| _0x44 | Is anyone else here for the nova-db meeting? | 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| jaypipes | _0x44: no, but we can talk DB if you want :) | 00:00 |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:01 | |
| _0x44 | jaypipes: My proposal as the nova-db lieutenant is to replace the nova sqlalchemy stuff with devnullalchemy | 00:01 |
| _0x44 | jaypipes: It's webscale | 00:01 |
| jaypipes | _0x44: MongoDb is web scale. | 00:02 |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 00:03 | |
| _0x44 | jaypipes: Is it high performance? | 00:03 |
| jaypipes | _0x44: 10 trillion TPS. | 00:03 |
| _0x44 | jaypipes: I think I can get that on /dev/null | 00:03 |
| jaypipes | :) | 00:03 |
| _0x44 | I think since I'm the only one here, I get to have lazy consensus with myself right? | 00:04 |
| dragondm | hello? | 00:05 |
| _0x44 | dragondm: The meeting is already over. jaypipes and I decided the -db team is moving nova to mongodb and /dev/null | 00:06 |
| dragondm | so we never did really agree on that DB team meeting time.... Or perhaps DST was the confusing factor | 00:06 |
| _0x44 | Yeah, I forgot about DST ending when I sent the email | 00:07 |
| dragondm | Howabout flatfiles and a set of perl scripts :-> | 00:07 |
| _0x44 | It's 1600 in California though, so if a couple more people show up... | 00:08 |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:09 | |
| *** sleepsontheflo-1 has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| * dragondm listens to crickets chirp. | 00:14 | |
| _0x44 | Okay, let's reschedule this. I'll send an email out on the list. Does Thursday work for you? | 00:16 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 00:17 | |
| dragondm | thursday sounds good. | 00:17 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:18 | |
| _0x44 | dragondm: Does 1600 PST work for you? | 00:18 |
| dragondm | ya. 6pm here. It's quiet & no other meetings. sounds good to me. | 00:19 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 00:22 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 00:24 | |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:28 | |
| *** cmagina has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:33 | |
| *** jakedahn has quit IRC | 00:39 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 00:47 | |
| *** dragondm has quit IRC | 00:48 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:50 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 01:00 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:00 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 01:05 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:06 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:14 | |
| *** jakedahn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:16 | |
| *** jakedahn has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** jakedahn_ is now known as jakedahn | 01:19 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 01:26 | |
| *** jdurgin has quit IRC | 01:32 | |
| *** jakedahn has quit IRC | 01:35 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 01:54 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 01:56 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:56 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 02:00 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:25 | |
| *** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:25 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 02:37 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:00 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:04 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 03:13 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:14 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:15 | |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:17 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 03:18 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 03:28 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:37 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 03:39 | |
| *** robertn_ has quit IRC | 03:48 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 03:49 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 04:21 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:41 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:47 | |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 05:02 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:03 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 05:08 | |
| *** mmetheny has quit IRC | 05:26 | |
| *** cdub has quit IRC | 05:53 | |
| *** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:55 | |
| *** nati2_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:02 | |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 06:03 | |
| *** jkoelker has quit IRC | 06:05 | |
| *** jkoelker_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:05 | |
| *** nati2_ has quit IRC | 07:16 | |
| *** vishy has quit IRC | 08:08 | |
| *** vishy has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:09 | |
| *** yehudasa has quit IRC | 08:18 | |
| *** yehudasa has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:18 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 08:24 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:41 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 08:45 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:51 | |
| *** mmetheny has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:38 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 11:50 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:58 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:05 | |
| *** cmagina_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:06 | |
| *** cmagina has quit IRC | 13:09 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:10 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 13:59 | |
| *** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:11 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 14:12 | |
| *** cmagina has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:13 | |
| *** cmagina_ has quit IRC | 14:39 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 14:46 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:47 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:51 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 14:59 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 15:03 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:07 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:07 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:11 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 15:20 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:20 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 15:21 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 15:23 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 15:36 | |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 15:41 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:51 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 15:52 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:52 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:56 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:00 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 16:00 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:00 | |
| *** killswitchguy__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:03 | |
| *** killswitchguy__ has quit IRC | 16:06 | |
| *** killswitchguy__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:07 | |
| *** killswitchguy__ has left #openstack-meeting | 16:08 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 16:17 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:17 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 16:32 | |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:32 | |
| ttx | For the UTC-challenged people: | 16:34 |
| ttx | nova-orchestration meeting starting in 30min | 16:34 |
| ttx | Keystone team meeting in 90min | 16:35 |
| ttx | Then on the next hours: CI team meeting, PPB, General team meeting, NetStack. | 16:35 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:36 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:36 | |
| *** jsavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:38 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 16:40 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 16:41 | |
| *** joesavak has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| *** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:45 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:48 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 16:55 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| *** mikeyp has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| sandywalsh | thanks ttx :) | 16:58 |
| *** gary_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| * sandywalsh counted himself amongst the UTC challenged | 16:58 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| *** gary_ is now known as Guest66277 | 16:59 | |
| *** Guest66277 has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| sandywalsh | #startmeeting | 17:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 8 17:00:35 2011 UTC. The chair is sandywalsh. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 17:00 |
| sandywalsh | Who is here for orchestration meeting? | 17:00 |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| sandywalsh | o/ | 17:01 |
| maoy | me | 17:01 |
| *** garyk has left #openstack-meeting | 17:01 | |
| maoy | hi sandy | 17:01 |
| sandywalsh | hey! ... may be a short meeting | 17:01 |
| sandywalsh | #topic pacemaker and zookeeper | 17:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "pacemaker and zookeeper" | 17:01 | |
| maoy | is Andrew Beekoff here? | 17:02 |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:02 | |
| sandywalsh | I don't believe so | 17:02 |
| maoy | I'm not very familiar with pacemaker. | 17:02 |
| sandywalsh | he's in charge of Pacemaker, which is a core part of red hats clustering strategy | 17:02 |
| sandywalsh | nor am I, it seems very capable | 17:03 |
| *** f-yang1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:03 | |
| sandywalsh | the biggest issue I see is the conflict with the nova architecture | 17:03 |
| mikeyp | I havent had a chance to review pacemaker at all, got through maoy's ppt, but not the full Tropic paper | 17:03 |
| sandywalsh | (workers vs. master-slave) | 17:03 |
| sandywalsh | mikeyp, the tropic paper is the log from last meeting | 17:04 |
| mikeyp | just need to read it :-) | 17:04 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, thanks again for the discussion on the row-locking issues | 17:04 |
| sandywalsh | for me the next step is to mess with zookeeper (and the python bindings) to see what we can make it do | 17:04 |
| maoy | the tropic paper requires a fairly big change to the nova architecture. so I made some changes in the ppt to simplify things | 17:04 |
| *** garyk_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:05 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 17:05 | |
| maoy | you are welcome | 17:05 |
| sandywalsh | I think we're in general agreement on the approach. I think your strategy fits in well with my proposal | 17:05 |
| maoy | cool. | 17:05 |
| sandywalsh | mikeyp, the workflow summary was great | 17:05 |
| sandywalsh | I haven't heard of pyutillib.workflow ... what's the recent status of it? | 17:06 |
| sandywalsh | is it maintained actively? | 17:06 |
| maoy | the zk python binding works fine for me although I never tried with eventlet | 17:06 |
| sandywalsh | (spiff workflow isn't actively maintained, and the author suggested we fork) | 17:06 |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 17:06 | |
| mikeyp | I looks like it's actively maintained - last checkin was a couple of weeks ago. | 17:06 |
| sandywalsh | nice | 17:06 |
| sandywalsh | does it make any assumptions about persistence layer or require a web interface, etc? Or is it just an engine? | 17:07 |
| dragondm | Yah, I do wonder abt the ZK interface + eventlet | 17:07 |
| mikeyp | I don't know yet - I'm going to kich the tires today | 17:08 |
| dragondm | It uses threading, + a C module | 17:08 |
| mikeyp | It does seem to be primarily an engine, thogu | 17:08 |
| sandywalsh | dragondm, good point | 17:08 |
| sandywalsh | mikeyp, can we put you down to give us a report on it? | 17:08 |
| mikeyp | sure, no problem. | 17:09 |
| sandywalsh | #action mikeyp to give us a report on pyutillib.workflow (dependencies ideally) | 17:09 |
| maoy | there is a non-threading version, at least for the C API. Not sure if there is a python binding as well. | 17:09 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, which did you use previously? | 17:10 |
| sandywalsh | dragondm, did you look at zookeeper before? | 17:10 |
| maoy | I used the multithread python binding | 17:10 |
| dragondm | I've looked at it briefly, I haven't played w/ it much | 17:10 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, but you weren't doing your project against nova, correct? | 17:10 |
| maoy | correct | 17:10 |
| maoy | that's for tropic | 17:11 |
| maoy | which doesn't use evently | 17:11 |
| maoy | eventlet | 17:11 |
| sandywalsh | andrew mentioned the licensing of the python binding for pacemaker wouldn't be an issue, I do have a question for him on the engine portion. | 17:11 |
| sandywalsh | or if he makes his money from professional services of the product | 17:12 |
| maoy | i c. | 17:12 |
| dragondm | the main concern would be something blocking in a C module that would prevent eventlet from taskswitching | 17:12 |
| sandywalsh | correct | 17:12 |
| sandywalsh | so, as an action item, maoy, can we put you down to investigate zookeeper/eventlet integration? | 17:13 |
| dragondm | BTW: sandywalsh: my workorder concept was posted here: https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg03767.html | 17:13 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:13 | |
| maoy | i'll take a look at it | 17:13 |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:13 | |
| sandywalsh | #link https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg03767.html dragondm's proposal | 17:13 |
| sandywalsh | thanks | 17:13 |
