| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:00 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 00:11 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:12 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has quit IRC | 00:15 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 00:15 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:21 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:25 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 00:27 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has quit IRC | 00:29 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:31 | |
| *** pengyong has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:38 | |
| *** pengyong has quit IRC | 00:43 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 00:47 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has quit IRC | 00:53 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 00:53 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 00:54 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:54 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 01:03 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:06 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 01:06 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 01:13 | |
| *** pengyong has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:23 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 01:29 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 01:36 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:38 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 01:42 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 01:46 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:47 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 01:49 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 01:51 | |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:23 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 02:28 | |
| *** mdrnstm has quit IRC | 02:28 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:31 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:33 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:35 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 02:39 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 02:46 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 02:50 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:52 | |
| *** jdurgin has quit IRC | 02:58 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:59 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:02 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:08 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 03:09 | |
| *** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC | 03:11 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:12 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:42 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 03:42 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:43 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 03:55 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 03:56 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:01 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 04:04 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:04 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 04:05 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:09 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:21 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 04:25 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 04:25 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:34 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 04:49 | |
| *** Yak-n-Yeti has quit IRC | 04:59 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 05:01 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 05:05 | |
| *** anderstj has quit IRC | 05:18 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 05:26 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 05:33 | |
| *** jacky has quit IRC | 05:36 | |
| *** jalcine has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:38 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 06:02 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 06:02 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 06:17 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 07:29 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:29 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 07:34 | |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:45 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 07:45 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:54 | |
| *** GheRivero_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:06 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 08:12 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:15 | |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 08:18 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:18 | |
| *** pengyong has quit IRC | 08:58 | |
| *** pengyong has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:59 | |
| *** chilung__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:10 | |
| *** chilung__ has quit IRC | 09:12 | |
| *** GheRivero_ has quit IRC | 11:22 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:56 | |
| *** GheRivero_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:17 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:22 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:22 | |
| *** deshantm has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:39 | |
| *** tong has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:45 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 12:58 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:00 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:21 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 13:27 | |
| *** galstrom has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:36 | |
| *** jalcine is now known as jacky | 13:37 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:46 | |
| *** rackerjoe has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:50 | |
| *** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:52 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 13:52 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:59 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:05 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:07 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:10 | |
| *** Amw3000 has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:14 | |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:19 | |
| *** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:24 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:25 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 14:26 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 14:26 | |
| *** Yak-n-Yeti has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:30 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 14:39 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:40 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 14:42 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:44 | |
| *** Yak-n-Yeti has quit IRC | 14:47 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 14:49 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:50 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:56 | |
