| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 00:18 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 00:20 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:21 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 00:21 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:38 | |
| *** jdag has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** carlp has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** colinnich has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** xtoddx has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** mirrorbox has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** pandemicsyn has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** Daviey has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** ttx has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** ke4qqq has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** troytoman-away has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** cburgess has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** ameade has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** jjm has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** jdag has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** jjm has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** carlp has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** pandemicsyn has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** mirrorbox has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** ameade has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** troytoman-away has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** ke4qqq has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** ttx has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** Daviey has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** xtoddx has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** colinnich has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** mtaylor has quit IRC | 00:55 | |
| *** mtaylor_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:55 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 01:07 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:23 | |
| *** vladimir3p has quit IRC | 01:26 | |
| *** _adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:36 | |
| *** _adjohn has quit IRC | 01:37 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 01:39 | |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:53 | |
| *** medberry is now known as med_out | 02:06 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 02:35 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 02:41 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:41 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:47 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 02:52 | |
| *** HowardRoark has quit IRC | 03:10 | |
| *** HowardRoark has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:10 | |
| *** vladimir3p has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:23 | |
| *** vladimir3p has quit IRC | 03:28 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 03:33 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:33 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:14 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 04:23 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 04:31 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:39 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:43 | |
| *** jakedahn has quit IRC | 05:10 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 05:12 | |
| *** tsuzuki_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:18 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:18 | |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 05:20 | |
| *** HowardRoark has quit IRC | 05:54 | |
| *** ogelbukh has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:08 | |
| *** cmagina has quit IRC | 07:15 | |
| *** GavinB_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:25 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 07:26 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:58 | |
| *** GavinB_ has quit IRC | 09:07 | |
| *** tsuzuki_ has quit IRC | 10:30 | |
| *** corrigac has quit IRC | 12:28 | |
| *** cmagina has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:35 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 12:53 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:57 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:33 | |
| *** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:38 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 13:47 | |
| *** HowardRoark has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:57 | |
| *** HowardRoark has quit IRC | 13:58 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:16 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 14:22 | |
| *** vladimir3p has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:34 | |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 14:40 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:44 | |
| *** HowardRoark has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:17 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:48 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:49 | |
| *** corrigac has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:52 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:02 | |
| *** mtaylor_ is now known as mtaylor | 16:03 | |
| *** mtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:03 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 16:31 | |
| *** hisaharu has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:31 | |
| *** Susanne-Balle has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:33 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 16:33 | |
| *** vladimir3p has quit IRC | 16:37 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:42 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 16:54 | |
| *** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:01 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:14 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:17 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 17:18 | |
| *** vladimir3p has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:19 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:28 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 17:30 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:31 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:37 | |
| *** kbader has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:47 | |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:58 | |
| zns | #startmeeting Keystone Team Meeting | 17:59 |
|---|---|---|
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Oct 18 17:59:14 2011 UTC. The chair is zns. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:59 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 17:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 17:59 | |
| zns | Hi - anyone here for the first Keystone meeting? | 18:01 |
| * heckj lurking for it | 18:01 | |
| heckj | didn't have anything specific though, just thought I'd sit in | 18:02 |
| zns | heckj: cool. Welcome! It's our first one and we decided to do only yesterday, so the word may not have spread yet. But I'm going to be available online for questions. I'll also publish the roadmap to test that it makes it into the meeting logs too. | 18:03 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:03 | |
| zns | #topic Essex Roadmap | 18:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Essex Roadmap (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 18:03 | |
| heckj | I did have a question related to tenantID when you're ready | 18:03 |
| zns | Fire away. I see dolphm just joined too. | 18:04 |
| *** Susanne-Balle has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| * dolphm salutes. | 18:05 | |
| heckj | I forwarded a bug to the dash team to add in representing a tenant by Name in the dash (it currently just shows an ID). ohnoimdead (Tres) did some digging on it over the weekend, reported back that Keystone doesn't present a name with the tenantID | 18:05 |
| heckj | Wondered how we could get that more accessible for display in the dash to resolve that bug | 18:05 |
| dolphm | heckj: what call doesn't show the name with the id? | 18:06 |
| heckj | looking up the code to find out - Tres's sending me the branch he worked on | 18:06 |
| dolphm | is there an LP bug for this? | 18:07 |
| zns | For the record, since we have been asked by many regarding the API: | 18:07 |
| heckj | relevant bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-dashboard/+bug/875231 | 18:07 |
| zns | - v2.0 API is final. Only extensions to it will be pubished. | 18:07 |
| zns | - Any core changes needed/requested will trigger next version (v2.1) | 18:07 |
| zns | - During F summit, we will discuss v3 and if any extensions should be promoted to v3 (core) | 18:07 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 875231 in openstack-dashboard "req: display username and tenant in syspanel" [Undecided,New] | 18:08 |
| heckj | Tres related that (through openstackX?) any of the calls to getting users only returned the ID's, not the combined data sets | 18:08 |
| zns | Extensions can still be released at any time (so RBAC and other work scheduled will be as extensions to v2.0). | 18:08 |
| dolphm | heckj: the bottom line is that whenever there is both a backend-managed ID and a user-managed Name, both should always be returned together | 18:09 |
| dolphm | heckj: so if that's not happening somewhere, it's a bug | 18:09 |
| heckj | cool - I'll dig it up, and if it's not happening now, I'll open a bug proper for it and link it up | 18:09 |
| dolphm | heckj: thanks | 18:10 |
| zns | ROADMAP | 18:10 |
| zns | #1 - Essentials (E-1) | 18:10 |
| zns | Implementation on 2.0 API+Extension | 18:10 |
| zns | Documentation sprint | 18:10 |
| zns | RBAC prototype | 18:10 |
| *** zns has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| dolphm | zns: (this meeting is already productive, yay!) | 18:10 |
| dolphm | what is the date for E-1? | 18:11 |
| dolphm | http://wiki.openstack.org/EssexReleaseSchedule | 18:13 |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:13 | |
| zns | That's the latest roadmap. | 18:13 |
| zns | Oops - got kicked off for too much text... | 18:14 |
| dolphm | so, in terms of sprinting, we're either not going to do a doc sprint, or we're not going to touch RBAC by E1 | 18:14 |
| zns | We'll prototype the RBAC API in E1 only; so basically give the other core teams sample API responses with capabilities and roles in them. Those would be hardcoded so we can iterate on the API, but no implementation. | 18:15 |
| heckj | What did you have in mind re: the Documentation sprint? | 18:15 |
| zns | heckj: we've heard frustration that documentation is lacking. We want to improve that with things like; consolidating docs, clearly identifying quickstart, install, admin, and design docs. | 18:15 |
| zns | I'm going to clean this up and we're going to put blueprints in and target them to milestones as well. | 18:17 |
| heckj | I'd be happy to take a swing at the RST docs to improve this and submit it as pullreq - you'll likely need to correct me as I'm not super-familiar with the internals, but picked up some detail at the design summit | 18:18 |
| zns | What is not clear also, but important, is that we will focus on stability for E3. We want to be stable for the last few milestones and we'll start on the F blueprints during the last milestone. | 18:19 |
| zns | heckj: super! Much appreciated. That would be helpful. | 18:19 |
| dolphm | zns: stable by e3 or by end of e3? | 18:19 |
| dolphm | zns: in other words, other projects are squashing bugs in e4/rc... are we squashing bugs for e3/e4/rc then? | 18:20 |
| zns | heckj: see also http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritJenkinsGithub. We're using that instead of pull requests. | 18:20 |
| heckj | zns: yeah, that's what I meant. I've used it previous, just still call it pull request because I'm lame :-) | 18:21 |
| zns | dolphm: stable by end of E3. Schedule: | 18:21 |
| zns | http://wiki.openstack.org/EssexReleaseSchedule | 18:21 |
| zns | Schedule: | 18:21 |
| zns | - E1: implement 2.0 API & doc sprint | 18:21 |
| zns | - E2: RBAC (big feature) | 18:21 |
| zns | - E3 (Jan 5th-Feb 1st): stabilizing/performance, etc... actively working code | 18:21 |
| zns | - E4 (Feb 2-March 1st): bug fixing, supporting users – prep for RC | 18:21 |
| zns | - E5 (March 1st-April 5): starting on BPs, prototypes for F | 18:21 |
| zns | - F Summit: April 19th | 18:21 |
| zns | heckj: not lame. Hopeful maybe? I miss pull requests :-) | 18:22 |
| heckj | zns: yeah, me too. Whole different discussion though. | 18:22 |
| *** susanne-balle has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:22 | |
| heckj | zns: looks like a good schedule | 18:22 |
| zns | dolphm: so while other projects quash bugs in E4, they should be writing against a pretty stable Keystone release. | 18:23 |
| zns | Also means we get a head start on F1. But that's what we need to commit to for a while to avoid the chaos we had (I caused!) for Diablo. | 18:23 |