| dragondm | I can expand that out if needed. | 17:14 |
| sandywalsh | #action maoy to investigate zookeeper/eventlet integration. Is the threading model with the C library going to be an issue? | 17:14 |
| maoy | so the concept of tasks and the analogy to process in OS makes sense? | 17:14 |
| garyk_ | Is it possible to run redundant Zookeepers? | 17:14 |
| sandywalsh | dragondm, we'll give it a re-read and give you some feedback | 17:14 |
| maoy | for zookeeper, you can run 2f+1 nodes to tolerate f node failures | 17:15 |
| sandywalsh | #action give dragondm feedback on his proposal | 17:15 |
| mikeyp | The workorder proposal seems really compatible with orchestration. | 17:15 |
| dragondm | sandywalsh: and s/scheduler/orchestrator/ in that :> | 17:16 |
| mikeyp | A question re:zookeeper - are there any concerns about adding a dependency on Zookeeper ? | 17:16 |
| sandywalsh | dragondm, right ... I still think the two are synonymous | 17:16 |
| dragondm | ya, pretty much | 17:17 |
| sandywalsh | mikeyp, I thought about that ... I sort of view it the same as rabbit, mysql or apache | 17:17 |
| sandywalsh | so long as the license works. | 17:17 |
| maoy | have you guys thought about the retry logic? | 17:17 |
| sandywalsh | however, there are replacements for apache, rabbit and mysql ... no so with zookeeper | 17:17 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, not in depth yet ... until the workflow engine is in place | 17:18 |
| *** sleepsontheflo-1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:18 | |
| sandywalsh | maoy did you think of it being handled in a different manner than the workflow? | 17:19 |
| mikeyp | retry and rollback might become a next-release item - I've been thinking a little about it. | 17:19 |
| *** n0ano has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:19 | |
| *** jog0 has left #openstack-meeting | 17:19 | |
| maoy | it's just my opinion, but workflow is mostly studied in computer programming to capture and develop human-to-machine interaction. | 17:19 |
| maoy | there is not much human interaction in nova. everything is a computer program.. | 17:20 |
| sandywalsh | when I say workflow I mean petri-net | 17:20 |
| sandywalsh | (state machine) | 17:20 |
| sandywalsh | sorry | 17:20 |
| maoy | i like petri-net at the design phase | 17:20 |
| sandywalsh | I'd like to see what the python code is going to look like to model these petri-nets | 17:21 |
| dragondm | ya' | 17:21 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, do you see something more formal for later stage? | 17:21 |
| mikeyp | Maoy, thats true for a lot of cases. There's also a whole world of production scheduling, ETL, and APP integration with little or no human interaction. | 17:21 |
| maoy | when implemented, it's still going to be python programs with greenthreads and rpc calls, right? | 17:21 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, yes | 17:21 |
| mikeyp | I was planning on trying to implement a couple of workflows in pyutilab.workflow, to see what they look like. | 17:22 |
| sandywalsh | mikeyp, that would be a big help | 17:22 |
| garyk_ | are the calls blocking? that is, can a number of events take place at once? | 17:22 |
| maoy | sandy, nothing more formal.. | 17:22 |
| sandywalsh | #task examples of what the petri-net models would look like in python | 17:22 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 17:22 | |
| maoy | i'm trying to figure out the exact benefit after we have the petri-net | 17:23 |
| sandywalsh | garyk_, good question. | 17:23 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:23 | |
| sandywalsh | maoy, of petri-net over single-state state machine? | 17:23 |
| maoy | no. | 17:24 |
| mikeyp | I think the benefit of a workflow / petri-net is that there can be many pre-defined workflows, so the service could expand to uses we haven't yet considered. | 17:24 |
| sandywalsh | garyk_, there will likely be some blocking in the orchestation layer, but it should be on a per-job basis ... not per-service | 17:24 |
| maoy | petri-net can model concurrent stuff. that i buy. | 17:24 |
| maoy | but i'm wondering after we have the models, how to take advantages of it | 17:24 |
| garyk_ | ok | 17:25 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, well, as you mentioned before, I think like a defining a single "retry" operation would be useful | 17:25 |
| sandywalsh | and reusing that model in various places | 17:25 |
| sandywalsh | (for example) | 17:25 |
| mikeyp | workflows can also be nested - pretty powerful way of combining primitives for reuse. | 17:26 |
| sandywalsh | yes | 17:26 |
| maoy | how does that compare to a decorator @retry(max=3) then automatically catch exceptions and retry? | 17:26 |
| sandywalsh | Perhaps even the whole "provision" an instance process would be comprised of sub workflows (such as load-image, move image, change networking, etc) | 17:27 |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:27 | |
| garyk_ | silly question - in the event that the host running the orchestration reboots, is there a way in which the orchestration can be resumed from the same point | 17:27 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, what happens if that service dies? | 17:27 |
| sandywalsh | maoy, the decorator has no persistence | 17:27 |
| *** beekhof has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:27 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 17:27 | |
| sandywalsh | but I see your point ... there may be places where code-level retries are better than workflow-modeled retries | 17:27 |
| sandywalsh | hey andrew! | 17:28 |
| beekhof | hey! | 17:28 |
| beekhof | jetlagged, so i happened to be awake :) | 17:28 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, you may want to read the scrollback | 17:28 |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:28 | |
| beekhof | could someone paste it somewhere? i only just got my internet connection back | 17:28 |
| maoy | I'm thinking that if a compute node dies, then the scheduler should receive a timeoutException if engineered correctly and retry there. | 17:28 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, there'll be a log when we stop the meeting | 17:29 |
| beekhof | k | 17:29 |
| maoy | hi beekhof! | 17:29 |
| beekhof | i read last weeks too | 17:29 |
| beekhof | hi maoy :) | 17:29 |
| mikeyp | garyk, I think thats one reason to consider ZooKeeper - a way of storing state reliably. | 17:29 |
| * heckj wonders which meeting he walked into | 17:29 | |
| sandywalsh | heckj, orchestration | 17:29 |
| dragondm | garyk_: yah, that was the reason I thought of the workorder idea. THat way the orchestration service is basically stateless. Doesn't matterif one falls over. | 17:30 |
| sandywalsh | #topic Orchestration - packemaker & zookeeper | 17:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Orchestration - packemaker & zookeeper" | 17:30 | |
| heckj | sandywalsh: cool, thank you | 17:30 |
| garyk_ | ok - sounds good. does the zookeeper keep some kind of configuration id to track the states? | 17:30 |
| sandywalsh | dragondm, does your proposal use zookeeper? | 17:30 |
| dragondm | I didn't specify storage. | 17:31 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:31 | |
| sandywalsh | k | 17:31 |
| sandywalsh | well, I think we have a good list of to-do's for this week | 17:31 |
| dragondm | The design I had could be persisted with an db | 17:31 |
| beekhof | for those that came in late, what type of state are we specifically talking about? | 17:31 |
| maoy | dragondm, i'll read your link after the meeting | 17:31 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, state machine | 17:31 |
| heckj | if you have many "clients" wanting to all agree on state, zookeeper is an excellent way of doing it. | 17:32 |
| maoy | zookeeper is used for 3 reasons: persistent storage, lock management, and leader election | 17:32 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, and that could contain things like "VM state" | 17:32 |
| heckj | a bit of extra complexity, but does a lot of the hard work of distributed locks to enable that sort of thing | 17:32 |
| maoy | it could be for the queue as well but since we're using rabbit, no need for zk at the moment | 17:32 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, or rollback status, etc | 17:32 |
| garyk_ | will it require support for authentication? | 17:33 |
| sandywalsh | yes, the trickiest thing about zk is what is it's core competency | 17:33 |
| beekhof | so would this be analogous to writing "guest X is starting" to a db? | 17:33 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, I think so, yes | 17:34 |
| maoy | beekhof, yes for storage purpose. | 17:34 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, the concern I brought up on the ML was zk vs. row-level locking | 17:34 |
| sandywalsh | and it sort of sounds like zk is an abstraction over those differences | 17:34 |
| sandywalsh | likely doing it's own row-level locking under the hook | 17:35 |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| *** cmagina has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| beekhof | so a random scheduler would grab guestX off the queue, say "i got this", and then go about the steps involved in start it up, updating the state as it went? | 17:35 |
| sandywalsh | ok ... I'd like to push the topic ahead for now | 17:35 |
| sandywalsh | sorry, go ahead beekhof ... | 17:36 |
| maoy | zookeeper uses a quorum protocol to reach consensus. | 17:36 |
| maoy | :) | 17:36 |
| *** mtaylor has quit IRC | 17:36 | |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, it would do one step in the process, when the event came it that the step finished another worker could handle the next step. | 17:36 |
| *** mtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:36 | |
| *** mtaylor has quit IRC | 17:36 | |
| *** mtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:36 | |
| beekhof | ok, i can see the advantage there | 17:36 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, I think that's the fundamental difference between PM and ZK ... master/slave vs. workers | 17:37 |
| beekhof | yep | 17:37 |
| sandywalsh | (well, and your resource manager) | 17:37 |
| maoy | it can also grab a lock on the instance so that no one else is touching the VM | 17:37 |
| sandywalsh | (which zk doesn't do) | 17:38 |
| sandywalsh | let's continue this one on the ML | 17:38 |
| beekhof | sure | 17:38 |
| sandywalsh | #topic Orchestration - Meeting time | 17:38 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Orchestration - Meeting time" | 17:38 | |
| sandywalsh | what UTC are most of you in? | 17:38 |
| sandywalsh | -4 | 17:38 |
| beekhof | ah, this one's my fault :) | 17:38 |
| maoy | -5 | 17:39 |
| sandywalsh | well, also, is Tuesday best? | 17:39 |
| beekhof | right now, I'm +10 | 17:39 |
| beekhof | http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/ | 17:39 |
| beekhof | really handy for this sort of thing | 17:39 |
| mikeyp | UTC -8 / Pacific | 17:39 |
| sandywalsh | beekhof, heh, both sides | 17:40 |
| sandywalsh | I mean beekhof & mikeyp | 17:40 |
| heckj | same as mikeyp | 17:40 |
| garyk_ | i am sorry i need to go and feed the animal in my zoo. thanks for the great ideas. | 17:40 |
| mikeyp | round the clock, follow the sun development :-) | 17:40 |
| maoy | bye garyk | 17:40 |
| sandywalsh | garyk_, thanks for the input | 17:40 |
| *** garyk_ has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| sandywalsh | k, so unless there are any objections ... keep meeting time the same? | 17:41 |
| mikeyp | works for me | 17:41 |
| beekhof | actually | 17:41 |
| beekhof | did we get any europeans? | 17:42 |
| sandywalsh | not active ... perhaps lurkers | 17:42 |
| beekhof | what about 2:15 from now? | 17:43 |
| beekhof | is that too late for anyone? | 17:43 |
| beekhof | 2:15:00 | 17:43 |
| sandywalsh | on tues it will be a conflict with other openstack teams | 17:43 |
| sandywalsh | we'd have to move days | 17:43 |
| beekhof | because thats 7am, which is easily doable | 17:43 |
| beekhof | 7am here i mean | 17:44 |
| * sandywalsh tries to figure out what that would be for him | 17:44 | |
| beekhof | 4am is harder and i'm less coherent | 17:44 |
| sandywalsh | :) | 17:44 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| beekhof | for PDT it should be about lunch time | 17:44 |
| maoy | 7pm Eastern? | 17:44 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:45 | |
| beekhof | is boston eastern? | 17:45 |
| sandywalsh | yup | 17:45 |
| maoy | yes | 17:45 |
| *** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:46 | |
| beekhof | that website is claiming my 7am is your 3pm | 17:46 |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:46 | |
| sandywalsh | this room is booked until 2300 UTC on tues | 17:46 |
| beekhof | different day? i'd really like to join on a regular basis | 17:47 |
| sandywalsh | See an opening? http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | 17:47 |
| sandywalsh | it would have to be Thurs for me | 17:48 |
| beekhof | thurs is fine by me | 17:48 |
| beekhof | and there appears to be only one other meeting on that day | 17:49 |
| mikeyp | thurs works for me. | 17:49 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 17:49 | |
| dragondm | thursday, when? | 17:49 |
| maoy | Thursday 3pm EST, 20 UTC? | 17:49 |
| beekhof | that would be ideal for me | 17:49 |
| maoy | 20:00 UTC | 17:49 |
| sandywalsh | done | 17:50 |
| beekhof | sweet :) | 17:50 |
| maoy | cool | 17:50 |
| sandywalsh | #action meeting moved to Thursdays 3pm EST, 2000 UTC | 17:50 |
| maoy | beekhof, what's the best intro reading for pacemaker? | 17:50 |
| sandywalsh | thanks guys ... keep active on the ML! | 17:50 |
| heckj | there's a detailed PDF called "pacemaker explained" which does a good job. | 17:50 |
| heckj | warning: very complex critter... | 17:50 |
| beekhof | maoy: that one and "clusters from scratch" | 17:51 |
| beekhof | heckj: yeah, pretty dry | 17:51 |
| heckj | beekhof: yeah, but the best detail short of "playing with it" incessantly | 17:51 |
| beekhof | maoy: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc <-- look for the 1.1 version | 17:51 |
| maoy | ok | 17:52 |
