | and identified a few places that may cause problems with Quantum integration | 22:12 |
| danwent | I've pulled but have not tested much. hoping to get to that over the long holiday (US) weekend | 22:12 |
| danwent | ryu: please elaborate | 22:12 |
| *** msinhore has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| ryu_ishimoto | the main issue was that 'virtual_interfaces' model is tied to the 'networks' model of Nova | 22:13 |
| danwent | ah, you mean whether that reference is nullable? | 22:13 |
| ryu_ishimoto | virtual_interfaces is the VIF table that will be used to communicate with Quantum | 22:13 |
| ryu_ishimoto | right, we need to keep the current Nova networking but it is preferable to use this table as the VIF f or Quantum | 22:14 |
| danwent | ryu: can you quickly repost your spec page for those listening in? | 22:15 |
| danwent | I don't have the link handy | 22:15 |
| salv-orlando | ryu_ishimoto: is that a data model issue? | 22:15 |
| danwent | http://wiki.openstack.org/network-refactoring | 22:15 |
| danwent | found it. | 22:15 |
| ryu_ishimoto | sure, it's http://wiki.openstack.org/network-refactoring I haven't updated it with multi-NIC stuff but I will | 22:15 |
| danwent | great. | 22:15 |
| *** jmckenty_ has quit IRC | 22:15 | |
| ryu_ishimoto | Trey just told me today that he will make that network_id field nullable so that we can keep using VIF for Quantum | 22:16 |
| tr3buchet | :) | 22:16 |
| salv-orlando | cool | 22:16 |
| tr3buchet | better to do this now | 22:16 |
| danwent | agreed. | 22:16 |
| danwent | great work guys. | 22:16 |
| danwent | (and tr3buchet in particular... that was a monster patch) | 22:16 |
| tr3buchet | you should see the merge conflicts ;) | 22:17 |
| danwent | OK, anything else for quantum? | 22:17 |
| ryu_ishimoto | tr3buchet: yeah seriously. thanks Trey! | 22:17 |
| danwent | tr3buchet: ha | 22:17 |
| ryu_ishimoto | that's it for now | 22:17 |
| danwent | thanks ryu | 22:17 |
| salv-orlando | jusrt a quick passage on API extensions... | 22:17 |
| danwent | sure | 22:17 |
| salv-orlando | has there been any progress? do we have an agrement on the extension model? | 22:17 |
| danwent | I think we agreed on following the openstack standard model | 22:18 |
| * vishy notes that managing long-diverged branches in bzr often leads to re-fixing the same conflicts over and over again. bzr merge --weave helps sometimes. | 22:18 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 22:18 | |
| *** jmckenty_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:18 | |
| danwent | whoops | 22:18 |
| danwent | do we have any update on jorge's work in general? | 22:18 |
| tr3buchet | vishy: yeah i played with --weave a bit | 22:18 |
| danwent | I'd really like to understand better where the existing extensions proposal differs. | 22:19 |
| danwent | I think we also need to figure out how plugins "register" an extension. | 22:19 |
| troytoman | I don't have an update from Jorge on the extensions documentation. I don't think there are changes pending as much as clearer documentation | 22:19 |
| salv-orlando | I'd like to undestand these two things as well | 22:19 |
| danwent | Same call as last meeting: if anyone wants to take a lead on this, please let me know. | 22:19 |
| danwent | (someone other than salv-orlando... he has already volunteered for too much :) ) | 22:20 |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 22:20 | |
| jamesurquhart | The ask is to follow up on extensions progress with Jorge? | 22:20 |
| salv-orlando | I might be wrong, but I think Ying was warking on this | 22:20 |
| danwent | I'm hoping to get cycles to do a quick review of the current work | 22:20 |
| danwent | it would be great for someone to scope out where the existing stuff falls short and call this out in the blueprint. | 22:21 |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 22:21 | |
| jamesurquhart | Ying and SumitNaiksatam were tracking this, I believe. | 22:21 |
| danwent | Yes, both Ying and Somik have done a review. | 22:21 |
| troytoman | Ying had a number of email exchanges with my team and with Jorge this week. I think the primary gap is with dynamic loading of extenstions | 22:21 |
| danwent | Ah, great. | 22:21 |
| troytoman | I think it is agreed that should probably be handled in a separate blueprint. but, i don't know if everyone is agreed yet | 22:22 |
| danwent | troytoman: dynamic loading be handled separately from the rest of the extension blueprint? | 22:22 |
| jamesurquhart | Do we need an online meeting to sort that out? | 22:22 |
| jamesurquhart | I can volunteer to get everyone together online if that is what is needed. | 22:23 |
| somik | another thing is that the current extension code is falls short of jorge's extension proposal | 22:23 |
| salv-orlando | somik: can you give us some details? | 22:23 |