| *** med_out is now known as medberry | 18:24 | |
| zns | #topic Documentation Sprint | 18:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Documentation Sprint (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 18:24 | |
| zns | heckj asked and I answered, so we've covered this topic. Any questions on it? | 18:24 |
| annegentle | hey would you all (including heckj) consider writing the admin/quickstart and install docs in openstack-manuals rather than RST? | 18:24 |
| annegentle | RST is more for dev docs than admin guidance | 18:25 |
| annegentle | though I did take the RST install info as a start | 18:25 |
| annegentle | the RST install should be for dev environments not production | 18:25 |
| annegentle | make sense? | 18:25 |
| heckj | Happy to, once I'm comfortable with the content - it's a little faster for me to knock out RST | 18:25 |
| dolphm | annegentle: makes sense to me | 18:25 |
| annegentle | heckj - yeah and if you want to author RST and then convert to DocBook we could do that on the sidelines possibly? | 18:25 |
| dolphm | i rewrote the README yesterday, trying to cut as much as possible that's been moved elsewhere (i.e. docs.openstack.org) | 18:26 |
| annegentle | heckj: just want to ensure the audience is appropriately served in the source | 18:26 |
| annegentle | dolphm: oh thanks for doing that | 18:26 |
| zns | annegentle: so RST for dev manuals (setting up a test/debug environment, documenting the code and design, etc?). Sounds fine to me. Any other projects following that model? | 18:26 |
| heckj | I'm going to fill in the blanks that exist in RST now, get familiar with the underpinnings by making Ziad and Dolph read me crap, than I can take a stab at install/configure docs in docbook | 18:26 |
| heckj | zns: all of them, actually | 18:26 |
| zns | dolphm: just saw that. Thanks! | 18:26 |
| zns | heckj: all of what? | 18:27 |
| annegentle | zns: yep, all projects follow the RST>Dev Docs, DocBook> Ops/Admin model | 18:27 |
| heckj | zns: answering your question - all the other projects have dev docs in RST, formal docs in Docbook | 18:27 |
| heckj | (what annegentle said) | 18:28 |
| zns | cool. | 18:28 |
| zns | #agreed dev manuals in RST. All other manuals in openstack-manuals.. | 18:28 |
| zns | Anything else on documentation sprint? | 18:29 |
| zns | #topic Open Bugs | 18:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Bugs (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 18:29 | |
| zns | I know Yogi has tackled a few since he came back from the summit. Anyone have any high priority bugs they are blocked on? | 18:30 |
| *** susanne-balle has quit IRC | 18:30 | |
| zns | OK. Nothing particular on bugs. We'll work them as they come up. | 18:31 |
| dolphm | how should we be prioritizing bug fixes? (besides spec mal-compliance) | 18:31 |
| zns | I'll work with Joe on prioritizing what's in the backlog. But if you have anyone blocked or asking for a bug to be fixed, we should prioritize unblocking them. | 18:32 |
| zns | So: if someone is actively asking, we help them. Otherwise, they get prioritized with all other work. | 18:32 |
| zns | #topic Open Discussion | 18:32 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 18:32 | |
| dolphm | alright | 18:33 |
| zns | I'm rushing the agenda a bit becuase I have to leave early. | 18:33 |
| zns | * apologizes * | 18:33 |
| dolphm | lol | 18:33 |
| dolphm | and that wraps it up for today | 18:33 |
| zns | Any other items to bring up, log in the minutes, or add to the agenda for next week? | 18:33 |
| annegentle | just a note of appreciation, thanks for the efforts | 18:34 |
| zns | OK. I'll be online during the PPB meeting in a bit too. | 18:35 |
| zns | annegentle: you are wlecome! | 18:35 |
| zns | heckj, dolphm, annegentle: thank you for attending :-) | 18:35 |
| zns | See you next week. | 18:35 |
| zns | #endmeeting | 18:35 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 18:35 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:35 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Oct 18 18:35:42 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:35 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-17.59.html | 18:35 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-17.59.txt | 18:35 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-17.59.log.html | 18:35 |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 18:38 | |
| *** kbader has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:50 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:54 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| *** donaldngo_hp has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| *** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| soren | mtaylor: CI meeting? | 19:04 |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:04 | |
| heckj | 0/ | 19:06 |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 19:07 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:08 | |
| mtaylor | hey all | 19:12 |
| mtaylor | sorry - took me longer to get to this coffeshop than I thought | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | #startmeeting | 19:14 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Oct 18 19:14:20 2011 UTC. The chair is mtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:14 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 19:14 |
| mtaylor | anybody still around? heckj - soren? | 19:16 |
| * zul is lurking | 19:17 | |
| mtaylor | hey zul! | 19:17 |
| * ttx lurks as well | 19:17 | |
| mtaylor | zul: our private conversations about packaging changes after the public discussions about packaging changes seem to have upset ttx ... ;) | 19:17 |
| zul | mtaylor: i expect a deathmatch in a week or two | 19:18 |
| * ttx lurks just enough to make sure another consensus is not made without him :P | 19:18 | |
| mtaylor | or at least my inability to write things in a tense other than "this is what we're going to do" | 19:18 |
| zul | deathmatch much more interesting :) | 19:19 |
| soren | mtaylor: Yeah. | 19:19 |
| mtaylor | ttx: so, to be clear (and I'll respond to the list too) I was mainly talking about packages as an output/deliverable of the project - i.e. the release ppa | 19:20 |
| mtaylor | ttx: because without ongoing updates to those packages, it is highly irresponsible to offer to them to someone as an installation source, largely due to security issues. | 19:21 |
| ttx | mtaylor: ah. that was not very apparent from your email. | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | dev ppas don't bother me nearly as much - although if it's not a project output, the logistics of actually maintaining the packaging of those packages becomes slightly weirder (since ubuntu upstream is not interested in maintaining packages that work as is on lucid) | 19:22 |
| ttx | Maybe I read too much into "We will not be uploading nova/swift/glance/keystone to PPAs." next to "We will be setting up a PyPI mirror into which we will publish pip-able packages for every trunk commit" | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | but certainly doable | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | ttx: well - pypi mirror will be for dev build testing | 19:22 |
| ttx | so it looked like you were talking about trunk ppa | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | well, the concern was release ppa - but trunk ppa _does_ wind up becomming problematic from a maint perspective | 19:23 |
| ttx | I fully agree that the release PPA can easily be replaced by the "last-milestone" PPA for the purpose of releasing the latest stuff | 19:23 |
| mtaylor | because if we're starting to run unittests with run_tests.sh instead of run_tests.sh -N | 19:23 |
| *** mrmartin has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:23 | |
| soren | Well, so is everything else we do :) | 19:23 |
| mtaylor | soren: ++ | 19:23 |
| soren | (problematic from a maint perspective) | 19:23 |
| ttx | since after a few days it's no longer that useful | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | then we will not have the "deps must be packaged before they can be used" blocking trunk commits | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I think that's a great idea | 19:24 |
| ttx | I really don't mind if it ends up being replaced by essex-1, for example | 19:24 |
| ttx | but there is still value in 0-day release packages, imho | 19:25 |
| mtaylor | ttx: also don't get me wrong ... I ACTUALLY think it's extremely valuable for us to release packages | 19:25 |
| * Daviey reads up | 19:26 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: but I think we need a will behind the staffing and maintenance of the mini-distribution we'd be creating | 19:26 |
| mtaylor | ttx: because I do not support release packages that we then never update or pay attention to ever again | 19:26 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I think the effort is limited if we don't maintain it after release | 19:26 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: I agree about it being less than ideal for openstack to maintain their own distro fork, like it currently is. | 19:27 |
| Daviey | *However*, i don't agree that producing a PPA is bad. | 19:27 |
| Daviey | Your recent mail was not what i thought we agreed. | 19:27 |
| Daviey | (it's been on my todo list to reply, bit not sure it makes sense now) | 19:27 |
| ttx | mtaylor: having a "last milestone" PPA is just that, a way to install the last milestone. The 0-day package | 19:27 |
| mtaylor | so - producing a ppa is bad only if it's unmaintained | 19:27 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I agree the release PPA seem to hold a promise they won't keep | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | because no matter what we say ... people _WILL_ use it | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ok. I think we're on the same page about that then :) | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | yes? | 19:28 |
| ttx | mtaylor: and the value of the release PPA is limited since the development version of Ubuntu carries something better | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | #agreed release PPA seems to hold an implicit maintenance promise which we are not interested in - we will replace it with the last-milestone PPA | 19:29 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: So the PPA isn't going away as a development resource? | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | (unless I got that wrong ^^^) | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: we're working back towards that I think. one sec | 19:29 |
| ttx | soren: does that work for you ? | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | we REALLY need the ubottu voting thing | 19:30 |
| mtaylor | why aren't we using that meetbot? | 19:30 |
| * mtaylor digresses | 19:30 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: the thing our release ppa offered that ubuntu does not is packages for current openstack that work on lucid | 19:30 |
| *** Susanne-Balle has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:30 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: which is the push back I've gotten from users I've talked to about pointing them towards ubuntu | 19:31 |
| mtaylor | ttx: thus far, none of them are wanting to run oneiric in prod | 19:31 |
| mtaylor | BUT | 19:31 |
| mtaylor | I think we can perhaps agree that solving that _might_ not happen this instant | 19:31 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I think our PPAs are usable for development, evaluation, and QA. Not production -- you should use something more maintained for that | 19:31 |
| Daviey | I think the burden can be shared, but as yet - i haven't seen a request for help. | 19:31 |
| Daviey | rather than drop it, if it's prooving to be too much work - a request for help should go out. | 19:32 |
| zul | people will use distros for production me thinks | 19:32 |
| ttx | mtaylor: the stable-branchers /could/ produce a PPA that is usable in production, but I don't think they really want to | 19:32 |
| ttx | zul: or internal distros | 19:32 |
| zul | ttx: yeah | 19:32 |
| mtaylor | zul: I do not think that people will use distros for production until P comes out | 19:32 |
| Daviey | keep in mind that 12.04 is an LTS, so i would expect people to deploy that. | 19:33 |
| zul | mtaylor: they already are apparently | 19:33 |
| soren | ttx: Sorry, got distracted. /me catches up | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | so, let me say - I had a set of people who are not core devs approach me about this this weekend | 19:33 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: and what did they say, and who were they? | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | and they were beside themselves upset that we were not maintaining the release PPA for lucid with bugfixes | 19:33 |