| sandywalsh | anything quick before we end? | 17:52 |
| beekhof | nod. its job is to detail all the options and possibilities, but doesnt give the first clue how to put it together sanely :) | 17:52 |
| beekhof | i'll read the notes | 17:52 |
| sandywalsh | #endmeeting | 17:52 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 17:52 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 8 17:52:43 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 17:52 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-17.00.html | 17:52 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-17.00.txt | 17:52 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-17.00.log.html | 17:52 |
| beekhof | next meeting is next thurs, not tomorrow right? | 17:53 |
| *** n0ano has left #openstack-meeting | 17:53 | |
| sandywalsh | correct | 17:53 |
| beekhof | gotcha | 17:53 |
| beekhof | cya then | 17:53 |
| maoy | later guys | 17:53 |
| mikeyp | bye | 17:53 |
| *** maoy has left #openstack-meeting | 17:53 | |
| sandywalsh | cheers guys | 17:54 |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 18:09 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:10 | |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 18:15 | |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:15 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:16 | |
| *** shang_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:30 | |
| *** f-yang1 has left #openstack-meeting | 18:39 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** troytoman has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** pvo has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** notmyname has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** chmouel has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:45 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** chmouel has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** troytoman has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** pvo has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** notmyname has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| *** nati2_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:51 | |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 18:51 | |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 18:52 | |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:58 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 18:59 | |
| jsavak | #startmeeting Keystone Team Meeting | 18:59 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 8 18:59:08 2011 UTC. The chair is jsavak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:59 |
| *** GheRivero_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:59 | |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 18:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 18:59 | |
| jsavak | Agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting | 18:59 |
| zns | Hi! I'm here. FYI | 18:59 |
| jsavak | Hi Ziad! | 19:00 |
| jsavak | Who else is here? | 19:00 |
| heckj | o/ | 19:00 |
| jsavak | Hey Joseph - good talking with you yesterday | 19:00 |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| jsavak | #topic Roadmap for Essex - status on blueprints | 19:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Roadmap for Essex - status on blueprints (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 19:02 | |
| heckj | jsavak: yeah, definitely! | 19:02 |
| heckj | jsavak: doc should be pretty reasonable now - for the BP | 19:02 |
| *** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:03 | |
| jsavak | Yeah - doc looks good. I was looking at keystone.openstack.org. The only thing that may need beefing up is the curl examples, but we can come back to those. | 19:03 |
| jsavak | I'm going through the blueprints for e-1 right now (listed on http://wiki.openstack.org/releasestatus/) and updating the blueprints as necessary. If it's merged, I've been saying that the blueprint is implemented. Is that the right status? | 19:03 |
| * heckj isn't entirely sure of best practice re: blueprints | 19:04 | |
| zns | Isn't the status of the BP supposed to get updated by Gerrit if the BP is referenced in the comments? | 19:05 |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 19:05 | |
| heckj | in horizon, we have some general blueprints that stay open and aren't assigned to milestones, others that are assigned and closed as they get completed. | 19:05 |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:05 | |
| jsavak | maybe these weren't then - they've been showing good progress even though the code was merged | 19:05 |
| heckj | zns: yes | 19:05 |
| zns | I think putting a BP# comment in there is what we need to do... | 19:05 |
| jeblair | zns: hi | 19:05 |
| zns | heckj: You know how to trigger that? Is it BP#? | 19:06 |
| jeblair | zns: auto status changes in blueprints isn't implemented yet, but is a todo | 19:06 |
| heckj | "blueprint [name of blueprint here]" is all I've needed in the past | 19:06 |
| heckj | damn - that must have just been bug then - I thought it was updating | 19:06 |
| jeblair | right now it links back to the change if you do that | 19:06 |
| jeblair | but doesn't change the status | 19:06 |
| heckj | jeblair: wait - where did the updates for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/keystone-documentation come in? | 19:07 |
| zns | jeblair: hi | 19:08 |
| jeblair | yeah, those are automatic based on saying something like "blueprint keystone-documentation" | 19:08 |
| jeblair | i think zns was talking about updating the actual "status" field in the bp | 19:08 |
| annegentle | one consideration though for that keystone-documentation blueprint is that the files in openstack-manuals (which publish to docs.openstack.org) are not yet updated | 19:08 |
| zns | jeblair: OK, so status still needs to be managed manually for now. np | 19:08 |
| heckj | annegentle: yeah, not yet complete - just dev docs | 19:08 |
| jeblair | which we've talked about doing but don't do yet. | 19:09 |
| jeblair | zns: yes | 19:09 |
| annegentle | I met with Joe and Theresa and we still need an assignee for those updates | 19:09 |
| heckj | zns: speaking of which, I'm still waiting on answers to questions from you, dolph, or yogi. Posted to mailing list after last keystone meeting I was in - never got a response from you guys. | 19:10 |
| jsavak | heckj - was it the "why does it" email? | 19:11 |
| jsavak | I saw that vish and jesse responded so I wasn't sure if there were any outstanding questions... | 19:12 |
| heckj | jsavak: yeah - the questions you said that I should send to the mailing list last meeting | 19:12 |
| heckj | Several, I'm afraid | 19:12 |
| jsavak | ping dolphm_ are you here? | 19:13 |
| jeblair | so there is a ci team meeting scheduled here for this time slot.... | 19:13 |
| heckj | they answered the credentials question, but that led to "how do you get keystone to work with EC2" - it really needs whomever is forward thinking on this project to answer. | 19:13 |
| zns | heckj: sorry, I missed that one. I just flagged it and will spend time on it this evening. | 19:13 |
| jsavak | jeblair - whoops | 19:13 |
| jsavak | heckj - can you send me your outstanding questions? I'll get them to dolph & yogi | 19:14 |
| heckj | one the way | 19:14 |
| jsavak | heckj - we're also going to spend more time in irc & responding to mailing lists. We've been bad about this in the past | 19:14 |
| *** bhall has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:14 | |
| jsavak | Topic: Open Discussion re: keystone | 19:15 |
| jsavak | #topic open discussion re: keystone | 19:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion re: keystone (Meeting topic: Keystone Team Meeting)" | 19:15 | |
| zns | heckj: We've done some work on the EC2 stuff. Yogi has been working on it. I'll try to put more meet on the answers this evening. | 19:15 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: yeah, i'm here, i've been following along | 19:15 |
| heckj | zns: cool, thank you | 19:16 |
| jsavak | dolphm: can you work with heckj on the questions he has? | 19:16 |
| heckj | ins, jsavak: need that to wrap from narrative around the docs update | 19:16 |
| zns | jsavak: not sure how we closed the previous topic. Are we on track for Diablo patch and E1? | 19:16 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: i don't know the answers to the ones remaining, but i can help him research :) they're good questions | 19:16 |
| dolphm_ | zns: diablo patch, yes | 19:17 |
| jsavak | zns: we are on track. All of the blueprints mentioned on http://wiki.openstack.org/releasestatus/ have been merged. | 19:17 |
| jsavak | er - metioned for e1 have been merged | 19:17 |
| zns | jsavak, dolphm_: thanks. Cool! | 19:17 |
| annegentle | zns: I'd like your review for the Keystone conceptual diagram at https://review.openstack.org/#change,1033 before pushing it through | 19:18 |
| jsavak | zns: we need to publicize your RBAC prototype. Can you send out a mailing-list email on it? | 19:18 |
| _0x44 | sandywalsh: You around? Look at #openstack-dev | 19:18 |
| zns | jsavak: sure. I wanted to test it with devstack, but maybe we shouldn't wait. I'll send it out today. | 19:19 |
| jsavak | zns: thanks! | 19:19 |
| zns | annegentle: OK. Will do. | 19:19 |
| jsavak | any other keystone business or questions? | 19:20 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: yeah... review 1068 | 19:20 |
| annegentle | Also are all Keystone's API updates targeted to 2.0? Does Keystone need a RFC period on its API docs? I'm asking since Compute and Netconn (Quantum) and Image (Glance) need RFC periods it looks like. | 19:20 |
| annegentle | So I'm collecting API draft spec needs from teams. | 19:20 |
| dolphm_ | we need to notify the community before that merges -- it's got a couple of backwards-incompatible changes that WILL break *every* consumer of keystone | 19:20 |
| zns | annegentle: there are no API updates as far as I know…. | 19:20 |
| annegentle | zns: ok so we'll be on API 2.0 from now until April (Essex) for certain? | 19:21 |
| zns | annegentle: yes. | 19:21 |
| annegentle | zns: ok thanks | 19:21 |
| zns | clarification - the only thing we will add will be non-breaking extensions... | 19:22 |
| annegentle | zns: and all - the key I think is, do you need community feedback through a request for comments period while you update the api? Maybe I'm asking the wrong question... | 19:22 |
| jsavak | dolphm: is 1068 close to submission? | 19:23 |
| zns | 1068 - we need to make sure that the instructions are clear and the experience is smooth. I don't think we're there yet. | 19:23 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: sort of | 19:23 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: i think it should go in after E1 | 19:23 |
| jsavak | dolphm: ok | 19:23 |
| zns | annegentle: Yes, but we don't have an API change scheduled for Essex. We may have some proposals for a new version at the F summit. | 19:24 |
| annegentle | zns: ok | 19:24 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: talking with yogi about it now | 19:24 |
| zns | dolphm_: agreed. | 19:24 |
| jsavak | dolphm: ok, thanks. | 19:24 |
| zns | jsavak: what I'd like to see is the RCB guys test it out and tell us it meets their needs/expectations. | 19:25 |
| jsavak | zns: test out 1068, or e1 overall? | 19:25 |
| jsavak | or both | 19:26 |
| dolphm_ | jsavak: i think he means the rbc prototype | 19:26 |
| zns | 1068. They would be a good bar to test any release against, but especially a hairy one like 1068. | 19:26 |
| jsavak | zns: ok. | 19:26 |
| jsavak | Dolph: let me know when 1068 is looking better and I'll get jesse to pull & review | 19:26 |
| zns | dolphm_: no - not the prototype…. 1068. | 19:27 |
| dolphm_ | zns: all of our commits go through RCB CI already, afaik, but the coverage is poor | 19:27 |
| zns | dolphm_: I'm thinking about the production deployments, not just the CI server. | 19:28 |
| jsavak | ok - any other keystone questions or issues? | 19:29 |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:30 | |
| jsavak | Ok - thanks for your time. I'll post the minutes on the wiki. | 19:30 |
| jsavak | #endmeeting | 19:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 19:30 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 8 19:30:30 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:30 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-18.59.html | 19:30 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-18.59.txt | 19:30 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-18.59.log.html | 19:30 |
| *** cmagina has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:31 | |
| zns | thanks everyone! | 19:31 |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:34 | |
| ttx | [ PPB meeting starts in 25 min. General meeting starts in 85 min. ] | 19:35 |
| *** nati2_ has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| ttx | zns: FWIW your meetign was one hour off | 19:36 |
| *** cmagina has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| zns | ttx: must be the recent time change! So PPB is in 20, not 80. OK! | 19:38 |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:38 | |
| *** cmagina has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:39 | |
| jeblair | let's just call the CI meeting canceled for this week, since there's not much time and no one is expecting it to start 40 minutes late. | 19:40 |
| *** vladimir3p has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:45 | |
| dolphm_ | zns: ttx: doesn't that mean the keystone meeting should have been at 2pm our time? | 19:47 |
| ttx | dolphm_: I have no idea what your time is. That's the whole point of using UTC time. | 19:48 |
| dolphm_ | ttx: =) | 19:48 |
| ttx | but yes, it should have happened one hour earlier :) | 19:48 |
| dolphm_ | ttx: earlier, got it | 19:48 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 19:49 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:49 | |
| *** yogirackspace has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:50 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 19:51 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 19:51 | |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:52 | |