| troytoman | danwent: yes. the current extension mechanism was never intended to address that space. | 22:23 |
| danwent | jamesurquhart: that could be helpful, though also just making sure that people are aware of the emails being sent is probably a good start. | 22:23 |
| somik | sal-orlando: the current code is modelled on existing extension mechanism in nova | 22:24 |
| danwent | troytoman: ok, i haven't put much thought in on that front. | 22:24 |
| danwent | maybe a meeting on the extensions stuff would make sense. | 22:24 |
| *** cynb has quit IRC | 22:24 | |
| jamesurquhart | troytoman I'll follow up with Ying, but can you see that I am cc'ed on the email thread/ | 22:24 |
| jamesurquhart | ? | 22:24 |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:24 | |
| troytoman | jamesurquhart: will loop you in | 22:25 |
| jamesurquhart | OK. I'll get something together, starting with Ying and troytoman. | 22:25 |
| danwent | Ok, that would be great. | 22:25 |
| danwent | Does someone want to take a crack at a "dynamic API extension" blueprint? | 22:26 |
| somik | salv-orlando: Jorge's extension proposal and our requirements are more than what nova supports. Our Pluggable backend presents additional challenges. Both these issues need to be addressed before we will be ready for merge. | 22:26 |
| danwent | or are we not on the same page about this being separate? | 22:26 |
| salv-orlando | somik: got it, cool | 22:26 |
| salv-orlando | +1 for separation | 22:26 |
| danwent | is there a point in merging the rest of the stuff before the dynamic loading is implemented? | 22:26 |
| danwent | I'm not familiar enough with the code to know. | 22:26 |
| somik | we might have to redo plugins an extensions | 22:27 |
| danwent | Otherwise I'd probably prefer to get the model right outside of trunk, then merge. | 22:27 |
| danwent | but I don't feel that strongly about this, so if someone has another opinion, holler | 22:28 |
| troytoman | I think the dynamic piece should be separated. we will have to do some work to handle extensions. | 22:28 |
| somik | danwent: that seems like a better idea to reduce churn therefore bugs. | 22:28 |
| danwent | troy: since you have done the work here, I'm happy to yield to your take. | 22:28 |
| troytoman | we can do that before or after a merge. | 22:28 |
| troytoman | sounds like we want to make those changes before merging, correct? | 22:28 |
| danwent | I'd prefer that | 22:29 |
| danwent | Sounds like a plan unless someone objects | 22:29 |
| danwent | going once, twice.... | 22:29 |
| danwent | ok, sounds like a plan :) | 22:29 |
| danwent | anything else on quantum? | 22:29 |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| danwent | #topic melange | 22:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "melange" | 22:29 | |
| danwent | troy? | 22:29 |
| danwent | general update? | 22:29 |
| *** agarwalla has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:30 | |
| troytoman | we continue to evolve the base functionality given feedback and example use cases | 22:30 |
| danwent | btw, troy, can you create a blueprint for the dynamic stuff (or ask Ying/Sumit to do it?) | 22:30 |
| danwent | dynamic -> dynamic extension loading | 22:30 |
| troytoman | jamesurquhart and I will work that out since I think ying is best suited to spec it out | 22:31 |
| danwent | great, thanks. | 22:31 |
| jamesurquhart | troytoman agreed | 22:31 |
| troytoman | we are bringing some rackspace nova core devs into the loop to help us figure out Nova integration | 22:31 |
| troytoman | i am hoping we can get the project merged into Nova in the D3 timeframe. integration of the service within Nova can start after the nova network refactoring is merged. | 22:32 |
| danwent | cool. any thoughts yet on a timeline? I know the nova-network-refactoring is slotted for d3, which is coming up soon. Do you see these changes as part of that? | 22:32 |
| danwent | sorry, crossed wires | 22:32 |
| troytoman | i plan to get blueprints/wiki/etc. updated within the next week - i'm a bit behind there | 22:32 |
| jamesurquhart | danwent: Are you creating actions via eavsdrop? With hash action? | 22:33 |
| danwent | I can :) | 22:33 |
| jamesurquhart | Hey, I don't care. Just curious. ;) | 22:33 |
| danwent | no, its a good suggestion | 22:34 |
| danwent | #action jamesurquhart + troytoman will coordinate on dynamic api extension blueprint | 22:34 |
| danwent | troy, do you expect that melange will replace existing nova code for IP allocation, or site along side it as an option? | 22:35 |
| * salv-orlando danwent stole my question :-) | 22:35 | |
| troytoman | we are thinking it would likely replace the existing code. that was one of the drivers behind putting it into the Nova project. | 22:36 |