| soren | ttx: Does it work for me to stop doing a release PPA? Sure. | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: various people who don't talk much in #openstack-dev , but who are apparently trying to deploy use at wherever they are | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: it was saturday, and there were at least three people in the conversation | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | which is a digression | 19:34 |
| Daviey | I don't think it was declared to be part of the openstack release.. therefore I'm not sure an active /effort/ is required to make it go away.. why not let it fade away if nobody pitches in? | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | because I think we've agreed that the current solutoin to this is to not produce the release PPA | 19:34 |
| ttx | mtaylor: right, so we are back on the promise the release PPAs apparently seem to carry with them | 19:35 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: "various people" isn't much use.. they really need to identify themselves if they have any hope of getting their use case catered for. | 19:35 |
| zul | mtaylor: simple fix, bzr mirror the stable git tree, then do a bzr reciepe, and let launchpad do the rest for you | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | yes. so I think we've got this bit - the next question is maintenance of dev ppas | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | zul: recipes don't make any sense to me - if someone wants to set that up there are more than welcome to | 19:36 |
| ttx | someone should get into the business of doing an openstack distro for lucid | 19:36 |
| zul | or a next LTS ;) | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | yes. they should - it would be quite popular :) | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | at least for the next year | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | :) | 19:36 |
| ttx | mtaylor: let me find a VC that will fund that startup | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | ttx: sweet | 19:37 |
| Daviey | ttx: I have £10 in my pocket if that helps. | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | zul: was the recipe fix a fix for dev ppa? | 19:37 |
| zul | mtaylor: yeah at least | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | zul: well, sure - but that's not really the problem that needs solving for the dev ppa | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | making the packages is easy | 19:37 |
| zul | mtaylor: and then i can break it when i upload to the bzr tree | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | the content of the packaging is harder | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | because of a) packaging version diversions and b) backport packages ... so I'm just wondering about maint of those things | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | packaging version diversions == dh_python2 problems | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | sorry - those were obtuse words | 19:38 |
| ttx | mtaylor: is it difficult, or too much work ? | 19:39 |
| soren | Admittedly, I can't imagine a stable update would add new dependencies. | 19:39 |
| soren | The trouble is that the things in the PPA that aren't openstack might have security problems. *That's* the part that freaks me out. | 19:39 |
| ttx | mtaylor: because we certainly can limit the number of flavors supported to current / current LTS | 19:39 |
| ttx | mtaylor: soren is the only openstack coredev that runs ubuntu under development :) | 19:40 |
| soren | ttx: I think that would be great. | 19:40 |
| Daviey | Hmm | 19:40 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 19:40 | |
| Daviey | Considering Ubuntu plan to run on-commit functional testing in the development release, we will need a PPA for the Ubuntu development version. | 19:41 |
| Daviey | I don't object if we do this ourselves | 19:41 |
| soren | ttx: We only got to this point, because noone ever had the heart to pull the trigger on the maverick builds and now the natty builds. | 19:41 |
| Daviey | Or if it is handled ~openstack-ubuntu-packagers, or whatever | 19:41 |
| mtaylor | ttx: difficult | 19:41 |
| mtaylor | I am not worried about ubuntu dev release packages, because I _know_ that ubuntu devs will be working on those | 19:42 |
| mtaylor | and I have no problem with creating/uploading those and or triggering the ubuntu on-commit functional testing even | 19:42 |
| mtaylor | is that the needs of _that_ ppa is very specific ubuntu | 19:42 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: We can probably take this aspect out of band TBH | 19:42 |
| mtaylor | and does not address what ttx was talking about, which is the potential need of devs to have packages of trunk commits | 19:43 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: ++ | 19:43 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: I think there is very little consternation around packages targetted at ubuntu dev release :) | 19:43 |
| Daviey | groovy | 19:43 |
| mtaylor | the question at hand is - should we, as the project, produce packages on each source commit for old ubuntu releases | 19:44 |
| notmyname | I may be the slow one in the room here. why don't we provide "prod-ready" packages (with support, committed to by the projects) and "dev/beta/test/whatever" packages for those who want other projects that aren't yet ready for prody | 19:44 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: lucid isn't old :-) | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: I'm aiming that sentence at the ubuntu devs in the room, which thus far have been the only people other than me in the conversation :) | 19:44 |
| soren | No. It's ancient :) | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: to whom lucid is very olld | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: thus far, swift is the only project that has indicated _any_ interest in maintaining such packages | 19:45 |
| notmyname | soren: lucid is the current prod-ready version of ubuntu (no ops will not run LTS) | 19:45 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: uhm, Rax public cloud is running on Sid.. ;) | 19:45 |
| * mtaylor would like to table any disagreements about lucid age at the moment | 19:45 | |
| ttx | notmyname: some ops do though :) | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | jaypipes: no, it's not | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | jaypipes: it's running squeeze | 19:45 |
| jaypipes | oh, sorry, even better | 19:45 |
| notmyname | all generalizations are wrong | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | which is the current released versoin of debian | 19:45 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: :) | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | anyway | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | bikeshed | 19:46 |
| zul | jaypipes: heretics :) | 19:46 |
| jaypipes | lol | 19:46 |
| * jaypipes goes back in hole | 19:46 | |
| notmyname | so decide if an openstack core project is ready for prod and then support it as such with LTS packages and support from the project team | 19:46 |
| mtaylor | #topic should we, as the project, produce packages on each source commit for old ubuntu releases | 19:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "should we, as the project, produce packages on each source commit for old ubuntu releases" | 19:46 | |
| ttx | notmyname: who is this "project team" ? | 19:46 |
| notmyname | nova/swift/whatever | 19:47 |
| ttx | ah ok | 19:47 |
| notmyname | ie, if a team says they are ready for prod, they should provide some support for it in the way of bugfixes (security), etc | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: right. based on conversations at the ODS, we created an openstack-stable-maint team comprised of distro folks who will deal with patching released versions | 19:48 |
| ttx | mtaylor: not necessarily for every trunk commit -- but maybe for milestone-proposed, and definitely for last-milestone | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ok. the next question is why | 19:48 |
| ttx | so it's not that much more work to also do it for trunk | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | ttx: because if we are not going to releae those packages, what is the point of explcitly testing those packages | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | ttx: when the devs are most likely going to be using devstack to run local tests? (not trying to be snarky, just making sure I understand) | 19:49 |
| ttx | trunk is used for development, milestone-proposed for QA, last-milestone for evaluation | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | sure. but QA of what | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | I mean, what value does the PPA add to that process | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | if it's different than testing trunk commits | 19:50 |
| ttx | I guess we could limit it to a relatively-new ubuntu version | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | and if it isn't how the final release is packaged | 19:50 |
| Daviey | This Topic is going a bit TL;DR, can we sumarise actions? | 19:50 |
| ttx | QA of the milestone itself | 19:50 |
| jeblair | if the CI team and the devs are all using devstack to test during development, then that same procedure seems suitable for testing milestones | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: I would love that - but I think we're still in discussion of the basic issue to figure out what it is that we're all actually talking about :) | 19:52 |
| ttx | with 7 minutes left | 19:52 |
| mtaylor | YAY! | 19:52 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I'm really not trying to difficult, I'm just trying to make sure I understand the thing we're trying to accomplish | 19:53 |
| ttx | mtaylor: so far I've been using trunk PPA for development, calling people to test the milestone-proposed using that PPA, and sent milestone release emails pointing to a milestone PPA | 19:53 |
| ttx | that worked. | 19:54 |
| mtaylor | really? | 19:54 |
| ttx | Now you tell me it doesn't work anymore and needs to be abandoned, at least partially | 19:54 |
| mtaylor | I don't think it did | 19:54 |
| mtaylor | nova was broken upon release | 19:54 |
| ttx | because people don't give a shit about fixing bugs | 19:54 |
| mtaylor | and only works in oneiric because ubuntu patched | 19:55 |
| mtaylor | patched it | 19:55 |
| ttx | not because of testing of the milestone-proposed | 19:55 |
| ttx | I don't see how removing the option people had to test actually improves that state | 19:55 |
| Daviey | I think it's not that simple, Diablo nova was a special case due to many factors. I'm not sure it's releated to the PPA. | 19:55 |
| mtaylor | so, what does testing milestone-proposed from packages rather than from source tarballs gain us in this case | 19:55 |
| Daviey | Although feature vs stability is a good point :) | 19:56 |
| mtaylor | I'm not saying it's related to the ppa - I'm just saying that ppa itself is an implementation detail | 19:56 |
| mtaylor | and that testing debian packages of the project vs. testing source tarballs of a version is an extra layer of code to test if the debian packages are not a project output | 19:56 |
| ttx | I guess I fail to see devstack as a usable way of testing. You probably know better | 19:56 |
| mtaylor | I think it made PERFET sense when the de-facto primary output of the project was the release PPA | 19:57 |
| jeblair | packages themselves don't produce a working environment for testing, devstack has the advantage of doing so | 19:57 |
| Daviey | I actually found the non-nova PPA's really useful for development of nova. | 19:57 |
| zul | the juju charms has options to use the dev ppas as well | 19:58 |
| Daviey | jeblair: For the project you are currently working on, i agree - for the depends, packages make more sense IMO. | 19:58 |
| *** mancdaz has quit IRC | 19:58 | |
| mtaylor | Daviey: only if you're an ubuntu dev - the python devs on the project all keep adding depends to pip-requires and then being confused why they don't work | 19:58 |
| zul | but everyone has their own usecase/agenda so you are not going to get a good concensous | 19:58 |
| ttx | I suppose I should try devstack -- it must just be my aversion for shell scripts used to setup complex things | 19:58 |
| mtaylor | zul ++ | 19:58 |
| ttx | probably dates back from my ebuild past | 19:58 |
| zul | lol | 19:59 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I totally hear that | 19:59 |
| jeblair | it's no panacea. don't run it on anything important. :) | 19:59 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: ++ | 19:59 |
| zul | ttx: funny i have the same aversion | 19:59 |
| *** kbader has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| ttx | jeblair: like our whole CI ? | 19:59 |
| jeblair | our CI is disposable. :) | 19:59 |
| mtaylor | but it's certainly a simple way for a dev to get an installable/working version of the current version from trunk | 19:59 |
| mtaylor | ttx: we're going to use devstack as the basis for CI testing because it's something that the devs can reproduce locally | 20:00 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: No, i mean.. if you are developing nova - then use, use nova git checkout.. but for devenv - glance, why the heck would you use source when you don't care about it for the feature you are working on? | 20:00 |