| *** jakedahn has quit IRC | 19:55 | |
| ttx | jbryce: PPB meeting starts in 5 minutes. | 19:56 |
| *** sleepsontheflo-1 has quit IRC | 19:56 | |
| jbryce | ttx: yep | 19:57 |
| ttx | jbryce: just making sure you're UTC-aware :) | 19:57 |
| jbryce | ttx:haha...i am. i wish everyone used UTC all the time. i actually converted all the clocks in my house to UTC for a little while before my wife had enough of it. | 19:58 |
| ttx | hehe | 19:58 |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| jeblair | "i'll meet you at the restaurant at oh-one-hundred zulu" | 19:59 |
| *** termie has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| *** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| jbryce | #startmeeting | 20:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 8 20:00:52 2011 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. | 20:00 |
| jbryce | all right, 2000 UTC, PPB roll call? | 20:00 |
| mtaylor | o/ | 20:01 |
| notmyname | here | 20:01 |
| jsavak | o/ | 20:01 |
| ewanmellor | Aiiight | 20:01 |
| jsavak | (for zns) | 20:01 |
| ttx | \o | 20:02 |
| jbryce | jaypipes, pvo, vishy? | 20:02 |
| pvo | here, sorry | 20:02 |
| pvo | multitasking | 20:03 |
| *** shang_ has quit IRC | 20:03 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 20:03 | |
| jbryce | we still need one more to have a quorum. we can wait a few minutes | 20:03 |
| jbryce | troytoman: while we wait are you here as well? | 20:04 |
| jaypipes | o/ | 20:04 |
| * jaypipes mutters about daylight savings... | 20:04 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| pvo | jbryce: I don't think he is. I see his compute and he isn't sitting in front of it | 20:04 |
| ttx | jaypipes: it hurts twice a year only :P | 20:04 |
| jbryce | pvo: thanks | 20:05 |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB - agenda | 20:05 |
| jbryce | we have 2 items scheduled: the melange application and the client library discussion | 20:05 |
| jbryce | with troy not around yet, we can start with client libraries and if he returns, discuss melange with him | 20:05 |
| jbryce | #topic http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB#preview | 20:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB#preview" | 20:06 | |
| jbryce | #topic Policy around and management of client libraries | 20:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Policy around and management of client libraries" | 20:06 | |
| jbryce | we've got a couple of different questions swirling around in the email thread that we probably need to look at | 20:06 |
| ttx | The first step is to decide if we are even competent to discuss that issue, since some members disagree | 20:06 |
| ttx | maybe start with mtaylor summary ? | 20:06 |
| jbryce | works for me | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | so - the basic summary is this | 20:07 |
| *** zns has quit IRC | 20:07 | |
| mtaylor | I'm proposing that we keep client libs separated as they are now, and that we pull them in as official things that we manage | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | to mitigate the potential explosion of PTLs, I was proposing that we manage them under the PTL of the associated project | 20:08 |
| troytoman | o/ sorry - time change mishap | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | but that we have them exist as top-level repos in our git/gerrit/jenkins setups | 20:08 |
| ttx | My opinion is that the PPB is legitimate to discuss the issue, since it either adds core projects, or expands their scope significantly to include previously non-core projects. | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | the PTL discussion is actually secondary to the part I really care about | 20:09 |
| ttx | (depending on how you view the change) | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | well yeah | 20:09 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: the point of this is because some of the (current?) gating requires the client libraries? | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: yes | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: and we already have issues with pip-requires between projects winding up pulling in entire projects (like glance) | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | horizon needing glance is the thing that precipitated the conversation | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | but the pattern of need isn't one that's unique there | 20:10 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: I understand the dependency problem (and am generally supportive of separate client bindings). but I'm not really a big fan of making those part of the gating (my opinion) | 20:10 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I'm familiar with the python-novaclient situation (separate project that would be added as new core project), what's the status of the others ? | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | we use novaclient and keystoneclient in integration testing | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: it's mainly just that they already are part of projects that are gating, so figuring out how to manage them sanely | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | ttx: glanceclient needs to be split from glance, which is a todo list item for jaypipes already | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | ttx: keystoneclient exists already | 20:11 |
| ttx | Basically I'm against adding new core projects in the middle of a cycle. We already decided against that. If it's just novaclient brought in and a few package splits, I think that's ok | 20:11 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: ya I get that. seems to be that the gating should be as low-level as possible (ie using http directly instead of a client library that adds complexity and its own bugs) | 20:12 |
| ttx | keystoneclient exists inside keystone ? Or out ? | 20:12 |
| notmyname | ttx: but it wouldn't be a new core project | 20:12 |
| heckj | https://github.com/4P/python-keystoneclient | 20:12 |
| notmyname | ttx: a client binding would still be part of its associate core project | 20:12 |
| heckj | ttx: ^^ | 20:12 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: yeah, I hear you - I think that the integratoin testss folks decided to do both straight http and use the client libs | 20:13 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: if project A depends on the client library of project B, then project A's trunk should be gated on changes to the client library for project B. IMHO... | 20:13 |
| ttx | notmyname: except from my point of view | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: but also it's the depends - such as nova depending on keystone and glance internally | 20:13 |
| ttx | notmyname: for everyone else it's two separate projects (CI, relmgmt...) | 20:13 |
| ttx | from the tools perspective it's two separate projects | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I'm (obviously) fine with considering it a single project for the purposes of openstack policy | 20:14 |
| ttx | mtaylor: then it introduces confusion. One project "for purposes of openstack policy" covers an identified number of real projects as far as tooling is concerned | 20:14 |
| ttx | unindentified* | 20:14 |
| ttx | mtaylor: where do you track the link between the two ? | 20:15 |
| * jaypipes would like to see the client library projects named after the API, not the reference implementation... i.e. openstack-images-client instead of glance-client. | 20:15 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: that's just the thing though - we have real dependencies that we arent' admitting to at the moment | 20:15 |
| ttx | At this point it's rather simple: you have a list of core projects, that's what I need to care about | 20:15 |
| notmyname | jaypipes: that gets into a different conversation (that we should have at a later date) on whether the project is the API or the API + implementation | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | ttx: then I am proposing the addition of four core projects | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | ttx: and I am requesting a policy exemption to add them as part of this cycle | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: sure, you're right. sorry for polluting the conversation :) | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | ttx: because I believe organizationally they are already unrecognized core projects | 20:16 |
| notmyname | isn't the policy that there is one project ("nova") that provides 2 things ("nova" and "nova-client")? | 20:17 |
| mtaylor | OR - that we do that ^^ | 20:17 |
| jaypipes | don't we already do that? | 20:17 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I can align with that. And you can also rule that client projects can share teams with another project | 20:17 |
| ttx | notmyname: Where can I query that magic relationship ? | 20:18 |
| jaypipes | I thought this was primarily a discussion about how to do the packaging and release management for things that are in separate source repos, not whether a "project" is the combination of a server and a client lib? | 20:18 |
| mtaylor | I think it's because the separate source repos idea is triggering a thought that now there are new core projects | 20:19 |
| ttx | You're telling me that the core project list doesn't change -- however in all the tools I have to change CORE_PROJECTS to add new projects names. | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | whereas if these were contained in a single repo it would be different from a governance perspective | 20:19 |
| ttx | I find that confusing that what we call core project depends on who is using the term | 20:19 |
| ttx | so far we had a single list and definition. | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | I'm personally fine with just adding them as core projects ... the project sharing part was just for expediency (an attempt to make things easier - silly me) | 20:20 |
| ttx | "projects that gets released in the common openstack release every 6 months" | 20:20 |
| _0x44 | ttx: Why were the repos called projects? | 20:20 |
| mtaylor | _0x44: I think ttx is caring less about repos and more about release artifacts? | 20:21 |
| ttx | _0x44: because they are 1:1 linked to LP projects and to a release deliverable | 20:21 |
| *** jk0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:21 | |
| notmyname | but why is there the 1:1 mapping? | 20:21 |
| * mtaylor should avoid attempting to speak for other people | 20:21 | |
| _0x44 | notmyname: +1 | 20:21 |
| ttx | mtaylor: actually, I care about being consistent. | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | it's certainly not required ... we could tie python-novaclient to the nova project on launchpad and track bugs there | 20:22 |
| ttx | notmyname: If we don't do 1:1 then the client project and main project share the same bug DB | 20:22 |
| ttx | We could do that. | 20:22 |
| _0x44 | ttx: You're telling me launchpad can't handle multiple code repositories per project? | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | ttx: would that make the distinction easier from your end? | 20:22 |
| ttx | Same project means same blueprint set, same bug database | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | _0x44: no, of course not | 20:22 |
| ttx | _0x44: it can. | 20:22 |
| _0x44 | mtaylor: Then we've obviously chosen the wrong set of nouns to refer to the governance projects. | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | _0x44: nouns are tricky :) | 20:23 |
| ttx | could be the same project pointing to two repos. | 20:23 |
| ttx | I'm fine with that. That would still be consistent | 20:23 |
| ttx | *But* that means sharing the same set of BP and bugs. Everyone fine with that ? | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | I'm fine with that | 20:23 |
| jaypipes | me too. | 20:23 |
| ttx | mtaylor: that means adding some mapping on the bugclosing magic on Gerrit | 20:24 |
| notmyname | ttx: I think that's less than ideal, but it can work. I've found benefit on the RAX-specific side to manage language bindings separately from swift (or cloud files stuff) | 20:24 |
| jbryce | i'm fine with that, but i'd love to get vishy's input on this before we make the final call | 20:24 |
| ttx | The "correct" way of doing that would be to create a nova project group in LP, and projects benath that -- but I don't think it's worth all the tropuble of changing | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | I'm ok waiting for vish ... can we say that it's ok pending vishy's input so that we don't have to put off dealing with it from a technical perspective until next ppb meeting? | 20:25 |
| ttx | sure | 20:25 |
| ttx | We need to discuss Melange | 20:26 |
| jbryce | mtaylor: +1 | 20:26 |
| jbryce | does everyone else agree? i will follow up with vish directly | 20:26 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: what about requirements for the separate bindings? | 20:26 |
| notmyname | is that something that the PPB will mandate for the core projects? | 20:26 |
| ttx | Also does the PPB need to be consulted to add new code repos (or modules) under an existing core project ? | 20:26 |
| notmyname | ttx: seems that would be up to the PTL | 20:27 |
| mtaylor | ++ | 20:27 |
| mtaylor | sorry, that was vague | 20:27 |
| ttx | mtaylor: ++ to what ? | 20:27 |
| mtaylor | I ++'d what notmyname said about the PTL | 20:27 |
| jbryce | i think if we are treating it as part of the project it's up to the ptl | 20:27 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: I'm not sure about mandating it | 20:27 |
| ttx | I think the PPB should be consulted for project scope expansion | 20:27 |
| jbryce | and in terms of mandating, how does that work for dashboard? | 20:27 |
| notmyname | PTLs are supposed to manage all of the technical details of the project. that seems to include client libraries and dependencies | 20:27 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: how about we leave that bit up to ptl's until it's a problem? | 20:28 |
| ttx | notmyname: I agree with you, as long as you don't suddenly expand your scope -- I'm all for letting you do it and solve it at PPB level if it becomes an issue | 20:28 |