| *** jsavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:00 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| *** joesavak has quit IRC | 15:02 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 15:06 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| *** edygarcia_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:18 | |
| *** Yak-n-Yeti has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:20 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 15:21 | |
| *** edygarcia_ is now known as edygarcia | 15:21 | |
| *** jsavak has quit IRC | 15:21 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 15:22 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 15:23 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 15:24 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 15:32 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 15:33 | |
| *** jsavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:38 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:38 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 15:39 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:40 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:41 | |
| *** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:52 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:01 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 16:08 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:08 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:09 | |
| *** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:17 | |
| *** jsavak has quit IRC | 16:19 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 16:21 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:25 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:25 | |
| *** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC | 16:26 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:27 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:27 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:28 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:29 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 16:33 | |
| *** pengyong has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:39 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:39 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 16:49 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 16:53 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 17:00 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:06 | |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:07 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 17:10 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 17:15 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:17 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:21 | |
| *** mdrnstm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:36 | |
| *** rackerjoe has left #openstack-meeting | 17:37 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:43 | |
| *** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:44 | |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:51 | |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:51 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 17:52 | |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 17:52 | |
| * heckj wanders in for the keystone meeting in a few minutes... | 17:57 | |
| dolphm | heckj: o/ | 17:57 |
|---|---|---|
| *** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:57 | |
| ayoung | \O/ | 17:58 |
| gyee | that's a big head | 17:58 |
| ayoung | \_/ ^^ \_/ | 17:58 |
| ayoung | \_/ ^_^ \_/ | 17:59 |
| ayoung | Metal | 17:59 |
| ayoung | \m/ ^_^ \m/ | 17:59 |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:59 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:59 | |
| heckj | morning all | 18:01 |
| heckj | #startmeeting | 18:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 18:01:49 2012 UTC. The chair is heckj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:01 |
| *** liemmn has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| heckj | moving slow today - gimme a sec to get the topics together | 18:02 |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| heckj | #topic Status and Progress | 18:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress" | 18:03 | |
| heckj | I've been going through blueprints, trying to identify who's working on what | 18:03 |
| gyee | I'll be starting the domains BP shortly | 18:04 |
| heckj | ayoung: haven't caught up with you yet. What's your general plans re: multiprocess-keystone-service | 18:04 |
| liemmn | You can mark me down for tempurl one | 18:04 |
| heckj | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone | 18:04 |
| ayoung | /me on IPv6 and PKI via HTTPD | 18:04 |
| heckj | gyee: what milestone are you aiming at for implementation? From our chat yesterday, I'm thinking F2 or F3. | 18:05 |
| ayoung | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/multiprocess-keystone-service | 18:05 |
| gyee | yes F2 if I work weekends | 18:05 |
| heckj | liemn: same question for you - what milestone are you aiming at for having an implementation | 18:05 |
| ayoung | heckj, I have a working prototype of Keystone running in HTTPD | 18:05 |
| gyee | F3 is more realistic | 18:05 |
| ayoung | Wrote up my notes here: | 18:05 |
| ayoung | http://adam.younglogic.com/2012/04/keystone-httpd/ | 18:05 |
| ayoung | the two things I'd like to get eyeballs on are the locations for the wsgi enabling files and the HTTPD config | 18:06 |
| heckj | gyee: milestone F3 set | 18:06 |
| gyee | thank you sir | 18:06 |
| heckj | ayoung: will look | 18:07 |
| heckj | #link http://adam.younglogic.com/2012/04/keystone-httpd/ | 18:07 |
| heckj | #action - please give feedback to ayoung re: http://adam.younglogic.com/2012/04/keystone-httpd/ | 18:07 |
| ayoung | heckj, realted to that is the discussion of deconflicting the URLS for Openstack in general | 18:07 |
| ayoung | related | 18:07 |
| heckj | ayoung: what's your thought around implementation time for the PKI work - and are you leading that up? | 18:07 |
| dolphm | heckj: i think i'm down for rbac, unless termie sleepsonthefloor is already on it (bp is unassigned) | 18:08 |
| *** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:08 | |
| ayoung | IE: do we want https://hostname/keystone or https://hostname/identity | 18:08 |
| heckj | dolphm: thanks - will assign. Thoughts on milestone? | 18:08 |
| dolphm | heckj: f2 | 18:08 |
| ayoung | heckj, again, once I have HTTPD, PKI becomes a lot easier | 18:08 |
| dolphm | (do we have a release schedule out yet? ..) | 18:08 |
| *** kevin-lewis-9 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:08 | |
| dolphm | ooh we do! http://wiki.openstack.org/FolsomReleaseSchedule | 18:09 |
| heckj | ayoung: makes sense | 18:10 |
| heckj | ayoung: I'm going to mark PKI for F3 at this point | 18:10 |
| ayoung | heckj, OK | 18:10 |
| heckj | ayoung: can move as needed | 18:11 |
| gyee | heckj, I think Liem's tempURL work depended on access key CRUD | 18:11 |
| ayoung | I'll try to have it done before then, but that is a safe bet | 18:11 |
| gyee | do I get the green light for access key BP? | 18:11 |
| heckj | gyee: I thought we agreed to a yes at the summit, and that the idea was to rework the EC2 API CRUD pieces to be more generic and use that. | 18:12 |
| heckj | liemn: are you doing that work? gyee | 18:12 |