| mtaylor | which is something that the other solutions thus far for integrated testing (puppet, chef, vpc, smokestack, whatnot) have drastically failed to do | 20:00 |
| Daviey | It's like installing python from source :) | 20:00 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: pip install -i http://pypi.openstack.org/ glance | 20:00 |
| ttx | mtaylor: maybe I was special, but my development workflow (based on installing deb packages) was totally reprodueable | 20:00 |
| *** mancdaz has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:01 | |
| zul | ttx: yeah but you knew what you were doing i bet | 20:01 |
| vishy | because source gives you more reliable version pinning? | 20:01 |
| ttx | mtaylor: but I hear that it's a bit ubuntu-slanted | 20:01 |
| ttx | mtaylor: and that to be distro-agnostic you need to cut the special link we built between ubuntu and openstack | 20:02 |
| Daviey | anyone want to join me behind the bikeshed for a smoke? | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | as fun as this has been ... we may or may not have a ppb meeting next | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: please. god | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | ttx: yes. EXCEPT - that I'd like to _change_ the link between ubuntu and openstack | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | ttx: so that it's one that isn't exclusive | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | ttx: and it won't be totally cut | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | because we're still pinned to ubuntu release dates :) | 20:03 |
| mtaylor | #agreed we could all discuss this for ages and ages and cause Daviey to smoke more | 20:03 |
| Daviey | mtaylor: "not totally cut", implies do damage to. | 20:03 |
| mtaylor | Daviey: only if change == damage | 20:03 |
| vishy | is ppb happening btw? | 20:03 |
| Daviey | well it depends if it's a positive or a negative change :) | 20:03 |
| zns | vishy: I'm here for PPB... | 20:04 |
| mtaylor | #endmeeting | 20:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 20:04 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Oct 18 20:04:27 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:04 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-19.14.html | 20:04 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-19.14.txt | 20:04 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-19.14.log.html | 20:04 |
| ttx | vishy: I don't like shell scripts that go unmaintained as soon as people look the other way, being used as a critical piece of CI workflow. I hope that devstack proves me wrong | 20:04 |
| *** jk0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| ttx | vishy: but I fail to see why its fate would be different from nova.sh ? | 20:05 |
| *** mancdaz has quit IRC | 20:05 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: well, for one, it's going to drive CI | 20:05 |
| mtaylor | ttx: so if it stops working, shit ain't gonna get into trunk :) | 20:05 |
| jeblair | ttx: and ppl can submit a patch to gerrit to fix it. | 20:06 |
| mtaylor | ttx: and the puppet and chef modules that attempted to install that stuff before were horribly unmaintained | 20:06 |
| ttx | mtaylor: it all goes down to maintenance. And maintainability | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | and juju doesn't quite fit our usecase yet | 20:07 |
| Daviey | wait, CI on the CI script.. i like that | 20:07 |
| soren | I really wish that the thing that would block getting stuff into trunk was that same thing we expected people to use for deployment. I.e. not devstack. | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | soren: the problem is that NOBODY agrees on how to install for deployment | 20:07 |
| soren | Well, NOBODY says to use devstack for deployment, AFAICT. | 20:07 |
| *** mancdaz has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:08 | |
| mtaylor | soren: we have puppet, chef and juju, none of whom talk, and all of who are mostly unusable by the standard dev | 20:08 |
| soren | Just effing pick something that someone will use, rather than something noone will use. | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | no | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | everytime we do that | 20:08 |
| ttx | soren: "something" needs to be used as a basis. Using Ubuntu packages apparently prevents other distros to be correctly supported, hence devstack feeling the void | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | huge amouts of people get pissed | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | and then the people who picked that one thing don't show up to help | 20:08 |
| soren | Yeah, there's a lot of that going around in this project. | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | and then the devs still can't reproduce locally | 20:09 |
| soren | It gets in the way of breaking stuff :) | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | I mean - have you tried installing from puppet? | 20:09 |
| soren | Good grief, no. | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | see | 20:09 |
| heckj | :-) | 20:09 |
| soren | I've installed from packages a *lot*. | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | what do I pick? | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | juju? | 20:09 |
| *** rmk has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:09 | |
| mtaylor | because that doesn't work either | 20:09 |
| Daviey | go on then | 20:09 |
| jeblair | the puppet modules _do_ install from packages | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | how, exactly, in the name of god, should I install from packages without scripting it with a shell script? | 20:09 |
| notmyname | ppb meeting? | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | in a CI setting | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | in a repeatable manner | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | that's all devstack is | 20:10 |
| soren | Except it doesn't use the packages. Right? | 20:10 |
| pvo | notmyname: jbryce can't make it and not one said they're going to run it yet | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | as soon as juju, chef or puppet get involved, none of the devs know how it works | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | it uses packages right now | 20:10 |
| heckj | mtaylor: except devstack does source install, not package install | 20:10 |
| soren | Whuh? | 20:10 |
| notmyname | pvo: did you just volunteer? ;-) | 20:10 |
| pvo | notmyname: and I don't have an agenda | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | sorry - I meant for the things that aren't the code branches | 20:10 |
| pvo | I gots work to do | 20:10 |
| * mtaylor retracts "it installs from packages" | 20:11 | |
| soren | Well, there you go. | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | soren: but what value add does installing from packages over python setup.py install have in a throwaway lxc container ? | 20:11 |
| soren | mtaylor: That it's something we expect people to actually do. | 20:11 |
| soren | (and setup.py doesn't leave you with a working system) | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | from whose packages? | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | we don't produce releaes packages | 20:12 |
| soren | Gee, I don't know. | 20:12 |
| *** mancdaz has quit IRC | 20:12 | |
| soren | Whether we build and whether we publish release packages are different things. | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | so again - how am I supposed to test that a version of the software works on a released ubuntu version? and if I tested that with packages we create just for testing - how is that testing how we're suggesting it should be deployed | 20:13 |
| heckj | mtaylor: haven't read the scrollback entirely, but the problem with puppet is that most devs don't know/use it? | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | no. it's the same thing | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | heckj: yes. you are right | 20:13 |
| *** mancdaz has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:13 | |
| mtaylor | you're arguing that we should test things using the same mechanism that we're suggesting people use to actually deploy | 20:13 |
| devcamcar | o/ | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | but if we make special packages for that purpose | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | those aren't any more what we're suggesting | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | than python setup.py | 20:13 |
| soren | We don't make special packasges for that purpose. | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | we do | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | because any package we make | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | isn't something that we release | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | because no one is making lucid packages for releaes for this project | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | so if you want to test that | 20:14 |
| soren | But they're the same as the ones that land in Ubuntu and as the ones we publish from trunk commits. | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | how, excactly, would you do that "in the way that we suggest to deploy" | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | no they're not | 20:14 |
| soren | How come? | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | because dh_python2 is different in oneirc | 20:14 |
| soren | Than what? | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | so the results of the pacakges are actually different | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | than lucid? | 20:14 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 20:15 | |
| soren | Ignore Lucid. Or something. Just pick *something*. | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | no | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | I will not ignore lucid | 20:15 |
| heckj | Coming at this from the final install parts - I'd love to see both deb and rpm packages made that I can just install. I'm sure I'm missing the complexity of what that actually means though. | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | it's the current ubuntu LTS | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | heckj: the problem is that you either have to make very generic packages | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | which don't work | 20:15 |
| soren | mtaylor: Fine. Pick Lucid. | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | heckj: or packages tailored to your deploy | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | which is what the deployers do | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | they make deployment choices and encode those into their packages | 20:16 |
| jeblair | (deployers includes distros in this context, i think) | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | yes | 20:16 |
| heckj | mtaylor: bring me up to speed - why do the generic packages "not work"? I did that with the deb's that we created from the Diablo PPA without too much issue. | 20:16 |
| ttx | could we move that discussion to some other channel ? | 20:16 |
| *** mrmartin has quit IRC | 20:16 | |
| ttx | It's a bit misleading for people joining | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | ttx: fair | 20:16 |
| ttx | especially with so many participants actually being PPB members | 20:17 |
| mtaylor | shall we attack openstack-dev ? | 20:17 |
| heckj | Okay - switch to #openstack-dev? | 20:17 |
| ttx | yay | 20:17 |
| heckj | mtaylor: ++ | 20:17 |
| ttx | let's make those gerrit notifications a minority | 20:17 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:20 | |
| vishy | so i guess no ppb? | 20:21 |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 20:23 | |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has quit IRC | 20:23 | |
| *** bhall_ has quit IRC | 20:23 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:24 | |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:24 | |
| *** bhall_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:24 | |
| ttx | vishy: I guess | 20:25 |
| *** Tushar has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:27 | |
| zns | vishy: I don't hear anyone volunteering to drive it. Nothing urgent I guess... | 20:29 |
| *** robertn has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:39 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 20:45 | |
| *** clayg has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| *** wwkeyboard has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:46 | |
| *** comstud has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:47 | |
| *** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:51 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:56 | |