| jbryce | ttx: i think we can say that client libraries are acceptable to expand to within a project with having to get involved in each project | 20:29 |
| ttx | For example, client libs would obviously be ok -- just keep us informed when you do one | 20:29 |
| notmyname | ttx: is adding a client binding adding scope? | 20:29 |
| notmyname | ah | 20:29 |
| jbryce | let's get to melange | 20:29 |
| ttx | notmyname: I think we can say: do whatever you want, and the PPB will hunt you down if you abuse that freedom | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | like, client bindings are obviously ok - but if nova wanted to suddenly add DBaaS as a "sub project" ... that might be a bit much :) | 20:29 |
| ttx | notmyname: like doing a web UI. | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | ttx: you want me to ask lp losa's if we can get project group set up and get project and client lib into the project group without causing too much of a headache? or do you want just just skip it? | 20:30 |
| jbryce | ttx: i agree with that | 20:30 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I think that's a headache. We can discuss that more tomorrow | 20:30 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ok | 20:30 |
| mtaylor | I think we're good on this one, yeah? | 20:30 |
| *** yogirackspace has quit IRC | 20:30 | |
| jbryce | #topic melange incubation | 20:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "melange incubation" | 20:30 | |
| *** yogirackspace has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Projects/IncubatorApplication/Melange - application | 20:30 |
| troytoman | I am requesting that we establish Melange as an incubated project | 20:31 |
| troytoman | Melange was identified as a need as part of the Netstack discussions at the Diablo summit | 20:31 |
| troytoman | Based on some discussion there, we were requested to try and do it within Nova | 20:32 |
| troytoman | But, that has proven to be a bad model, i think, on a number of fronts | 20:32 |
| notmyname | troytoman: please explain why it's bad | 20:33 |
| troytoman | After discussions with a number of folks including vishy, jaypipes and others, incubation makes more sense | 20:33 |
| troytoman | notmyname: we have had difficulty getting the attention of core devs for reviews | 20:33 |
| troytoman | notmyname: packaging/testing/ci has also been complicated | 20:34 |
| troytoman | the eventual goal is for Melange to provide IPAM and other information across multiple services (servers, firewall, LB, etc,) | 20:34 |
| troytoman | it's hard to fit that idea into a Nova project | 20:34 |
| troytoman | those are a few | 20:35 |
| notmyname | troytoman: does our previous discussion on client bindings change either of the first 2? (the possible change to allow a 1:* mapping of core project to deliverables) | 20:35 |
| mtaylor | I think he'd still have a problem with the core team reviewers being not the melange team | 20:36 |
| ttx | troytoman: wasn't the main motivator the fact that you have your own API ? | 20:36 |
| troytoman | i don't think it solves the problem that Melange intends to be a service easily accessible to more projects | 20:36 |
| troytoman | ttx: that was definitely another element | 20:36 |
| ttx | ISTR vishy mentioning that as the key reason | 20:36 |
| ttx | separate user-facing API | 20:36 |
| troytoman | ttx: yes. that was one of his biggest concerns | 20:37 |
| mtaylor | separate user-facing API sounds like a whole separate thing to me | 20:37 |
| ttx | mtaylor: could even be the definition of where the "project" boundary stops :) | 20:37 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: (could you please split off a python-melangeclient repo :) ) | 20:37 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ++ | 20:37 |
| troytoman | mtaylor: hehe | 20:37 |
| jbryce | it makes sense to me as a separate project like quantum does where we want to enable a more generic service rather than something that is just specific to getting traffic in and our of vms | 20:38 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: ttx: that gets tricky, though. arguably, the server and a client binding expose different APIs /devilsadvocate | 20:38 |
| *** sleepsontheflo-1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:38 | |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 20:38 | |
| ttx | I'm all for having Melange incubated, since Quantum depends on it and is in incubation. | 20:38 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: heh. one exposes, the other implements? same API? | 20:38 |
| troytoman | in actively participating in both Melange and Quantum projects, i think Quantum represents a much better model for Melange | 20:38 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:38 | |
| ttx | ..and we almost had it in Nova for Diablo, so I guess the scope issue is solved | 20:38 |
| notmyname | ttx: quantum is incubated? | 20:39 |
| notmyname | when did that happen? | 20:39 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: a while ago? | 20:39 |
| ttx | notmyname: let me find that for you | 20:39 |
| jbryce | notmyname: before the diablo release | 20:39 |
| troytoman | I think that was in late aug/early sep | 20:39 |
| notmyname | hmmm...must have missed that. I thought all of the incubated projects had been promoted (dashboard and keystone) | 20:39 |
| ttx | nope, Quantum was inclubated at around the same time as core promotion for the others | 20:40 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: I think it was decided to add it as incubated for the essex cycle | 20:40 |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:40 | |
| ttx | For reference: http://wiki.openstack.org/Projects | 20:40 |
| * ttx tries to find the right meeting logs | 20:41 | |
| notmyname | ttx: no worries | 20:41 |
| jaypipes | let's get back to Melange... | 20:41 |
| jbryce | one of the things i think we learned in diablo with keystone is that incubated projects should probably follow the core release cycle more closely | 20:41 |
| *** wwkeyboard has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| jbryce | troytoman: do you feel like the melange team will be able to do that? | 20:41 |
| mtaylor | jbryce: ++ | 20:41 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: ++ | 20:41 |
| dolphm_ | jbryce: ++ | 20:41 |
| troytoman | jbryce: definitely. we were already tracking to Nova cycles | 20:41 |
| ttx | A bit difficult sonce jbryce did not archive all the logs: jbryce-- :) | 20:41 |
| troytoman | we have some work to do to setup the project structure, etc. but that is all doable | 20:42 |
| jbryce | ttx: sorry, i try to do it, but i'm sure i've missed a few | 20:42 |
| troytoman | we will need to stay close to both Quantum and Nova | 20:42 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: well, you get help from me on that when you become incubated :) | 20:42 |
| jbryce | troytoman: i think the biggest thing is that there will probably be an expectation around essex release time that there will be a melange release as well | 20:42 |
| *** donaldngo_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:42 | |
| ttx | notmyname: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-08-23-20.04.html | 20:43 |
| troytoman | jbryce: that should not be a problem | 20:43 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 20:43 | |
| troytoman | we have a working Melange/Quantum/Nova implementation now | 20:43 |
| ttx | notmyname: you voted against it :) | 20:43 |
| notmyname | ttx: heh | 20:43 |
| ttx | then suppressed it from your memory. | 20:43 |
| jaypipes | are we ready to vote on incubation for Melange then? | 20:44 |
| jbryce | troytoman: who is the core team. are all of the developers listed in the incubation application core? | 20:44 |
| troytoman | yes. although I would like to recruit some non-rackspace/thoughtworks devs to the project. | 20:44 |
| jbryce | yes...i think that should definitely be a goal | 20:45 |
| jaypipes | ++ | 20:45 |
| jbryce | something else that i think we learned from the previous incubation cycles | 20:45 |
| notmyname | troytoman: so melange is a software service? like a combo dns/dhcp server? | 20:45 |
| troytoman | i am hoping that the visibility will help get more people involved | 20:45 |
| ttx | troytoman: amen | 20:45 |
| notmyname | troytoman: obviously more than that. just trying to get my head around it | 20:45 |
| ewanmellor | Devils advocate: Why not put Melange functionality in with Quantum, and have one NaaS project? | 20:46 |
| troytoman | notmyname: it is primarily a network information service. central resource for IP/MAC/routes/DNS info | 20:46 |
| *** comstud has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:46 | |
| notmyname | troytoman: so it isn't a dns/etc server, but it manages the metadata for one? or the data about what is configured? | 20:46 |
| notmyname | ewanmellor: good question | 20:46 |
| troytoman | notmyname: correct | 20:47 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: is it similar in scope to a thing like ocsinventory at all? | 20:47 |
| troytoman | mtaylor: sorry but I'm not familiar with ocsinventory | 20:47 |
| ttx | mtaylor: I don't think it is | 20:48 |
| troytoman | after a quick look, i don't think so. | 20:48 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ok. (I was wondering if it might make sense to point the canonical guys who were going to extend cobbler to look at melange) | 20:48 |
| notmyname | troytoman: I may need to talk more about it with you in person, but the usefulness of that doesn't seem to jump out at me (my ignorance, I'm sure) | 20:48 |
| ttx | mtaylor: OCSinventory is hardware inventory, not a network resource repo | 20:48 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: cool. | 20:48 |
| mtaylor | ttx: GOTCHA | 20:49 |
| troytoman | notmyname: think IP Commander for OpenStack if that helps at all | 20:49 |
| ttx | troytoman: could you answer <ewanmellor> Devils advocate: Why not put Melange functionality in with Quantum, and have one NaaS project? | 20:49 |
| ttx | after that I'll be ready to vote :) | 20:49 |
| troytoman | ttx: I think that is an idea worth exploring personally. I know that danwendt has been pretty strong in his position that Quantum should just be network segments. | 20:50 |
| ttx | troytoman: I think it warranst two projects if oen can be used without the other, I guess | 20:50 |
| ttx | in this case I suspect Melange could be used without Quantum ? | 20:51 |
| troytoman | ttx: I think that is something we will learn as these projects evolve. | 20:51 |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 20:51 | |
| troytoman | ttx: you certainly can, i'm not sure how often it will. | 20:51 |
| wwkeyboard | troytoman: ttx: I think one of the big worries is being able to change layer 2 manager without changing the layer 3 manager | 20:51 |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:52 | |
| ttx | I'm all for having them in incubation and see how they evolve. | 20:52 |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:52 | |
| ttx | jbryce: I guess we can vote ? | 20:52 |
| jbryce | i'm having some network problems | 20:52 |
| notmyname | jbryce: perhaps you need a NaaS | 20:53 |
| mtaylor | ++ | 20:53 |
| ttx | happends to the best of us. | 20:53 |
| jbryce | hehe | 20:53 |
| jbryce | troytoman: do you feel like you're going to be able to dedicate enough of your time as ptl? i think something else we've realized is that it can be pretty time consuming | 20:53 |
| notmyname | indeed | 20:54 |
| troytoman | jbryce: I believe so. I have essentially been in that role since May. there will be some extra demands as we try and grow the team. | 20:54 |
| ttx | yeah, the PTL are expected to be quite available on IRC | 20:54 |
| troytoman | but I think I will be able to cover it. | 20:54 |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:55 | |
| ttx | for cross-team communication | 20:55 |
| jbryce | any other questions from anyone? | 20:55 |
| jbryce | #info VOTE: Should the Melange project be added as an Incubated project with Troy Toman as PTL? | 20:55 |
| pvo | +1 | 20:56 |
| ewanmellor | +1 | 20:56 |
| ttx | +1 | 20:56 |
| mtaylor | +1 | 20:56 |
| jbryce | +1 | 20:56 |
| notmyname | +0 | 20:56 |
| jaypipes | +1 | 20:56 |
| ttx | notmyname: you say you don't like being different, but you are ! | 20:56 |
| notmyname | webx: | 20:57 |
| notmyname | heh | 20:57 |
| jbryce | #agreed Melange should be added as an incubated project (6 agree, 1 abstain) | 20:57 |
| *** jdg has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| troytoman | thanks all | 20:57 |
| mtaylor | perhaps we should express the number of PPB at-large members in terms of a percentage of extant PTLs, rather than as a fixed number? | 20:57 |
| jaypipes | troytoman: congrats and condolences | 20:57 |
| * ttx wil modify wiki.openstack.org/Projects | 20:57 | |
| mtaylor | troytoman: ++ | 20:57 |
| troytoman | jaypipes: :-) | 20:58 |
| ttx | troytoman: whenever https://launchpad.net/melange is set up | 20:58 |
| troytoman | thanks ttx | 20:58 |
| * mtaylor may have spent too much time in poly-sci class growing up | 20:58 | |
| *** rohitk has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| troytoman | now the real work begins | 20:58 |
| vishy | hmm | 20:58 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: let's circle up with jeblair and come up with a time to get you migrated to gerrit | 20:58 |
| mtaylor | vishy: !!! | 20:58 |
| jbryce | hi vishy | 20:58 |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 20:59 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: and get the LP project set up | 20:59 |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| * vishy forgot time change doesn't affect utc | 20:59 | |
| mtaylor | vishy: we missed you | 20:59 |
| jbryce | vishy: anything you'd like to say in the last 40 seconds? | 20:59 |
| vishy | +1 to everything | 20:59 |
| * ttx sobs at the number of early warnings he sent for nothing | 20:59 | |
| jbryce | vishy: i need to catch up with you on something real quick, but we're out of time for ppb | 20:59 |
| jbryce | thanks everyone | 20:59 |