| troytoman | and a reason to wait for the refactoring work to be done | 22:36 |
| danwent | great to hear. makes sense. | 22:36 |
| danwent | any other melange-related discussion points? | 22:36 |
| danwent | #action troytoman update nova melange blueprints | 22:37 |
| danwent | #topic donabe | 22:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "donabe" | 22:37 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 22:37 | |
| danwent | anyone around for an update? | 22:37 |
| danwent | I know dendrobates mentioned an API a while ago. | 22:37 |
| jamesurquhart | I'm just getting integrated into that effort, so I can't give update, but there is work underway. | 22:38 |
| danwent | With quantum + multi-nic, I think we are to the point where we could at least create some interesting topologies as "containers" | 22:38 |
| danwent | Ok, sounds good. | 22:38 |
| danwent | #topic open discussion | 22:38 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 22:38 | |
| danwent | one question: are most people working next tuesday? | 22:39 |
| salv-orlando | yes, I am... no holydays in the UK! | 22:39 |
| somik | jamesurquhart: it would be good to get some blueprints for discussion before writing too much code.. | 22:39 |
| markvoelker | danwent: I likely will be | 22:39 |
| danwent | salv: :) | 22:39 |
| danwent | OK, that sounds like quorum to me :) | 22:39 |
| *** foxtrotgulf has quit IRC | 22:40 | |
| danwent | any other open discussion? | 22:40 |
| somik | salv-orlando: only monday is a holiday in US, tuesday is officially open for business here too :) | 22:40 |
| salv-orlando | I'd really love to make some progress on incubation, is we need to move the meeting for having dendrobates it is fine for me | 22:40 |
| jamesurquhart | somik: Right. That's the plan. Get some blueprints together quickly for discussion. | 22:40 |
| danwent | salv: dendrobates was actually on vacation, then had a conflict today. We'll ping him on that. I believe he is making progress. | 22:41 |
| salv-orlando | cool | 22:41 |
| danwent | #action dendrobates to give update on quantum incubation for next meeting | 22:41 |
| danwent | look at me using those action tags :) | 22:41 |
| danwent | anything else? | 22:41 |
| jamesurquhart | You are a hash master, danwent. ;) | 22:42 |
| danwent | ok, let's call it a meeting | 22:42 |
| salv-orlando | launchpad question for discussion on authN/authZ for quantum: https://answers.launchpad.net/quantum/+question/163091 | 22:42 |
| danwent | #endmeeting | 22:42 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 22:42 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 28 22:42:31 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:42 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-22.01.html | 22:42 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-22.01.txt | 22:42 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-06-28-22.01.log.html | 22:42 |
| salv-orlando | it got logged just in time :-) | 22:42 |
| danwent | salv: I think that made the log | 22:42 |
| danwent | :) | 22:42 |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:42 | |
| danwent | thanks all! | 22:43 |
| salv-orlando | cheers, bye! | 22:43 |
| *** jamesurquhart has left #openstack-meeting | 22:43 | |
| *** markvoelker has left #openstack-meeting | 22:43 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 22:43 | |
| *** eperdomo has quit IRC | 22:44 | |
| *** jmckenty_ has quit IRC | 22:46 | |
| *** agarwalla has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 22:52 | |
| *** danwent has left #openstack-meeting | 22:52 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 22:52 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:55 | |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 22:55 | |
| *** katkee has quit IRC | 22:58 | |
| *** Jamey has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 23:04 | |
| *** vladimir3p has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:08 | |
| *** ryu_ishimoto has left #openstack-meeting | 23:09 | |
| *** reldan has quit IRC | 23:13 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 23:16 | |
| *** reldan has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:21 | |
| *** midodan has left #openstack-meeting | 23:22 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 23:24 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:25 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:37 | |
| *** jkoelker has quit IRC | 23:37 | |
| *** reldan has quit IRC | 23:39 | |
| *** reldan has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:41 | |
| *** adiantum has quit IRC | 23:48 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:52 | |
| *** adiantum has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:54 | |
| *** alandman has quit IRC | 23:56 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!