| *** jdg has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| *** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| *** banka has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| ttx | ... | 21:00 |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 21:00 | |
| *** Vijay_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| *** ewanmellor has quit IRC | 21:00 | |
| *** Vijay_ has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| ttx | zns, notmyname, jaypipes, vishy, devcamcar: around ? | 21:01 |
| notmyname | here | 21:01 |
| jaypipes | ttx: o/ | 21:01 |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| zns | ttx: yes | 21:01 |
| *** Vijay_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| heckj | devcamcar not here at the moment, back soon | 21:01 |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 21:01 | |
| ttx | vishy and devcamcar go last anyway, I guess we can start | 21:02 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| mtaylor | o/ | 21:02 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Oct 18 21:02:46 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 |
| ttx | Welcome everyone to our weekly meeting... Today's agenda is at: | 21:03 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/TeamMeeting | 21:03 |
| ttx | #info Please use #info #link #idea #action for a richer summary. | 21:03 |
| ttx | #topic Actions from previous meeting | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting" | 21:03 | |
| ttx | * ttx to set up some survey monkey for summit feedback | 21:03 |
| ttx | in progress, will probably be common with the conference feedback, marketing plans to send on Thursday | 21:03 |
| *** patelna_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| ttx | * ttx to ask powers that be about next design summit location plans | 21:04 |
| ttx | done, it looks like they want the next summit to be held somewhere in the US, for a change | 21:04 |
| soren | Wow, I've always wanted to vist. | 21:04 |
| ttx | * vishy to schedule nova blueprint prioritizing meeting for Thursday and send an email to the list | 21:04 |
| soren | visit, even. | 21:04 |
| vishy | o/ | 21:04 |
| ttx | vishy: that was done, right ? | 21:04 |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| comstud | i was there, so i'd say so | 21:05 |
| comstud | :) | 21:05 |
| *** jamesurquhart has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:05 | |
| ttx | * devcamcar to set "Maintainer" at https://launchpad.net/openstack-dashboard to ~openstack-admins: DONE | 21:05 |
| ttx | * ttx to update the "How to Contribute" page and add dashboard & keystone to wiki.openstack.org overview: DONE | 21:05 |
| vishy | yes | 21:06 |
| vishy | sorry internet is spotty | 21:06 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status" | 21:06 | |
| ttx | zns: Looking at: | 21:06 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/essex | 21:06 |
| ttx | Looks a bit empty at this point :) | 21:06 |
| *** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:06 | |
| zns | Weekly meetings started. First one was today. | 21:06 |
| zns | Info here: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting | 21:06 |
| ttx | zns: you should: | 21:06 |
| zns | Minutes here: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-17.59.html | 21:06 |
| ttx | #info 1. create blueprints (or ask people to file blueprints) matching your feature plan (if you have any feature) | 21:07 |
| zns | Hi level roadmap and schedule: | 21:07 |
| zns | http://wiki.openstack.org/EssexReleaseSchedule | 21:07 |
| zns | Schedule: | 21:07 |
| zns | - E1: implement 2.0 API & doc sprint | 21:07 |
| zns | - E2: RBAC (big feature) | 21:07 |
| zns | - E3 (Jan 5th-Feb 1st): stabilizing/performance, etc... actively working code | 21:07 |
| zns | - E4 (Feb 2-March 1st): bug fixing, supporting users – prep for RC | 21:07 |
| zns | - E5 (March 1st-April 5): starting on BPs, prototypes for F | 21:07 |
| zns | - F Summit: April 19th | 21:07 |
| ttx | #info 2. set the "Series goal" to Essex so thet it appears at the above link | 21:07 |
| ttx | #info 3. set "Milestone" to one of the milestones | 21:07 |
| ttx | any chance you could convert that roadmap to that ? | 21:07 |
| zns | We're working on the blueprints and will get them done by end of next week. Will report status next Tuesday. We have sopme in already. | 21:07 |
| ttx | cool ! | 21:07 |
| ttx | Note that E1 is in 3 weeks now | 21:08 |
| ttx | zns: I'll maintain the milestones for you... but first you need to fix the group permissions: | 21:08 |
| ttx | #action zns to set "Maintainer" at https://launchpad.net/keystone to ~openstack-admins | 21:08 |
| zns | ttx: yes, we have not targetted them (or entered them) yet. But the roadmap is under discussion and planning (per minutes of meeting today). | 21:08 |
| zns | ttx: uyes. will set the series and milestones. | 21:09 |
| ttx | Are you planning to freeze the API by E3 or earlier ? | 21:09 |
| vishy | afk for 10 minutes | 21:09 |
| ttx | zns: i can maintain that for you with the right dates -- just set the maintainer on keystone project to ~openstack-admins | 21:09 |
| zns | No API changes in E3. The last changes will be worked on in E2. So everyone can have a stable API to work on from E3 on. | 21:09 |
| zns | ttx: will do. | 21:10 |
| ttx | so that I can add myself as release manager for keystone | 21:10 |
| ttx | that sounds great | 21:10 |
| ttx | zns: Anything else ? | 21:10 |
| zns | ttx: No. THanks! | 21:10 |
| *** patelna__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:10 | |
| ttx | everyone: Raise your hand if you have questions on Keystone... | 21:10 |
| westmaas | o/ | 21:11 |
| ttx | westmaas: shoot | 21:11 |
| zns | ttx: openstack-admins set as maintainer on Keystone. | 21:11 |
| ttx | zns: coolio | 21:11 |
| westmaas | zns: do you anticipate a lot of change between now and E1 on 2.0? Especially in terms of backwards compatibility | 21:11 |
| westmaas | or is it mostly adding things | 21:11 |
| westmaas | not asking for a garauntee or anything just curious where you expect most changes to be | 21:12 |
| *** banka has quit IRC | 21:12 | |
| zns | No. No changes will happen to 2.0. 2.0 API is fixed. | 21:12 |
| jaypipes | zns: where is the proposed 2.0 API spec? | 21:13 |
| westmaas | sorry, I mean in implementation | 21:13 |
| westmaas | seems like its working in a basic way now | 21:13 |
| zns | westmaas: from the Keystone meeting: | 21:13 |
| zns | - v2.0 API is final. Only extensions to it will be pubished. | 21:13 |
| zns | - Any core changes needed/requested will trigger next version (v2.1) | 21:13 |
| zns | - During F summit, we will discuss v3 and if any extensions should be promoted to v3 (core) | 21:13 |
| westmaas | kk | 21:13 |
| westmaas | thanks | 21:13 |
| jaypipes | gotcha. thx. | 21:13 |
| ttx | anything else ? | 21:14 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:14 | |
| ttx | notmyname: o/ | 21:14 |
| notmyname | hi | 21:14 |
| ttx | notmyname: did you come to a decision wrt the milestone plan (common vs. specific) ? | 21:14 |
| zns | westmaas: The 2.0 API spec is complete. It's available here: http://docs.openstack.org/ | 21:14 |
| *** patelna_ has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| *** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:15 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 21:15 | |
| notmyname | ttx: we will be continuing our previous path of releasing as needed and not necessarily following the nova milestones | 21:15 |
| ttx | ok | 21:15 |
| notmyname | #info swift will be continuing our previous path of releasing as needed and not necessarily following the nova milestones | 21:15 |
| ttx | do you have a date in mind and a version number for the next one ? | 21:15 |
| *** jdg_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:16 | |
| *** jdg has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| notmyname | 1.4.4 I expect. and in 2-3 weeks. I want to see the currently in-review features land first. then we'll be ready for a release | 21:16 |
| devcamcar | o/ | 21:16 |
| ttx | notmyname: do you have features targeted to that already ? | 21:17 |
| zns | jaypipes, westmaas: sorry, correct URL for API specs is: https://github.com/openstack/keystone/tree/master/keystone/content/admin | 21:17 |
| jaypipes | zns: ah, cheers | 21:17 |
| notmyname | ttx: ah, probably not in LP. I was looking at that this morning (before I got pulled aside for some personal things) | 21:17 |
| notmyname | I'm currently trying to clean up the blueprints and bugs in LP for swift | 21:18 |
| zns | jaypipes, westmaas: if you see the roadmap above, first thing we are doing is updating the docs to make it easier to find this stuff. Consolidating and simplifying. | 21:18 |
| notmyname | devcamcar: did you have a question? | 21:18 |
| ttx | notmyname: could you create / link blueprints to 1.4.4 by next week ? | 21:18 |
| notmyname | ttx: I'll do my best | 21:18 |
| ttx | notmyname: I'll create the milestone if it's missing | 21:18 |
| devcamcar | notmyname: nope, just running behind schedule and finally got here | 21:18 |
| ttx | #action notmyname to create/target blueprints to 1.4.4 | 21:18 |
| ttx | #action ttx to create 1.4.4 milestone if it doesn't exist yet | 21:19 |
| ttx | notmyname: Anything else ? | 21:19 |
| ttx | Questions on Swift ? | 21:19 |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 21:19 | |
| *** patelna__ has quit IRC | 21:20 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:20 | |
| ttx | ok, moving on... | 21:20 |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:20 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:20 | |
| jaypipes | https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:20 |
| ttx | jaypipes: How complete is that ? | 21:21 |
| jaypipes | Essex 1 looking good. Got SSL support into trunk today. | 21:21 |
| ttx | I mean, is that the full essex-1 plan ? | 21:21 |
| jaypipes | Open reviews: https://review.openstack.org/#q,status:open+project:openstack/glance,n,z | 21:21 |
| jaypipes | Would appreciated reviews on there... if anyone has some time | 21:21 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I am fleshing out the 2.0 API blueprints and proposal this week. 2.0 API stuff should be targeted to E2. | 21:22 |
| jaypipes | ttx: so yes, that is correct for E1. | 21:22 |
| jaypipes | ttx: focusing on getting bugs done and some refactoring work done before work on 2.0 API. | 21:22 |
| ttx | jaypipes: Would you consider setting a milestone target and an assignee for all the "High" blueprints on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/essex ? | 21:22 |
| ttx | or is that too early ? | 21:22 |
| ttx | (I tend to think that things taht are important should have someone committed to delivering them) | 21:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I've tried. If the assignee is missing, it's for a areason :) same for missing milestones... | 21:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: should have those filled in by next week. | 21:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: just need to get the proposed images API 2.0 out the door and get feedback on it. | 21:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: after that, I'll negotiate some resources with pvo and westmaas ;) | 21:24 |
| ttx | #action jaypipes to try to get a complete Essex plan | 21:24 |
| ttx | jaypipes: Anything else ? | 21:24 |
| jaypipes | ttx: nope. | 21:24 |
| ttx | everyone: Questions on Glance ? | 21:24 |
| ttx | vishy: are you back ? | 21:25 |
| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:25 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:25 | |
| ttx | let's skip to dashbaord first | 21:25 |
| ttx | #topic Dashboard status | 21:25 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Dashboard status" | 21:25 | |
| ttx | devcamcar: o/ | 21:25 |
| ttx | So what's the new name ? :) | 21:25 |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 21:25 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| *** danwent_ is now known as danwent | 21:26 | |
| devcamcar | ttx: i am actually crafting the email to announce the name right now - it'll hit the list in about an hour :) | 21:26 |
| ttx | cool | 21:26 |
| ttx | devcamcar: Looking at your empty Essex plan: | 21:26 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-dashboard/essex | 21:26 |
| devcamcar | dashboard update - i'm triaging a number of new blueprints from the essex summit | 21:26 |
| devcamcar | today | 21:26 |
| ttx | devcamcar: see steps I outlined for Ziad above | 21:26 |
| devcamcar | ttx: will review | 21:27 |
| ttx | on how to link existing blueprints to essex | 21:27 |
| devcamcar | ttx: oh, yea i'm good on how to do that | 21:27 |
| ttx | #info Producing such a plan really helps in communicating your goals and completion targets outside your project, which is critical to attracting outside participation | 21:27 |
| ttx | cool | 21:27 |
| devcamcar | that was all done for diablo in dashboard | 21:27 |
| devcamcar | so today we'll have the official dashboard roadmap, a new name, and a timeline for gerrit migration | 21:28 |
| ttx | (it's also about the only way to filter down the blueprints list in launchpad to something that makes sense) | 21:28 |