| *** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| jbryce | #endmeeting | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 8 21:00:14 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-20.00.html | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-20.00.txt | 21:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-20.00.log.html | 21:00 |
| ttx | jsavak: still around ? | 21:00 |
| jsavak | ttx: yup | 21:00 |
| ttx | devcamcar missing | 21:00 |
| heckj | ttx: in transit to cloud expo | 21:01 |
| heckj | ttx: he's expecting to be online, but I don't know when. | 21:01 |
| mtaylor | vishy: so you're on board with the client lib stuff? | 21:01 |
| ttx | heckj: could you replace him ? | 21:01 |
| heckj | ttx: I can babble in his place if you need | 21:01 |
| ttx | mtaylor: let him catch up with backlog first | 21:01 |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| * heckj goes and gets liquored up | 21:01 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: no! | 21:01 |
| vishy | i was on board with what you suggested in email | 21:01 |
| ttx | heckj: that should be good | 21:01 |
| ttx | vishy: it changed. | 21:01 |
| mtaylor | vishy: great. it's mostly that. | 21:01 |
| ttx | OK, let's get started | 21:01 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 8 21:02:02 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 |
| soren | o/ | 21:02 |
| mtaylor | vishy: main difference being that we'll tie both to a single launchpad project | 21:02 |
| heckj | 0? | 21:02 |
| ttx | Welcome everyone to our weekly meeting... Today's agenda: | 21:02 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/TeamMeeting | 21:02 |
| ttx | Please all use #info #link #idea #action for a richer summary ! | 21:02 |
| ttx | At the end of today (or rather very early tomorrow) we should create essex-1 milestone-proposed branches from master | 21:02 |
| ttx | (for those following the common milestone plan) | 21:03 |
| ttx | This meeting will focus on making sure we can do that :) | 21:03 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status" | 21:03 | |
| ttx | jsavak: looking at: | 21:03 |
| jsavak | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/essex | 21:03 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:03 |
| jsavak | ttx: yup | 21:03 |
| ttx | essex-1 looks pretty complete to me... | 21:03 |
| jsavak | We're good for e-1. | 21:03 |
| ttx | Is there anything else significant added since Diablo that does not appear in the blueprint list ? | 21:04 |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| ttx | (feature-wise) | 21:04 |
| jsavak | lots more documentation and functional test coverage. | 21:04 |
| ttx | ack | 21:04 |
| jsavak | Feature wise: no. We have RBAC prototype in a different repo | 21:04 |
| ttx | jsavak: Other news ? | 21:04 |
| jsavak | diablo backport is complete. Dolph is putting together the back-port release notes now | 21:05 |
| Ravikumar_hp | Is unit tests available for keystone to cover essex-1 Rc1? | 21:05 |
| ttx | diablo backport: is everyone happy with it ? | 21:06 |
| jsavak | ravi: the major piece of functionality is the ssl piece created by liem. There is functional tests for that | 21:06 |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:06 | |
| ttx | jsavak: diablo backport: is everyone happy with it ? | 21:07 |
| vishy | mtaylor, ttx: finished scrollback I'm ok with the lplan | 21:07 |
| jsavak | I believe so, but need to verify | 21:07 |
| mtaylor | vishy: thanks! | 21:07 |
| ttx | Raise your hand if you have other questions on Keystone... | 21:07 |
| jsavak | #action jsavak to verify that everyone is happy with diablo-backport | 21:07 |
| vishy | I think we're still missing one item in diablo backport | 21:07 |
| jsavak | vishy: what item? | 21:08 |
| vishy | jsavak: https://review.openstack.org/#change,1375 | 21:08 |
| annegentle | I believe the Keystone documentation blueprint is still incomplete from a coverage standpoint - to ensure sysadmins can deploy it | 21:09 |
| vishy | (we may need something similar for glance/swift as well | 21:09 |
| heckj | annegentle: +1 | 21:09 |
| vishy | unless we feel that tenant_name is the central artifact in diablo | 21:09 |
| jsavak | vishy: ok - I'll pass this on. | 21:09 |
| ttx | jsavak: I'll branch essex-1 milestone-proposed from master early tomorrow morning. | 21:09 |
| jsavak | ttx: thanks | 21:09 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:10 |
| jsavak | anne: +1 | 21:10 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:10 | |
| ttx | notmyname: o/ | 21:10 |
| notmyname | hi | 21:10 |
| ttx | Still no proposed release date for 1.4.4 ? | 21:10 |
| notmyname | well, let's talk about that | 21:10 |
| notmyname | how does early in the week of Mov 21 work for you? | 21:10 |
| notmyname | Nov | 21:10 |
| ttx | works for me | 21:11 |
| notmyname | ttx: ok. then lets say either Nov 21 or 22 (for final release, we'll have QA'd it by the preceding friday) | 21:11 |
| *** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:11 | |
| ttx | branch at end of Nov 18, final release Nov 22 ? | 21:11 |
| notmyname | sounds good | 21:12 |
| notmyname | #info swift 1.4.4 to be release on November 22 | 21:12 |
| ttx | cool | 21:12 |
| *** aabes has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:12 | |
| ttx | notmyname: Anything else ? | 21:12 |
| notmyname | yup | 21:12 |
| *** vkp has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:12 | |
| notmyname | one more thing | 21:12 |
| notmyname | we've found a potential memory leak in eventlet | 21:12 |
| notmyname | gholt has patched eventlet and we are testing it now | 21:13 |
| Ravikumar_hp | notmyname: is swift 1.4.4 not part of any Diablo release ? Is it standalone release | 21:13 |
| notmyname | if his patch fixes it, we'd recommend bumping the required version of eventlet once it's included in the mainline | 21:13 |
| ttx | Ravikumar_hp: Swift 1.4.4 is a release, part of the Essex development timeframe | 21:13 |
| notmyname | Ravikumar_hp: and stable and prod-ready | 21:13 |
| notmyname | I've talked to a few people already about the eventlet bug. I just want to make sure people know what's coming | 21:14 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: ++ on eventlet | 21:14 |
| ttx | great, thx for the heads-up. | 21:14 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: all props go to gholt | 21:14 |
| ttx | Questions on Swift ? | 21:14 |
| mtaylor | gholt++ | 21:14 |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:15 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: yo | 21:15 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:15 |
| jaypipes | Waiting on one final code review for some documentation stuff, but good to cut milestone-proposed | 21:15 |
| ttx | One blueprint left unimplemented: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/protected-images ? | 21:15 |
| jaypipes | ttx: refresh your browser... | 21:16 |
| ttx | jaypipes: that's cheating. | 21:16 |
| jaypipes | lol | 21:16 |
| ttx | jaypipes: Does the list on essex-1 page reflect the new features for Glance since Diablo ? | 21:16 |
| jaypipes | ttx: yes | 21:16 |
| ttx | anything missing that we should retrospectively add ? | 21:16 |
| ttx | ok | 21:16 |
| jaypipes | ttx: nope. | 21:16 |
| Ravikumar_hp | jaypipes: Is Glance API documentation v2.0 is complete and finalised? | 21:17 |
| ttx | jaypipes: OK, wil cut with tomorrow's status, with or without that last bugfix | 21:17 |
| jaypipes | Ravikumar_hp: still in RFC period, still getting feedback from a few folks | 21:17 |
| *** mjfork has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:17 | |
| ttx | jaypipes: Anything else ? | 21:17 |
| jaypipes | Ravikumar_hp: And I've created a number of blueprints that address how to implement 2.0 API: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/api-2 | 21:18 |
| jaypipes | ttx: no, just to say please go to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1klPuEJbU7yxSLalhucFPw4dTVFi6aXIh7lO5c-O8wQw/edit and provide feedback on the proposed 2.0 Images API | 21:18 |
| ttx | #help please go to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1klPuEJbU7yxSLalhucFPw4dTVFi6aXIh7lO5c-O8wQw/edit and provide feedback on the proposed 2.0 Images API | 21:19 |
| ttx | Questions on Glance ? | 21:19 |
| heckj | how is the glance API aligning with Keystone? Dependency? | 21:19 |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 21:20 | |
| jaypipes | heckj: It's not related to the proposed 2.0 Images API... in other words, that's an implementation detail. | 21:20 |
| vishy | jaypipes: don't know if you noticed, but at some point in keystone tenant -> tenant_id, tenant_name | 21:20 |
| jaypipes | vishy: yep, noticed... | 21:20 |
| vishy | jaypipes: we're going to use tenant_id as the canonical version | 21:21 |
| ttx | ok, moving on to Nova | 21:21 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:21 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:21 | |
| jaypipes | vishy: TENANT_ID is a string, right? | 21:21 |
| vishy | jaypipes: seems like we should do the same thing across projects to avoid breakage | 21:21 |
| vishy | jaypipes: correct | 21:21 |
| vishy | so nova status | 21:21 |
| ttx | vishy: https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:21 |
| vishy | we need reviews! | 21:21 |
| jaypipes | ya, we'll use the tenant ID. | 21:21 |
| ttx | badly | 21:21 |
| vishy | I'm drafting an email to the list to request reviews. | 21:21 |
| ttx | vishy: soren is starting to extract stats that could lkead to suggesting new core members (and cleaning up stale ones) | 21:22 |
| ttx | 4 BPs still needing review: | 21:22 |
| vishy | i'm pushing the ha nova network one to e2 | 21:22 |
| jaypipes | seems a small list of bugs... where did all the nati2 bugs get targeted? | 21:22 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/quantum-dhcp-parity | 21:22 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/osapi-console-log | 21:22 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/pci-passthrough | 21:22 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/openstack-api-ssl | 21:22 |
| ttx | jaypipes: they weren't targeted to a specific milestone | 21:23 |
| vishy | i actually don't think we will have code for that one | 21:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: the nati2 bugs or just in general bugs? | 21:23 |
| soren | vishy: Which one? | 21:23 |
| vishy | the ha nova network xenserver | 21:24 |
| ttx | the nati2 bugs ? | 21:24 |
| soren | Ah. | 21:24 |
| vishy | it is hopefully just configuration and instructions for setup | 21:24 |
| ttx | Nothing like 3 discussions mixed. | 21:24 |
| ttx | vishy: agreed to defer xenapi-ha-nova-network to essex-2 | 21:24 |
| ttx | vishy: what about the other ones ? | 21:24 |
| * jaypipes wondering where all the nova bugs have been targeted, that's all... | 21:24 | |
| jaypipes | surely there's more than 5 bugs fixed in E1 for Nova? | 21:25 |
| vishy | jaypipes: i don't know if the bugs have been targetted proplerly | 21:25 |
| ttx | jaypipes: i will target the FixCommitted to essex-1 tomorrow | 21:25 |
| vishy | ttx: do you have a secret trick for finding them...yeah | 21:25 |
| ttx | since that doesn't happen automatically | 21:25 |
| vishy | so osapi needs fixes, just pinged jake | 21:25 |
| *** mcohen has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:26 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: sounds like an improvement we could make | 21:26 |
| *** salv has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:26 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: arro?? | 21:26 |
| vishy | pci is going to be deferred allso | 21:27 |
| ttx | #action ttx to see with mtaylor about setting up target milestone on FixCommitted bug automatically on master merge | 21:27 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ah. target FixCommitted to the current milestone? | 21:27 |
| vishy | my review hasn't been addresed yet | 21:27 |
| mtaylor | cool | 21:27 |
| ttx | vishy: deferring | 21:27 |
| vishy | looks like the console stuff will be refactored | 21:28 |
| vishy | so that one is deferred too | 21:28 |
| ttx | deferring | 21:28 |
| westmaas | vishy: definitely want to hear about osapi fixes needed, can we tag those in some way if bugs are filed? | 21:29 |
| vishy | quantum might land | 21:29 |
| ttx | vishy: You are left with openstack-api-ssl and quantum-dhcp-parity | 21:29 |
| vishy | looks like it is just missing some reviews | 21:29 |
| vishy | so lets leave that for now | 21:29 |
| ttx | vishy: sure | 21:29 |
| ttx | vishy: You're OK to cut milestone-proposed even if those aren't in ? | 21:29 |
| vishy | sure | 21:29 |
| ttx | (tomorrow morning) | 21:30 |
| ttx | Also one targeted bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/886224 (bcwaldon) | 21:30 |
| vishy | doesn't look like ssl will make it | 21:30 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 886224 in nova "Compute Manager makes too many calls to Glance on instance create" [Low,In progress] | 21:30 |
| ttx | vishy: would be good to have though | 21:30 |
| ttx | vishy: let's give it a few more hours chance ? | 21:30 |
| Ravikumar_hp | vishy: Is there any DB changes for Nova in Essex and if so ,is the changes frozen? | 21:30 |
| vishy | sure | 21:30 |
| vishy | Ravikumar_hp: there will be db changes | 21:31 |
| vishy | they all go through migrations though | 21:31 |
| ttx | vishy, bcwaldon: bug 886224 is not milestone-critical, right | 21:31 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 886224 in nova "Compute Manager makes too many calls to Glance on instance create" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/886224 | 21:31 |
| vishy | no | 21:31 |
| ttx | ok | 21:31 |
| vishy | there is one bug which is kind of critical, but I haven't even gotten a clear repro | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: right, and it's seeing some functional failures | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: we can target to essex-2 | 21:31 |
| ttx | doing so | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: thx | 21:31 |
| ttx | vishy: bug # ? | 21:32 |
| vishy | if i can track it down before the milestone it would be great | 21:32 |