| ttx | devcamcar: once we know the name we'll work to align the project with other core projects in terms of team names etc | 21:28 |
| devcamcar | sounds good! | 21:29 |
| ttx | devcamcar: Anything else ? | 21:29 |
| devcamcar | thats all for today | 21:29 |
| ttx | Questions on Dashboard ? | 21:29 |
| ttx | vishy: around now ? | 21:29 |
| ttx | hmm, skipping again | 21:30 |
| ttx | #topic Incubated projects and other Team reports | 21:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects and other Team reports" | 21:30 | |
| ttx | #info This (new) topic is about having a moment for the various other team leads to communicate stuff that is happening in their teams | 21:30 |
| zns | ttx: in fairness to Vishy, he was here at the correct meeting time... | 21:30 |
| ttx | We have plenty of teams now: | 21:30 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Teams | 21:30 |
| ttx | zns: correct meeting time ? | 21:31 |
| *** vishyweb has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:31 | |
| ttx | that's him in disguise | 21:31 |
| vishyweb | hi | 21:31 |
| vishyweb | having trouble with the internet here, had to webclient it | 21:31 |
| ttx | vishyweb: back to Nova in a bit | 21:31 |
| ttx | So if you're a team lead and want to talk about something, you can raise your hand during this topic | 21:31 |
| danwent | hi | 21:31 |
| zns | ttx: PPB meeting 90 minutes ago. | 21:31 |
| ttx | Or just add a line to the agenda at: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/TeamMeeting | 21:32 |
| danwent | on quantum: E1 is starting to fill up: https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:32 |
| danwent | still more to add | 21:32 |
| ttx | zns: this is a different meeting :P | 21:32 |
| zns | ttx: Oh! Felt like a PPB :-) | 21:32 |
| danwent | as always, our netstack meeting agenda is available at: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings if you're interested in what we are talking about next. | 21:32 |
| zns | ttx: albeit an efficient one ;-) | 21:32 |
| ttx | zns: the PPB is much more chaotic :P | 21:32 |
| carlp | Quick question: is there a reason Netstack is not on the Teams page? | 21:33 |
| ttx | hmm, I guess it could fit on that page | 21:33 |
| danwent | carlp: we can add it. | 21:33 |
| ttx | Quantum is not (and Nova is not) because they are a project, not a team | 21:33 |
| *** cmagina_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:33 | |
| carlp | \o/ Yay! | 21:33 |
| *** kbader has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| ttx | but the "netstack" group could, I think. Hey, it's a wiki. | 21:34 |
| danwent | also, some more quantum improvements will be hitting nova soon. reviews are much appreciated :) | 21:34 |
| ttx | danwent: you can also edit http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | 21:34 |
| *** cmagina has quit IRC | 21:34 | |
| ttx | any other team lead with news ? | 21:34 |
| danwent | ttx: will do | 21:34 |
| ttx | QA, CI , docs ? | 21:35 |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 21:35 | |
| annegentle | docs - formed the nova-doc team with Razique and kbringard | 21:35 |
| zykes- | quicky question, when is the Quantum meeting ? | 21:35 |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:35 | |
| annegentle | docs - Keystone sprinting on admin/install docs | 21:35 |
| ttx | annegentle: does it make sense to have project-specific doc teams ? | 21:36 |
| danwent | top of the hour, right after this one | 21:36 |
| annegentle | ttx: when people volunteer for it, yes :) but seems only that nova needs it right now. | 21:36 |
| ttx | annegentle: in addition to the horizontal "docs" team ? | 21:36 |
| ttx | ok | 21:36 |
| ttx | unless some other team has something, we'll move back to the nova topic | 21:37 |
| annegentle | but we can always revisit, it's just that docs for nova/keystone are in dire need | 21:37 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:37 | |
| ttx | vishy: yo | 21:37 |
| ttx | vishyweb: ^ | 21:37 |
| vishyweb | hi | 21:37 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/essex | 21:37 |
| ttx | Still very empty, except the nova-rootwrap one that I filed (targeted to essex-2) | 21:38 |
| _0x44 | Sorry I'm late. | 21:38 |
| ttx | vishy: Any way I can help in filling this up ? | 21:38 |
| ttx | vishyweb: ? | 21:40 |
| ttx | not sure the webclient works really better :/ | 21:40 |
| ttx | My other question was, do we have any significant thing that is already merged and that we should retrospectively add to the Essex list ? | 21:41 |
| ttx | but I guess I'll have to solve those off-meeting | 21:42 |
| ttx | Questions on Nova ? | 21:42 |
| *** vishyweb has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| ttx | that another nova-core dude would answer ? :) | 21:42 |
| *** vishyweb has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:42 | |
| vishyweb | worst internet in history | 21:42 |
| vishyweb | sorry ttx | 21:42 |
| ttx | vishyweb: feeling better now ? | 21:42 |
| vishyweb | switched to mobile hotspot | 21:43 |
| vishyweb | hopefully it stays | 21:43 |
| ttx | vishyweb: in what country did they send you this time ? | 21:43 |
| ttx | vishy: reposting | 21:43 |
| vishyweb | anyway the quick update is that I haven't targetted blueprints yet | 21:43 |
| ttx | Any way I can help in filling this up ? | 21:43 |
| vishyweb | As per my email I am going to do a rough triage and assign them to various teams | 21:43 |
| ttx | My other question was, do we have any significant thing that is already merged and that we should retrospectively add to the Essex list ? | 21:43 |
| vishyweb | then work with team leads to narrow down the milestones | 21:43 |
| vishyweb | there was the volume cleanup stuff | 21:44 |
| ttx | I admit having not followed day-to-day essex merges | 21:44 |
| *** kbader has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:44 | |
| vishyweb | i think it had a blueprint already though | 21:44 |
| ttx | yes. I can resurrect that one | 21:44 |
| *** Susanne-Balle has quit IRC | 21:44 | |
| ttx | #action ttx to dig the diablo blueprint grave and exhume the volume-cleanup blueprint and target it to essex1 | 21:44 |
| ttx | vishy: Anything else ? | 21:45 |
| zykes- | ttx: question, is there any DNSaaS going on or that's thought of ? | 21:46 |
| ttx | Let's move to open discussion before I answer that one | 21:46 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:46 | |
| ttx | zykes-: I guess it depends on what you mean by DNSaaS exactly. There is some effort on IP resources management | 21:47 |
| ttx | through the "Melange" project | 21:47 |
| ttx | if it's pure DNS, I don't think so | 21:47 |
| danwent | melange is mostly focused on ip address management, as related to DHCP for now | 21:47 |
| danwent | zykes: interested in chatting if this is something you'd like to work on. | 21:47 |
| ttx | I had one open discussion topic... with more meetings being set up, calling this meeting "the Team meeting" is a bit misleading | 21:48 |
| ttx | So I'm open to a rename... | 21:48 |
| ttx | For example we can call it the "General meeting" or something like it, to emphasize the fact that all teams can ultimately report progress here | 21:48 |
| ttx | Thoughts ? | 21:48 |
| zykes- | ttx: i was more thing of a project to leverage typically PowerDNS which supports MySQL | 21:48 |
| comstud | 'DNSaaS' | 21:48 |
| comstud | a service as a service. | 21:48 |
| zykes- | comstud: rs calls it i thing dnsaas ? | 21:49 |
| ttx | Also, do you find the meeting reminder (on the ML) helpful ? Or just another email you ignore ? | 21:49 |
| comstud | i think the name changed :) | 21:49 |
| comstud | but i could be wrong | 21:49 |
| ttx | I could send it out only when extra participation is needed. | 21:49 |
| comstud | either way, I'll still make fun of it | 21:49 |
| zns | #idea Rackspace uses a tool called UserVoice to capture customer feedback and requests (http://feedback.rackspacecloud.com/). At the Boston summit there was talk of finding a way to capture user (non-developer) feedback to help drive the roadmaps for projects. I'd like to propose we set up UserVoice for OpenStack to capture that. Let me know if this is the right meeting or if that should be a PPB topic. | 21:49 |
| *** devcamcar has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** xtoddx has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** vishy has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** thingee has left #openstack-meeting | 21:50 | |
| zykes- | danwent: sure i could be helping in creating something that could leverage either bind or powerdns in making authorative dns work | 21:50 |
| ttx | looks like we don't have a quorum of opiniated people left | 21:51 |
| danwent | zykes: sounds like fun. we can help with how to plug it into quantum networks | 21:51 |
| zykes- | or melange? | 21:51 |
| zns | ttx: last part of that question was for you; on whether this is the right meeting to discuss this idea. | 21:51 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:51 | |
| danwent | zykes: from a dataplane perspective, it would probably plug into quantum, from a network data perspective, might plug into melange. | 21:52 |
| ttx | zns: I don't know enough about that tool to have an opinion | 21:52 |
| ttx | looking | 21:52 |
| ttx | oh, brainstorm like | 21:52 |
| zns | Yes. Users use a limited number of votes to vote on the features they want most. | 21:53 |
| zns | And they can request new features or vote on features others have proposed. | 21:53 |
| jdg_ | I don't know anything about the format, but capturing user input is something I think is a great idea | 21:53 |
| ttx | zns: that sounds mostly useful when you don't really know what you want to work on | 21:53 |
| zykes- | danwent: is there any design docs or something for Quantum ? | 21:53 |
| zns | ttx: or when you don't know for sure what to work on first. | 21:54 |
| ttx | zns: unfortunately, in some projects, that would end up with grumpy users complaining that the feature with 800+ votes never got done | 21:54 |
| danwent | zykes: http://wiki.openstack.org/Quantum is the starting point | 21:54 |
| danwent | there are also docs on http://docs.openstack.org/incubation | 21:54 |
| ttx | zns: I definitely think it can help, at least for some projects | 21:54 |
| ttx | zns: you should talk to stefano about it | 21:55 |
| zykes- | ttx: whatever happened to spector | 21:55 |
| danwent | zykes: developer docs are non-existent… netstack mailing list can help with that. | 21:55 |
| zns | ttx: that would be a vlid complaint. 800+ votes means it is in demand. Why would a PTLignore that… | 21:55 |
| zns | OK. Will reach out to him. | 21:55 |
| ttx | zns: because a PTL has no real control over his developers ? | 21:55 |
| *** devcamcar has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| ttx | zns: swift and keystone might have some reasonable control over their devs, but nova... | 21:56 |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| ttx | zns: but I agree it could be a good resource for development teams to decide what's most needed | 21:56 |
| *** vishy has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:57 | |
| *** xtoddx has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:57 | |
| ttx | last words ? | 21:57 |
| zns | ttx: good point about PTL control. I sent Stefano and email. Will pick it up with him and/or the PPB. Thanks. | 21:57 |
| zns | Bye? :-) | 21:57 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 21:58 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Oct 18 21:57:59 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:58 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-21.02.html | 21:58 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-21.02.txt | 21:58 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-21.02.log.html | 21:58 |
| ttx | yay | 21:58 |
| *** zns has left #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 21:58 | |
| *** jk0 has left #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| *** agarwalla has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| *** edgarmagana has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:59 | |
| danwent | #startmeeting | 22:00 |
| ttx | danwent: floor is yours | 22:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Oct 18 22:00:19 2011 UTC. The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 22:00 |
| danwent | thanks ttx | 22:00 |
| *** RamD has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:00 | |
| *** Tushar has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** jdurgin has left #openstack-meeting | 22:00 | |
| edgarmagana | Hi Folks! | 22:00 |
| *** devcamcar has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** xtoddx has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** vishy has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| danwent | hello netstackers | 22:00 |
| carlp | Hi! | 22:00 |
| zykes- | hmmm, cloudserver having a bad day ? :p | 22:00 |
| RamD | Hello All | 22:00 |
| salv-orlando | hi | 22:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Hi | 22:01 |
| *** devcamcar has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| danwent | ok, agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings | 22:01 |
| danwent | any general discussion before we jump into project updates? | 22:01 |
| danwent | general announcements rather | 22:01 |
| danwent | (open discussion will be later) | 22:01 |
| *** sleepsonthefloor has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| danwent | is troy here? | 22:01 |
| *** vishy has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:02 | |
| danwent | ok, we'll start with quantum and switch to melange later if troy shows up. | 22:02 |
| danwent | #topic Quantum Status | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum Status" | 22:02 | |
| danwent | carlp: you're up first | 22:02 |
| troytoman | o/ | 22:02 |
| *** markmc has left #openstack-meeting | 22:02 | |
| *** xtoddx has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:02 | |
| danwent | ah troy.. | 22:02 |
| danwent | Ok, let's switch over and let troy give a quick update on melange | 22:03 |
| danwent | #topic melange status | 22:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "melange status" | 22:03 | |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has quit IRC | 22:03 | |
| troytoman | we're trying to get one last review on the initial merge prop into nova | 22:03 |
| troytoman | i think we are close | 22:03 |
| danwent | great | 22:03 |
| troytoman | started working on MAC address assignment this week | 22:03 |
| troytoman | will write up a blueprint for that tomorrow | 22:04 |
| danwent | #info basic melange that works with Quantum Manager is in last stages of nova review | 22:04 |
| *** jmeredit has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:04 | |
| troytoman | will add nova blueprints for /interfaces as well to tie in Quantum/multi-nic/melange | 22:04 |
| danwent | troy: definitely send an email to netstack with that BP | 22:04 |
| troytoman | will do | 22:05 |
| danwent | will be very help | 22:05 |
| danwent | ful | 22:05 |
| danwent | also, any BP for packaging melange (either with nova, or by itself?) | 22:05 |
| troytoman | yes. need to add that one as well. thx for the reminder | 22:05 |
| danwent | #action troy send email to netstack with with BP for "interfaces" API, and for melange packaging | 22:06 |
| danwent | Anything else? Any questions for melange? | 22:06 |
| *** Vijay_ has quit IRC | 22:06 | |
| bhall_ | one quick one | 22:06 |
| bhall_ | troytoman: will melange also track dhcp start address? | 22:06 |
| RamD | yes. curious to know more about "interfaces" api...will wait for Troys BP | 22:07 |
| bhall_ | we're still getting that from nova.. but most of the other pieces we get from melange | 22:07 |
| carlp | bhall_: The goal is to have Melange be the definitive source for all of that, yes | 22:07 |
| troytoman | i think it can do that via policies | 22:07 |
| danwent | RamD: basically this is how to use the nova API to define VM vNICs | 22:07 |
| bhall_ | ok, I'll have to look at policies | 22:07 |
| bhall_ | thanks! | 22:07 |
| troytoman | you assign a block to a network and add policies that will give you the right starting point | 22:08 |
| bhall_ | that makes sense | 22:08 |
| troytoman | carp is going to work on DHCP calling melange to get the auto-assigned IP | 22:08 |
| troytoman | ^carlp that is | 22:08 |
| uvirtbot | troytoman: Error: "carlp" is not a valid command. | 22:08 |
| bhall_ | ok | 22:08 |
| carlp | haha | 22:08 |
| danwent | I like "carp" better | 22:08 |
| carlp | Yep, I'm the DHCP dude for now | 22:09 |
| troytoman | i'll get carp to work on it too | 22:09 |
| troytoman | more help the better | 22:09 |
| danwent | :) | 22:09 |
| danwent | Ok, anything else for melange? | 22:09 |
| danwent | #info carlp will be working on DHCP service using melange data | 22:09 |
| danwent | #topic quantum status (for real this time) | 22:10 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "quantum status (for real this time)" | 22:10 | |
| danwent | carlp, update on jenkins with respect to functional/system test? | 22:10 |
| danwent | this is really going to have to be a team effort, but you're the point person :) | 22:10 |
| carlp | I have the hardware ready to go, robertn and I should have the networking done as speced by the notes from two weeks ago by the end of the week | 22:11 |
| bhall_ | #action bhall ask jeblair about a jenkins job for code coverage for quantum | 22:11 |
| danwent | cool. is there a BP tracking this work? | 22:11 |
| carlp | I'm also hoping to get some one-on-one with mtaylor this week to get Jenkins setup as well | 22:11 |
| carlp | I was going to get that straightened out tonight | 22:11 |
| danwent | Ok, great. | 22:11 |
| carlp | I know you gave me one, I just need to flush it out | 22:12 |
| danwent | #info all milestones for essex are now open. please start assigning BPs to them https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestones | 22:12 |
| danwent | carlp: great | 22:12 |
| *** vishyweb has quit IRC | 22:12 | |
| danwent | #info carlp is in the process of setting up quantum jenkins infrastructure | 22:13 |
| danwent | Ok, next up, topics from the nova-parity discussion we had at the summit. Goal is to make sure that users can use Quantum to achieve at least the same use cases as they could with traditional nova networking | 22:13 |
| danwent | I saw that bhall created some blueprints on this | 22:14 |
| danwent | sumit and salvatore as well | 22:14 |
| danwent | bhall, want to go first? | 22:14 |
| bhall_ | yup, they're created but still need more detail | 22:14 |
| bhall_ | sure | 22:14 |
| bhall_ | #info parity blueprints linked as dependencies here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/nova-network-parity | 22:15 |
| carlp | bhall_: You can assign the dhcp one to me | 22:15 |
| bhall_ | ok | 22:15 |
| zykes- | so basically networking will be removed from nova late ron or ? | 22:15 |
| bhall_ | we've got a review on gerrit for adding interim dhcp support | 22:16 |
| bhall_ | the work carl is doing will supercede that, though | 22:16 |
| danwent | carlp: most of the nova parity things can be thought of along two lines: a short-term solution that likely integrates with nova-network capabilities (e.g., DHCP with dnsmasq) and the better long term approach, which is extracting the functionality to be its own service | 22:16 |
| danwent | this will be the case for DHCP, L3, floating ips, etc. | 22:16 |
| salv-orlando | #agree | 22:16 |
| bhall_ | I think Sumit's team was going to take security groups and vpn | 22:17 |
| bhall_ | but we still need volunteers for the other pieces | 22:17 |
| danwent | zykes: basic networking capabilities will likely remain in nova for ease of use. | 22:17 |
| carlp | danwent: understood. I figured getting a simple service up and running now would be a good short term solution (so it can talk to any supported driver) and then add more features as time goes on | 22:17 |
| bhall_ | that's pretty much where we are at this point | 22:17 |
| danwent | zykes: also, nova today acts not just as compute, but also as an orchtestrator (e.g., creating gateways for tenants automatically) | 22:17 |
| carlp | bhall_: I was going to look at VPN as well, but if sumit wants to take lead that's fine with me | 22:17 |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 22:18 | |
| danwent | zykes: long-term that may change, with orchestration being pulled out into another service (e.g., donabe) | 22:18 |
| bhall_ | carlp: either way is OK with me.. maybe they can take security groups and give you vpn | 22:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bhall/carlp: we will look at it, but we can sure collaborate | 22:18 |
| bhall_ | lets talk about it on the mailing list | 22:18 |
| danwent | sumit/carlp: I looked at the vpn stuff, should be quite managable | 22:18 |
| carlp | sounds good | 22:18 |
| danwent | sumit, I believe your team was going to send out mail about the security groups + vpn stuff? | 22:19 |
| salv-orlando | danwent:: do you mean cloudpipe vpn porting or APIs for configuring VPN access? | 22:19 |
| danwent | salv: just cloudpipe porting, thanks for clarifying | 22:20 |
| RamD | danwent: yes, we will send soon...also thinking about the overlap between VPN and "Network extensions" that we discussed at boston | 22:20 |
| danwent | salv: short-term | 22:20 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: ok | 22:20 |
| salv-orlando | sumit, RamD: are you including also AWS-style security groups in your L3 service design? | 22:21 |
| danwent | RamD: yeah, I think that will be part of the "long-term" phase of remote connectivity. would be nice to have a uniform API that works for different types of remote access. | 22:21 |
| zykes- | is there any involvement from Vyatta for example for integrating their vm into the netstack ? | 22:21 |
| RamD | salv-orlando: yes. atleast thinking is along those lines | 22:21 |
| salv-orlando | RamD: ok, thanks | 22:21 |
| danwent | zykes: would be nice, but I haven't seen any openstack interest from them | 22:21 |
| danwent | RamD: aren't security groups more of a per VM VIF thing? | 22:22 |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| RamD | salv-orlando: but the priority is ensure current nova model works and supported short term | 22:22 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: that's my wau of looking at them | 22:22 |
| danwent | RamD: anyway, we can take this offline and have a broader discussion about what should/should not be in the L3 abstraction | 22:22 |
| salv-orlando | wau => way | 22:22 |
| danwent | again, defining an L3 API is not in the set of the first things we're tackling for essex | 22:22 |
| danwent | we have to get quantum as-is solid first | 22:23 |
| RamD | danwent: Yes. Agree we need a discussion on L3 service | 22:23 |
| danwent | Ok, so let's try to settle on next steps regarding nova-parity | 22:23 |
| RamD | danwent: completely agree on Quantum stability...but if we can acheive some of the nova parity work with immeidate L3 service API then it would be great for long term as well | 22:23 |
| danwent | #action: sumit + team is exploring short-term cloudpipe integration | 22:24 |
| salv-orlando | #idea circulate list of parity-related blueprints on ML. Volunteers will pick individual blueprints. | 22:24 |
| bhall_ | salv-orlando: good idea | 22:25 |
| edgarmagana | +1 salv | 22:25 |
| bhall_ | salv-orlando: I'll send mail with the bp links/etc | 22:25 |
| salv-orlando | bhall_: thanks | 22:25 |
| bhall_ | #action bhall cirtualte parity-related bps | 22:25 |
| danwent | RamD: my guess is that defining a canonical tenant-facing L3 API will be a big undertaking that will require signficant effort from lots of different members of the netstack team. | 22:26 |
| danwent | RamD: i have a feeling its scope is much beyond simply replacing the basic L3 gateway that is in nova today. | 22:26 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: my only concern is that for Quantum we came to the diablo summit with an half-cooked API proposal and finalized the API 3 days before rbp... with L3service, we don't have even a project name yet :) | 22:27 |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:27 | |
| RamD | danwent: Agree on the overall L3 Service APIs and we need lots of help. As we are doing the nova parity if we can do those "functionalities" only for now using L3 API "Set" then we can take up the "fuller" service later | 22:27 |
| jmeredit | Personally I'd rather see a continuation of the tight, concise building block approach. Get a minimal feature set working and build from that. | 22:27 |
| RamD | salv-orlando:I thought L3 service will inherit Quantum project name itself...atleast that's what I heard in the summit. | 22:28 |
| danwent | Salv: do I understand you correctly in saying that L3 will be significant effort, or are you saying something else? | 22:29 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: I'm exactly saying it will be a significant effort. | 22:29 |
| RamD | jmeredit: The L3service proposal more like what we have started in the Quantum L2 side....basic bldg blocks and keep expanding...for example start with L3 Subnet + Nat as in the nova parity list | 22:30 |
| danwent | RamD: yes, that is what we talked about. | 22:30 |
| salv-orlando | basically, I don't think it would be safe to bet on the L3 service for nova-parity in Essex nevertheless I do hope to see some form of L3 service with tenant facing APIs for the Essex release | 22:30 |
| somik | One approach would be to discuss and spend our energy on solidifying the core quantum nova-net parity effort and if there are more cycles left towards E3, we can discuss L3. | 22:30 |
| danwent | somik: I agree. I think we should focus on getting our core solid, hopefully early in the essex cycle, then we can start to push on L3 so we have a solid proposal in place for the next summit | 22:31 |
| RamD | salv-orlando: if we can have L3 service to meet some of the nova parity work..then as well we can spend energy on it rather than two step process | 22:31 |
| danwent | but I agree with Ram that we can start learning and thinking about L3 in the mean time | 22:31 |
| danwent | thinking about what the relationship between QuantumManager, and L3 service, and melange might look like | 22:32 |