| vishy | bug 855350 | 21:32 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 855350 in xorg "long reprobes slow down boot/login (dup-of: 854986)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/855350 | 21:32 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 854986 in xserver-xorg-video-intel "[eDP1] 5 second delay between Xorg starting and the greeter starting (Dell Latitude E6410)" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/854986 | 21:32 |
| vishy | oops | 21:32 |
| ttx | 862653 'VDI resize failed' errors on nova-compute (XenServer) ? | 21:32 |
| vishy | bug 855030 | 21:32 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 855030 in nova "Encountering sporadic AMQPChannelException" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/855030 | 21:32 |
| bcwaldon | vishy, ttx: this needs to get in to milestone -> 886281 | 21:32 |
| vishy | there we go :_ | 21:32 |
| vishy | bug 886281 | 21:33 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 886281 in nova "zone_manager uses LOG which isn't defined" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/886281 | 21:33 |
| bcwaldon | I'm going to approve it after my tests finish | 21:33 |
| bcwaldon | +1 that is | 21:33 |
| * ttx adds it to the list then | 21:33 | |
| vishy | bcwaldon: ok where is the code? | 21:33 |
| bcwaldon | https://review.openstack.org/#change,1424 | 21:34 |
| bcwaldon | one line change | 21:34 |
| ttx | vishy: the AMQPException is definitely nice to have if you can nail it | 21:34 |
| vishy | ttx: yes working on it :) | 21:34 |
| vishy | it is a tricky bugger | 21:34 |
| ttx | no kidding | 21:34 |
| ttx | vishy: Anything else ? | 21:35 |
| vishy | i think that is it | 21:35 |
| ttx | Nova subteam leads: anything you want to mention ? | 21:35 |
| _0x44 | Yes | 21:36 |
| bcwaldon | I'm here to answer any questions about the compute api, if there are any | 21:36 |
| _0x44 | -db meeting didn't happen yesterday due to lack of attendance, so we rescheduled it for Thursday at 00:00UTC | 21:36 |
| bcwaldon | whoops, sorry I missed that :( | 21:36 |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:37 | |
| _0x44 | bcwaldon: It's okay, if it happens again we're moving the db to be backed by flat files and perl scripts. | 21:37 |
| _0x44 | bcwaldon: :D | 21:37 |
| bcwaldon | excellent | 21:37 |
| ttx | Questions on Nova ? | 21:37 |
| vishy | _0x44: ugh my bad | 21:37 |
| ttx | The gCal is your friend. | 21:38 |
| _0x44 | vishy: I assumed you were at cloud-expo handling the press :) | 21:38 |
| comstud | vishy: i'll be looking at that amqp thing again more tonight/tomorrow | 21:38 |
| jsavak | nova quesiton here - | 21:38 |
| jsavak | can we get review of RBAC prototype functionality in #link https://github.com/ziadsawalha/keystone/ | 21:38 |
| vishy | comstud: cool. I'm going to try and repro it on two boxes today | 21:38 |
| comstud | same | 21:38 |
| comstud | i got oneiric installed | 21:38 |
| comstud | i can't reproduce it on squeeze | 21:38 |
| ttx | vishy: if you have a fix for the AMQP thing we can backport it to the milestone-proposed branch: it's set to release Thursday. | 21:38 |
| vishy | ttx: good deal | 21:39 |
| vishy | comstud: i think it only happens on multi-machine install | 21:39 |
| vishy | comstud: i can't repro it on 1 box | 21:39 |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 21:39 | |
| comstud | You could with parallel tests, though, i thought | 21:39 |
| comstud | I can't even get that with squeeze. | 21:39 |
| _0x44 | vishy: ttx: Yeah, good call, sending one now. | 21:39 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:39 | |
| vishy | comstud: not convinced that is the same issue. I will let you know what i discover | 21:40 |
| ttx | _0x44: if you keep http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings up to date, I'll keep the gCal up to date :) | 21:40 |
| comstud | I'm sure it's not an OS distro thing.. I'm just stuck trying anything I can to reproduce it with tests | 21:40 |
| comstud | Ah k | 21:40 |
| ttx | ok, we need to move on | 21:41 |
| *** medberry has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:41 | |
| *** medberry has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:41 | |
| ttx | #help nova devs to review RBAC prototype functionality at https://github.com/ziadsawalha/keystone/ | 21:41 |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:41 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status" | 21:41 | |
| jsavak | ttx: thanks | 21:41 |
| * heckj puts on his devcamcar hat | 21:41 | |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:42 |
| ttx | Two incomplete blueprints still targeted at essex-1: | 21:42 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/frontend-testing | 21:42 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/javascript-unit-tests | 21:42 |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 21:42 | |
| heckj | we're most ready for the cut tomorrow - a few bugs with the modular architecture work in the queue right now | 21:42 |
| ttx | heckj: should they just be postponed to essex-2 ? | 21:42 |
| heckj | Yes - good starts, but we'll retarget those back | 21:43 |
| *** nati2 has quit IRC | 21:43 | |
| ttx | I'l push them back if they are not complete tomorrow morning. | 21:43 |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 21:43 | |
| heckj | ttx: thanks - I can't seem to edit them directly | 21:43 |
| ttx | ask devcamcar to add you in the Horizon Drivers group. | 21:44 |
| heckj | K | 21:44 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 21:44 | |
| ttx | So I assume Horizon is OK to branch tomorrow | 21:44 |
| heckj | ttx: yep, we're looking pretty good | 21:44 |
| ttx | if anything critical comes in, we can backport to the created milestone-proposed branch | 21:44 |
| ttx | The idea being to exercise the temporary release automation from jeblair/mtaylor tomorrow early | 21:45 |
| ttx | heckj: Anything else ? | 21:45 |
| heckj | lots of good new feature - listed on the blueprints, so I won't repeat. Good progress on all fronts. | 21:46 |
| heckj | Questions re: Horizon? | 21:46 |
| ttx | Good. Looks like all affected core projects are good to go for essex-1. | 21:46 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:46 | |
| ttx | #topic Incubated projects and other Team reports | 21:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects and other Team reports" | 21:46 | |
| ttx | danwent: o/ | 21:47 |
| ttx | that's call good timing. | 21:47 |
| danwent | :) | 21:47 |
| ttx | ed* | 21:47 |
| danwent | we're just wrapping up essex-1 | 21:47 |
| danwent | thanks for folks from nova for reviews on quantum manager | 21:47 |
| ttx | danwent: Melange was just accepted for Incubation, btw, so you're not alone anymore. | 21:47 |
| danwent | still have a good number of quantum-only reviews to finish | 21:47 |
| danwent | ah, great. it was getting loney here :) | 21:48 |
| medberry | It's always loony here. | 21:48 |
| danwent | :) | 21:48 |
| danwent | https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-1 | 21:48 |
| ttx | danwent: shows a lot of "needs code review" | 21:48 |
| danwent | all major features are implemented or in review, so we're doing pretty well. | 21:48 |
| danwent | yeah, some of those are out of date. will update | 21:49 |
| danwent | we also had a big packaging branch come in, which stalled some of the other reviews. | 21:49 |
| ttx | danwent: remember that fore core the features actually need to land a bit earlier, to allow for one/two days of baking into milestone-proposed | 21:49 |
| danwent | k | 21:49 |
| ttx | danwent: not that it affects you right now, just for potential future :) | 21:49 |
| danwent | yup, we're definitely shooting for core, so will keep in mind | 21:50 |
| ttx | Any other team lead wanting to report status ? | 21:50 |
| troytoman | we'll start reporting on Melange next week | 21:50 |
| ttx | CI/QA/Doc/Community ? | 21:50 |
| annegentle | ttx: I have a late entry to the agenda | 21:50 |
| zul | so melange is core now as well? | 21:51 |
| annegentle | #topic draft APIs | 21:51 |
| ttx | annegentle: ow | 21:51 |
| medberry | zul, melange is now incubated | 21:51 |
| annegentle | We have three projects that need to have draft API docs (for a new API version) published during the Essex timeframe. (Quantum, Glance, and Nova) | 21:51 |
| troytoman | Melange is incubated | 21:51 |
| annegentle | ttx: sorry for the late entry :) | 21:51 |
| annegentle | I'd like to get ideas about where those should be published - and whether there's a special treatment for "RFC" vs. "Draft" designations. | 21:51 |
| ttx | What's the point of preparing all those open tabs if people change things at the last minute ! :) | 21:51 |
| annegentle | Do these need drafts need to be published to http://docs.openstack.org/api, or is that site for "final" APIs for end-users? Do these API drafts need their own site for the RFC period? | 21:51 |
| annegentle | I can also ask on the mailing list but wanted to bring it up here for ideas. | 21:52 |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:52 | |
| ttx | annegentle: you need feedback from the PTLs, and some of them already disappeared. So maybe ML | 21:52 |
| annegentle | ttx: okay. | 21:53 |
| ttx | #action annegentle to raise ML thread about draft APIs | 21:53 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:54 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:54 | |
| zul | nova-ec2-api team just formed woot! | 21:54 |
| ttx | zul: cool ! | 21:54 |
| ttx | Now I didn't tag all those bugs "ec2" for nothing. | 21:54 |
| annegentle | zul: great to hear! | 21:54 |
| bcwaldon | zul: awesome! I would love for all members of the nova-ec2-api team to attend nova-api meetings | 21:55 |
| tr3buchet | hollar! | 21:55 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: or at least one | 21:55 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: If I ask for all, I should get at least one ;) | 21:55 |
| ttx | hopefully. | 21:56 |
| medberry | bcwaldon, when/where is nova-api meetings? | 21:56 |
| ttx | medberry: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | 21:56 |
| bcwaldon | medberry: had one last friday here, havent established a recurring time yet | 21:56 |
| medberry | nod. tx. | 21:56 |
| bcwaldon | medberry: it will be at that link ttx posted once we figure it out | 21:56 |
| ttx | medberry: I live in the future. | 21:57 |
| ttx | (and there are no roads) | 21:57 |
| medberry | :) | 21:57 |
| ttx | Last note: you should have received a survey from the rax events team about your experience at the design summit / conference | 21:58 |
| ttx | Please make sure to fill it so that everyone knows the wifi really sucked. | 21:58 |
| ttx | and on those words... | 21:59 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 21:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 8 21:59:06 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-21.02.html | 21:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-21.02.txt | 21:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-21.02.log.html | 21:59 |
| *** markmc has left #openstack-meeting | 21:59 | |
| ttx | danwent: floor is yours. | 21:59 |
| *** jk0 has left #openstack-meeting | 21:59 | |
| danwent | thx | 21:59 |
| *** Ghe_Rivero has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:59 | |
| danwent | let's see how many netstackers got the DST change wrong like I did :) | 22:00 |
| * bhall raises his hand | 22:00 | |
| *** aabes has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| salv | the change came last week for me :) | 22:00 |
| danwent | #startmeeting | 22:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 8 22:00:46 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 | Ok, netstack meeting | 22:01 |
| danwent | #info: agenda http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings | 22:01 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| danwent | Quantum focus will mainly be on essex-1 | 22:01 |
| *** thingee has left #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| danwent | troy, still around? | 22:01 |
| medberry | troytoman, ? | 22:02 |
| troytoman | yes | 22:02 |
| danwent | #topic melange status | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "melange status" | 22:02 | |
| troytoman | Melange was just approved as an incubated project | 22:02 |
| danwent | congrats :) | 22:02 |
| danwent | one thing troy and I talked about is the official location for the melange code | 22:02 |
| salv | congratulations troy! | 22:03 |
| troytoman | while that's a good thing, it means we will be focused on getting the project infrastructure setup | 22:03 |
| troytoman | hopefully, by tomorrow, we'll have the launchpad project setup with much of the key information about location etc. | 22:03 |
| medberry | yep, I checked launchpad for membership &c a few min.s ago and found nothing. | 22:03 |
| troytoman | I'll also be working on gerrit, etc. | 22:03 |
| mtaylor | troytoman: ++ | 22:03 |
| troytoman | salv: thx | 22:04 |
| *** ipl31 has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:04 | |
| troytoman | medberry: working on that | 22:04 |
| troytoman | otherwise, we are making some adjustments to the Melange API to streamline the interaction with the Nova Quantum Manager | 22:04 |
| bhall | yeehaw | 22:04 |
| troytoman | and working on adding notifications | 22:04 |
| danwent | troytoman: those improvements will be very welcome | 22:04 |
| danwent | ok, anything else? | 22:05 |
| danwent | questions on melange? | 22:05 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:05 | |
| troytoman | i don't think so. except that we're looking for more devs to get involved! | 22:06 |
| danwent | #info melange is incubated. working on API streamlining for quantummanager, and notifications | 22:06 |
| danwent | #topic quantum status | 22:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "quantum status" | 22:06 | |
| danwent | Ok, we should be branching for essex-1 tonight (ideally) | 22:06 |
| danwent | #info essex-1 milestone: https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-1 | 22:06 |
| danwent | please open up the link so we can go over outstanding issues. | 22:06 |
| *** mikeyp has quit IRC | 22:07 | |
| danwent | dhcp work for QuantumManager, brad? | 22:07 |
| salv | I think the important bits for this release are in master now | 22:07 |