| *** patelna has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| RamD | I think L3 "constructs" are huge missin block for any openstack used to use Quantum..which I think we all agree. | 22:32 |
| somik | RamD: The two stetp process is a risk tradeoff, this way we go slower but we can atleast deliver something solid and usable for the community in the short term | 22:32 |
| danwent | I just want to make sure developers are rewarded for focusing on making quantum production quality. I don't want anyone feeling left out of the L3 discussions because they spent time building functionality tests, working on jenkins, etc. | 22:33 |
| *** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:33 | |
| danwent | RamD: definitely agree. L3 is THE next big part of the puzzle in my mind. | 22:33 |
| danwent | I just want to make sure we wrap up the L2 part of the puzzle first, as there are people that actually want to put Quantum in project with L2-only. | 22:34 |
| danwent | project -> production | 22:34 |
| *** jamesurquhart has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| RamD | danwent: Having the focus on making Quantum prodcution ready is absoulte must and ahving L3 basic construcsts will only help in that direction...I completely agree on complete participation on this | 22:34 |
| salv-orlando | I'm a bit puzzled here. On one side I see danwent has a good point, but on the other side we should not stop progress on L3 service if there are people willing to start work on it. | 22:34 |
| danwent | salv: I agree. I'd rather see everyone pitch in to make things solid, then everyone move on to focus on L3 | 22:35 |
| danwent | that way no one feels left out by working on the "boring" but necessary stuff, while others do the "fun" stuff like L3 :) | 22:36 |
| RamD | the wiki posting from Sumit today shows one such case in which the L3 service how it can potentially help on the nova-parity side as well .. | 22:36 |
| somik | salv-orlando: if we start on L3 before solidying L2, we are compromising resources that could get us to stable L2 faster, and gotten Quantum into production. | 22:36 |
| danwent | RamD: agreed… L3 service would be a (large) super-set of what is needed by nova | 22:36 |
| salv-orlando | somik: agree | 22:37 |
| danwent | that in fact is my concern, as I think it will be a much larger effort than just trying to get the equivalent of nova. | 22:37 |
| RamD | danwent: I think the proposal is already we all agree on fixing the L3 using nova parity work stream...the point is if we can achieve that and provide enough hooks to future by starting of with basic L3 service today I thing its great | 22:37 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: I estimate at least the same effort we put into Quantum | 22:37 |
| danwent | salv: can you clarify? I think I lost context :) | 22:37 |
| danwent | ah, amount of work? | 22:38 |
| RamD | That way all the developers trying/signing up for the parity work example NAT can readily particiapte on the basic L3 service as well | 22:38 |
| salv-orlando | yeah | 22:38 |
| salv-orlando | I don't want to be boring, but we are almost 40 mins into the meeting and nowhere near the middle of the agenda :) | 22:38 |
| RamD | shall I propose to set up a webex for L3 discussions? | 22:38 |
| danwent | RamD: actually, parity can be achieved quite simply by leveraging all of the L3 work already done by the nova-network service and just plugging it into a L2 quantum network. Brad sent an example of this out. | 22:38 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 22:39 | |
| danwent | salv: agreed, but I think this is a pretty key point for the community :) | 22:39 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: sure. | 22:39 |
| danwent | salv: apologies that this has to happy late at night for you :) | 22:39 |
| bhall_ | also, now that dhcp is into quantummanager I think we have enough hooks to make leveraging the other features easier | 22:40 |
| RamD | danwent: I see for DHCP..Apologies if there is something on subnet and other things then atleast its worth look at the flow model | 22:40 |
| danwent | yeah, a lot of the work will be quantummanager work that will just apply across any plugin that implements vif-plugging on the nova network node. | 22:41 |
| RamD | How about for 1 hour conf call tomorrow on nova parity and L3 discussions? | 22:41 |
| danwent | RamD: I think it would be good to give folks a better understanding of the short-term vs. long-term plan with respect to all nova-network capabilties. | 22:41 |
| danwent | Perhaps brad could provide more info on how his proposal for short-term parity works… I think there is still a lot of confusion around this. | 22:42 |
| bhall_ | here or on the mailing list? maybe clearer if I type it up and send mail | 22:43 |
| danwent | if things are unclear after brad sends an email, we can try a webex or a face-to-face meeting + webex | 22:43 |
| carlp | bhall_: I think that's a great idea | 22:43 |
| bhall_ | k | 22:43 |
| cdub | would be nice to see the mapping of current nova L3 to quantum in the least | 22:43 |
| salv-orlando | #agree | 22:43 |
| danwent | (sorry, to remote folks, but whiteboard is probably a huge win there) | 22:43 |
| danwent | though I guess webex has virtual whiteboard, right? | 22:43 |
| RamD | danwent: yes my confusion is also there...nothing like we jump on to a conf call or hit whiteboard, probably this week itself. | 22:43 |
| *** HowardRoark has quit IRC | 22:43 | |
| RamD | danwent: yes webex has whiteboard :-) | 22:44 |
| danwent | #action brad sent detailed email on short-term nova-network integration | 22:44 |
| bhall_ | #action bhall send mail regarding short-term parity | 22:44 |
| danwent | :) | 22:44 |
| danwent | now you have to do it twice brad | 22:44 |
| danwent | if needed, we can follow-up with a webex | 22:44 |
| bhall_ | sounds good | 22:44 |
| danwent | is everyone ok with that plan? | 22:44 |
| carlp | yes | 22:45 |
| salv-orlando | yes | 22:45 |
| edgarmagana | sounds good! | 22:45 |
| jmeredit | yes | 22:45 |
| zykes- | how can i subscribe to the team mails ? | 22:45 |
| danwent | netstack list | 22:45 |
| somik | you can join the netstack team to and choose subscribe to mailing list | 22:45 |
| zykes- | and that is where ? :) | 22:45 |
| danwent | looking it up.... | 22:45 |
| somik | sykes: on launchpad | 22:45 |
| zykes- | quantum core developers or ? | 22:45 |
| danwent | https://launchpad.net/~netstack | 22:46 |
| salv-orlando | or https://launchpad.net/~<your-name-here>/+editemails | 22:46 |
| bhall_ | wow, 129 people on the list now.. guess its growing :) | 22:46 |
| danwent | Ok, in deference to salv, let's keep moving | 22:46 |
| danwent | Salv, any updates you need to provide on API work? | 22:46 |
| salv-orlando | Just a progress update | 22:47 |
| salv-orlando | I'm in the middle of a little bit of wsgi framework refactoring | 22:47 |
| salv-orlando | for splitting route paths for v1.0 and v1.1, even though the only thing that will change is the 'operational status' in responses | 22:48 |
| danwent | ok, nice. that will payoff in the future as well i'm sure | 22:48 |
| zykes- | hmm | 22:48 |
| salv-orlando | also, I'm removing unused bits of code (see code coverage emails), and improving serialization/deserialization | 22:48 |
| salv-orlando | reusing code from nova | 22:48 |
| zykes- | just as a general question there, why isn't there an overall "version handling api" middleware that goes across all projects ? | 22:49 |
| salv-orlando | Said that, I hope we will be able to can all this code before Essex, and use openstack-commons | 22:49 |
| salv-orlando | zykes-: the answer would be openstack-commons | 22:49 |
| danwent | salv: do we have a detailed spec yet on exactly how operation status will work? i.e., is the field a string, a boolean "up" vs. "down", etc? | 22:49 |
| salv-orlando | danwent: working on that. Will publish wiki page by end of the week. My opinion is to go for an enum | 22:50 |
| danwent | ok, great. looking forward to reading it. | 22:50 |
| salv-orlando | #action Salvatore to publish detailed spec for operational status by end of the week | 22:50 |
| danwent | thx, anything else on API salv? | 22:51 |
| salv-orlando | I have targeted blueprints and bugs for API work to Essex milestones. that's all. | 22:51 |
| danwent | great, thx. | 22:51 |
| danwent | somik, mark, are you two around to talk about the user flow + dashboard work? | 22:51 |
| somik | danwent: I have high level discussions from summit summarized | 22:52 |
| danwent | I don't see mark in the room… anyone from the cisco dashboard team here? | 22:52 |
| somik | I beleive Arvind was working on some ideas as well | 22:52 |
| danwent | ok, would be great to see blueprints sent to the list, even if they are rough. | 22:53 |
| somik | although unsure if Arvind is back in the country yet. | 22:53 |
| somik | After I document all summit discussions, I'll send it out everybody. | 22:53 |
| danwent | ok, sounds good. | 22:53 |
| danwent | #action somik send out document describing summit user flow | 22:53 |
| danwent | Brad, what is the status of the issues with the data extensions? | 22:54 |
| bhall_ | danwent: create port/net is proposed for merge and reviewed | 22:54 |
| bhall_ | (and approved I think) | 22:54 |
| danwent | you had mentioned a need to change the plugin python API though? | 22:54 |
| bhall_ | update port/net .. I just sent that out today | 22:54 |
| bhall_ | ah, yeah.. well, I sent mail to the list about this but I want to get rid of rename_net and change_port_state | 22:55 |
| bhall_ | and make htem just update_network and update_port | 22:55 |
| bhall_ | which changes the cli, plugins, everything | 22:55 |
| danwent | Ok, probably warrants more discussion on list, but I wanted to make sure it was at least raised in the meeting. | 22:55 |
| bhall_ | (I guess we don't have to get rid of rename_net/set_port_state .. they could just make to update_network, update_port) | 22:55 |
| bhall_ | yeah, I'm hoping for some ML feedback on that one | 22:56 |
| danwent | Ok, thx. | 22:56 |
| danwent | #action somik will check with salvatore about re-enabling keystone middleware | 22:56 |
| danwent | Ok, aything else on quantum? | 22:57 |
| bhall_ | oh, thanks for the reviews to everyone who reviewed the stuf I sent out the other day | 22:57 |
| danwent | #topic open discussion | 22:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 22:57 | |
| danwent | apologies to salvatore for keeping him up so late.... | 22:57 |
| danwent | anything else? | 22:57 |
| danwent | Ok, thanks folks | 22:58 |
| danwent | #endmeeting | 22:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 22:58 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Oct 18 22:58:22 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:58 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-22.00.html | 22:58 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-22.00.txt | 22:58 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-10-18-22.00.log.html | 22:58 |
| RamD | bye | 22:58 |
| danwent | have a good night all | 22:58 |
| carlp | thanks all! | 22:58 |
| salv-orlando | Bye! | 22:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | byw | 22:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bye | 22:58 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 22:58 | |
| *** RamD has quit IRC | 22:58 | |
| *** agarwalla has quit IRC | 22:59 | |
| cdub | cya | 22:59 |
| *** jmeredit has left #openstack-meeting | 22:59 | |
| *** cdub has left #openstack-meeting | 22:59 | |
| somik | have a good one all! | 22:59 |
| zykes- | ;) | 22:59 |
| *** edgarmagana has quit IRC | 23:02 | |
| *** robertn has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| *** robertn has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:09 | |
| *** somik has quit IRC | 23:10 | |
| *** kbader has quit IRC | 23:11 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** wwkeyboard has left #openstack-meeting | 23:22 | |
| *** bcwaldon has quit IRC | 23:22 | |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 23:29 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 23:36 | |
| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:40 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 23:40 | |
| *** danwent_ is now known as danwent | 23:40 | |
| *** HowardRoark has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:40 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 23:41 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:44 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 23:45 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:45 | |
| *** jdg_ has quit IRC | 23:46 | |
| *** danwent has left #openstack-meeting | 23:55 | |
| *** jamesurquhart has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:55 | |
| *** jamesurquhart has left #openstack-meeting | 23:55 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 23:57 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 23:57 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:58 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!