| *** jsavak has quit IRC | 22:07 | |
| danwent | still in nova review? | 22:07 |
| *** Tushar has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:07 | |
| bhall | danwent: still in nova review.. we've got multiple +1's so far but having to rebase erases them | 22:07 |
| bhall | I need to track down tr3buchet today and ask for another +1 | 22:07 |
| bhall | hopefully it will go in today | 22:08 |
| salv | bhall: I've been there. Chasing the trunk might be hard | 22:08 |
| danwent | yes, please ping him now, if he's still online | 22:08 |
| tr3buchet | bhall: it's just been given | 22:08 |
| bhall | tr3buchet: gracias :) | 22:08 |
| danwent | thanks trey! | 22:08 |
| tr3buchet | let me know if you want the +2, i think we've got enough +1s on it | 22:09 |
| bhall | yes that would be nice :) | 22:09 |
| salv | bhall: what changes in the QuantumManager with this changeset? | 22:09 |
| bhall | salv: it adds dhcp support | 22:09 |
| *** Tushar has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| danwent | #info dhcp nova-parity changes are actively being merged into nova | 22:10 |
| salv | salv: I wanted a few more dirty details, such as are we doing it with dnsmasq as nova-network or are we using a different strategy? I'm sorry but I did not look at the code. | 22:10 |
| bhall | salv: ah, yeah, it's using dnsmasq | 22:11 |
| tr3buchet | yep | 22:11 |
| bhall | salv: pretty much the same as the other nova nework managers | 22:11 |
| danwent | this is just for nova parity | 22:11 |
| danwent | will expand on it once we get parity. I think carlp was talking about doing a true DHCP service in the future | 22:11 |
| danwent | Ok, next open issue: the python-novaclient changes have been rebased, but I need to test them again before asking sandy to pull them in. | 22:12 |
| danwent | #info Ok, the python-novaclient changes have been rebased, but I need to test them again before asking sandy to pull them in. | 22:12 |
| danwent | salv: update on quantum middleware for keystone? last I saw it was blocked on pylint? | 22:13 |
| salv | Blocked on pylint violations. Code has been fixed and updated 6 hours ago. | 22:13 |
| danwent | #info quantum.conf changes to document how to enable keystone middleware is already in quantum | 22:13 |
| salv | got a another Jenkins stop now | 22:13 |
| dolphm | salv: the pylint blocker is actually project wide, so fixing pylint violations anywhere will get it back under the threshold | 22:14 |
| salv | I got that dolphm, I tried to fix a few violations earlier on but those were not enough | 22:15 |
| salv | is the thresold actually 32? | 22:15 |
| dolphm | salv: it's around ~500 for the whole project | 22:15 |
| salv | okay my changeset put the total number to 497, maybe fixing 20-30 violations should be enough | 22:16 |
| salv | I will push again right after the meeting | 22:16 |
| danwent | salv: great | 22:16 |
| salv | dolphm: thanks! | 22:16 |
| dolphm | salv: didn't realize this was openstack-meeting lol, ping me if you need help! | 22:16 |
| danwent | #info: quantum middleware pushed keystone over project-wide pylint threshold. salv will do a bit of clean-up to try to get it back down. | 22:16 |
| salv | dolphm: sure | 22:16 |
| dolphm | my apologies for crashing whatever meeting this is =) | 22:17 |
| salv | on another note I'm still trying to merge bp/api-framework-essex | 22:17 |
| danwent | read my mind (or the milestone list).... | 22:17 |
| danwent | pep8 issues? | 22:17 |
| salv | I think it would be better to have it in essex-2 | 22:17 |
| salv | danwent: some bits of code which apparently are not in the right place | 22:18 |
| danwent | salv: Ok, I'd prefer not to jam it in if you don't think it is ready. Hopefully we can get it in right away for essex-2? | 22:18 |
| salv | Since this bp does not actually add any functionality, I think we can slip it to essex-2, so I will be able to see some TV or a movie tonight :) | 22:18 |
| danwent | I know of a few people that were holding off on doing API-related work with the goal of avoiding conflicts with this framework change | 22:19 |
| danwent | tv or movie sounds like a good choice :) | 22:19 |
| salv | can be merged in the next few days | 22:19 |
| danwent | great. let's untarget | 22:19 |
| salv | I just reckon we don't have a need for essex-1 | 22:19 |
| danwent | yeah, I think its more important that the dev work got done in essex-1 period, not necessarily that code was in essex-2 deliverable | 22:20 |
| danwent | essex-2 -> essex-1 | 22:20 |
| danwent | #info: delyaing API framework code until early essex-2. No impact on features. | 22:20 |
| danwent | on to the bugs. | 22:20 |
| danwent | I still need to rework the README. have been viewing this as lower priority than code changes. | 22:21 |
| danwent | README changes will just try to get rid of duplicate + out-dated references to things that are now covered in main quantum documentation. will include a pointer to docs instead. | 22:21 |
| danwent | will have a review out later this afternoon. | 22:21 |
| danwent | #info README changes to point to new Quantum docs will still be in essex-1. available for review later today | 22:22 |
| danwent | bhall: want to comment on your two bugs? | 22:22 |
| bhall | sure | 22:22 |
| danwent | both are listed as in progress, not code review? | 22:22 |
| bhall | they will go in as soon as the cisco folks run the tests against the update() call patch | 22:22 |
| *** donaldngo_hp has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| danwent | ah… no "code review" state for bugs | 22:23 |
| bhall | danwent: there is no code review status for bugs ;) | 22:23 |
| danwent | I always forget that. | 22:23 |
| *** donaldngo_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:23 | |
| *** jdg has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| bhall | I think tyler said he'll have tim ethis afternoon | 22:23 |
| danwent | OK. any other essex-1 issues we need to be coordinating on? | 22:23 |
| danwent | what about the new patch sent to the list? | 22:24 |
| danwent | is ghe around? | 22:24 |
| bhall | I tihnk that went in? | 22:25 |
| Ghe_Rivero | tep | 22:25 |
| Ghe_Rivero | here i am | 22:25 |
| danwent | wow, got to refresh I guess | 22:25 |
| danwent | the world moves by pretty quickly… yes, that was already reviewed and merged. thanks bhall :) | 22:25 |
| *** vkp has quit IRC | 22:26 | |
| bhall | no prob.. thanks to Ghe for doing it | 22:26 |
| Ghe_Rivero | you are welcome | 22:26 |
| danwent | ideally we would have opened a bug on that are targeted it to essex-1, given how late it was coming in, but I didn't tell Ghe to do that, so its my fault :) | 22:26 |
| danwent | Ok, so sounds like essex-1 will be in good shape. Will probably branch tonight. | 22:27 |
| danwent | #info: decided to delay patch to combine plugins.ini into quantum.conf to avoid breaking automated testing environments right before a milestone. this will go in early essex-2 | 22:28 |
| danwent | here is the patch for reference: https://review.openstack.org/#change,1415 | 22:28 |
| danwent | ok, great work on the reviews folks, especially with the compressed schedule. | 22:28 |
| danwent | please keep a look out for any remaining reviews… anything going in at this point should be both small and important | 22:29 |
| danwent | otherwise we'll push it to essex-2 | 22:29 |
| danwent | Ok, is carlp here? | 22:29 |
| danwent | Along with nova-parity our other big short-term goal is better functional and system test. | 22:30 |
| danwent | #todo: #danwent will contact #carlp and have him send something out on next steps there. | 22:30 |
| danwent | final note for quantum, essex-2 milestone is now essentially open: https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-2 | 22:31 |
| danwent | we got a bit of a late start on essex-1 due to planning, so will be hounding people to get things in for essex-2 to make sure its a nice plump release :) | 22:31 |
| danwent | any general questions/concerns about quantum? | 22:32 |
| danwent | #info: please now target blueprints for essex-2: https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/essex-2 | 22:32 |
| danwent | at next tuesday's meeting I would like to cover what we plan to get done for essex-2. | 22:32 |
| danwent | #topic open discussion | 22:33 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 22:33 | |
| salv | sounds reasonable | 22:33 |
| danwent | salv: does the DST change help you at all, or is it still midnight when this meeting ends for you? | 22:33 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 22:33 | |
| salv | it's 11 | 22:33 |
| salv | not bad :) | 22:33 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:33 | |
| danwent | sweet, practically the middle of the day :) | 22:33 |
| danwent | Ok, sounds like no other open discussion. have a good day folks! | 22:33 |
| danwent | #endmeeting | 22:34 |
| salv | Bye! | 22:34 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Openstack Meetings: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/" | 22:34 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 8 22:34:03 2011 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:34 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-22.00.html | 22:34 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-22.00.txt | 22:34 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2011/openstack-meeting.2011-11-08-22.00.log.html | 22:34 |
| *** cdub has quit IRC | 22:37 | |
| *** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:37 | |
| *** bcwaldon has quit IRC | 22:41 | |
| *** Ghe_Rivero has quit IRC | 22:42 | |
| *** mcohen has left #openstack-meeting | 22:42 | |
| *** GheRivero_ has quit IRC | 22:47 | |
| *** jog0 has left #openstack-meeting | 22:50 | |
| salv | dolphm: are you around? | 22:51 |
| dolphm | salv: yes | 22:51 |
| salv | I see the limit for pylint violations is 470 and the current number of violations is 459 | 22:52 |
| salv | instead of keeping pushing hoping that it gets past pylint it would be great if I could get the same report on my local dev machines | 22:52 |
| salv | I think I'd need the pylintrc file | 22:52 |
| salv | Any chance you can tell me where I can get it? | 22:52 |
| salv | ok I feel stupid | 22:53 |
| salv | sorry about that | 22:53 |
| salv | didn't realize it was in the source code tree :) | 22:54 |
| dolphm | salv: catching up... | 22:55 |
| medberry | sometimes just asking the right question in IRC involved refining it such that you can solve it yourself. :^) | 22:56 |
| dolphm | the pylintrc file in the root of the project, it's just called .pylintrc | 22:56 |
| dolphm | alternatively, you can just get a count of violations by running ./run_tests.sh -l -N | 22:56 |
| dolphm | that command will also provide you a command you can copy/paste to get the full report directly | 22:56 |
| dolphm | and now i'm caught up with you finding the pylintrc file :P | 22:57 |
| salv | yeah, I saw it after I asked you the question. Thanks for the advice I will do ./run_test.sh -l -N | 22:57 |
| dolphm | salv: the -N isn't necessary, but I use it because I run my own virtualenv | 22:57 |
| salv | I take the number of violations that come out from ./run_tests.sh -l is the same that will come out from Jenkins, is that correct? | 22:59 |
| *** edgarmagana has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:02 | |
| danwent | edgar: due to daylight savings, the meeting was an hour ago :) | 23:03 |
| dolphm | salv: yes, that should be true | 23:04 |
| danwent | you can see logs at: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/MeetingLogs | 23:04 |
| dolphm | salv: if it's not, something is wrong :) | 23:04 |
| edgarmagana | what?? | 23:04 |
| edgarmagana | sorry... did not knwo it | 23:04 |
| dolphm | edgarmagana: as a community, we're not very skilled at daylight savings :) | 23:05 |
| edgarmagana | :-( checking the meeting logs | 23:05 |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:06 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 23:09 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 23:11 | |
| *** Jamey___ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:11 | |
| *** Uri_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:13 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 23:13 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:14 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 23:15 | |
| *** ying has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:17 | |
| *** edgarmagana has quit IRC | 23:18 | |
| *** somik has quit IRC | 23:20 | |
| *** Jamey___ has quit IRC | 23:23 | |
| *** Jamey___ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:23 | |
| salv | dolphm: patch has been pushed to gerrit. I fixed some pylint errors here and there to stay under threshold. Thanks for your assistance. | 23:25 |
| dolphm_ | salv: reviewing it :) | 23:26 |
| dolphm_ | salv: it all looks good, except changing the method signatures to compensate for unused variables makes me nervous, especially in the Middleware class :/ | 23:31 |
| *** Uri_ has quit IRC | 23:33 | |
| dolphm_ | salv: service.py and wsgi.py | 23:33 |
| *** yogirackspace has left #openstack-meeting | 23:33 | |
| salv | okay I will revert those changes and hope pylint will be merciful! | 23:37 |
| *** mmetheny has quit IRC | 23:37 | |
| *** mmetheny has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:38 | |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 23:40 | |
| *** ying has quit IRC | 23:40 | |
| salv | dolphm: method signatures reverted | 23:41 |
| dolphm_ | salv: i think you should be fine -- you fixed a lot! | 23:41 |
| dolphm_ | (thanks!) | 23:41 |
| dolphm_ | salv: let's see what jenkins says | 23:43 |
| *** nati2 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:47 | |
| salv | dolphm: jenkins's happy finally :) thanks a lot! | 23:48 |
| dolphm_ | salv: np, thanks again for the fixes! | 23:49 |
| dolphm_ | salv: do you need that middleware to go into stable/diablo? | 23:49 |
| dolphm_ | or is essex-1 sufficient? | 23:49 |
| *** Jamey___ has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** zns has quit IRC | 23:56 | |
| *** zns has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:57 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!