| heckj | ? | 18:12 |
| gyee | gotcha | 18:12 |
| heckj | there's no blueprint to that at this point... | 18:12 |
| liemmn | heckj, yeah, I will do the tempurl | 18:12 |
| gyee | I'll pay Liem to do that work :) | 18:12 |
| liemmn | heckj, so the access key stuff still remains an extenstion? | 18:13 |
| heckj | liemn: is https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/access-key-authentication what you're doing then? | 18:13 |
| liemmn | yes | 18:13 |
| heckj | liemmn: I'm drafting an v3 API now to drag these things into core - I'm expecting to have it up for comments by | 18:14 |
| heckj | F1 | 18:14 |
| liemmn | I don't think F1, probably F2 | 18:14 |
| heckj | gyee: would you create a blueprint to cover working EC2 to be generic to support general key access? | 18:15 |
| heckj | liemmn: I put you in F3 for now, can totally move in up if you'd prefer | 18:15 |
| gyee | heckj, will do | 18:15 |
| dolphm | heckj: i assume you're covering all the BP's that will depend on a revised api? | 18:15 |
| heckj | #action: gyee to create BP to cover making access key storage EC2 more generic | 18:16 |
| ayoung | liemmn, how does that interact with PKI Blueprint? | 18:16 |
| heckj | dolphm: trying, but I'm sure I'll miss something in the first cut - or several. AIming to get that up ASAP so we can move on the impl work form there | 18:16 |
| dolphm | heckj: no worries | 18:17 |
| ayoung | gyee, heckj I think we should ensure that PKI and Key access solutions are complementation | 18:18 |
| ayoung | complementary | 18:18 |
| gyee | ayoung, access is different from PKI | 18:18 |
| ayoung | gyee, yes and no. | 18:18 |
| gyee | access key auth is just like password auth, while PKI requires handshake | 18:18 |
| ayoung | Understood | 18:18 |
| ayoung | gyee, you and I understand the distinctions, but most people will not | 18:19 |
| ayoung | additionally, there are overlapping concerns regarding key management etc | 18:19 |
| ayoung | key generation... | 18:19 |
| gyee | good luck with that :) | 18:19 |
| ayoung | gyee, well, I do have a little bit of experience in dealing with it... | 18:20 |
| ayoung | heckj, I think we need an action Item something along the lines of "map out the whole PKI approach" | 18:20 |
| gyee | I am putting in the requirement for OCSP, just for you | 18:20 |
| ayoung | something that connects the dots | 18:20 |
| ayoung | gyee, stapling or server call? | 18:21 |
| heckj | ayoung: definitely | 18:21 |
| gyee | real time | 18:21 |
| heckj | ayoung: would you create a blueprint to lay out the PKI approach? Document, etc | 18:21 |
| *** galstrom has quit IRC | 18:22 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:22 | |
| heckj | ayoung: we can do that like the V3 api - document & feedback in F1, impl in F2/F3 | 18:22 |
| heckj | #action: ayoung to create blueprint to document PKI approach for feedback | 18:22 |
| ayoung | heckj, will do, if gyee promises to help | 18:22 |
| gyee | sure | 18:22 |
| heckj | #action: gyee to help ayound with it | 18:22 |
| heckj | :-) | 18:22 |
| liemmn | ayoung, I can help review too... I did the 2-way auth a while back for keystone diablo... | 18:23 |
| ayoung | liemmn, thanks. I was planning on asking for your help, too. | 18:23 |
| heckj | Okay - any other work for Keystone that we don't have tracked as yet? | 18:25 |
| heckj | liemmn: are you set up as an openstack contributor? signed CLA and all that rot? | 18:26 |
| liemmn | heckj, yes | 18:26 |
| liemmn | FYI... separate topic... I filed a validation bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/992214 | 18:26 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 992214 in keystone "GET /tenants XSD schema validation fails" [Undecided,New] | 18:26 |
| liemmn | we need to decide what the source of truth is... XSD or code :) | 18:27 |
| *** Haneef has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:27 | |
| heckj | liemmn: at the moment, it's code. Although we need to have integrated tests that verify the code against the API description (WADL, XSD, etc) | 18:28 |
| heckj | the only way we can guarantee interop is with tests | 18:28 |
| heckj | Tempest is still getting traction, so for now I'm in favor of getting integration tests like these into Keystone's testing framework - once they're in, we'll automatically gate on them with code updates. | 18:29 |
| heckj | liemmn: is that something you're interested in doing? | 18:29 |
| ayoung | It seems to me that the XSD should be generated from the code | 18:29 |
| gyee | +1 | 18:29 |
| dolphm | liemmn: xsd:id should definitely be a string | 18:30 |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:30 | |
| heckj | ayoung: ideally - but in practice it turns out ot be a PITA. If you guys want to take that on as a prototype to try it out, I'm all game. | 18:30 |
| dolphm | ayoung: additionally, some parts of the xsd are optional and keystone does not (and probably will never) implement them | 18:30 |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:30 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, then why carry them? | 18:30 |
| dolphm | ayoung: we're not the only implementation on the block | 18:30 |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 18:31 | |
| heckj | just the only public one | 18:31 |
| gyee | s/public/public and free/g | 18:31 |
| gyee | :) | 18:31 |
| ayoung | you RAX folks holding out on us? | 18:31 |
| *** Yak-n-Yeti has quit IRC | 18:31 | |
| heckj | gyee: fair 'nough | 18:32 |
| liemmn | IMO... it should be the other way around... start out with XSD and then generate code... That way, you don't let language specifics "leak" into the XSD... | 18:32 |
| ayoung | liemmn, +1 | 18:32 |
| ayoung | if, in fact, the XSD is the public contract | 18:32 |
| ayoung | and it sounds like it is. | 18:32 |
| heckj | liemmn: I disagree - the resulting code is horrific to maintain, and what we just crawled out from underneath | 18:32 |
| *** Comet1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| *** Comet1 has quit IRC | 18:32 | |
| heckj | I totally agree that need to match, and I think the way to verify that is with tests. | 18:32 |
| heckj | An API without a concrete implementation that you can verify against is worse than useless | 18:33 |
| liemmn | yeah, in reality, code generation tools vary from language bindings to language bindings... | 18:33 |
| heckj | Personally, I don't care about the XSD outside of providing a means to document the api.openstack.org site. To me, that's the primary value. | 18:33 |
| liemmn | heckj, I think both are important... tests and XSD serving as contracts for other implementers. | 18:34 |
| dolphm | heckj: +1 | 18:34 |
| heckj | liemmn: I agree that it's an important contract, but that wasn't the earlier assertion. Hence my suggestion of tests to verify. | 18:34 |
| * gyee memo to self: write a lot of tests | 18:34 | |
| liemmn | heckj: +1 | 18:34 |
| dolphm | i know rax adopted keystone's old integration tests at some point, worked well for them -- not sure what they're doing post-redux | 18:34 |
| joesavak | o\ | 18:35 |
| heckj | joesavak! | 18:35 |
| joesavak | we are using python keystone client in some of the integration tests against rax impl. | 18:35 |
| dolphm | joesavak: awesome | 18:35 |
| joesavak | we aren't using the keystone tests though against rax impl | 18:35 |
| heckj | joesavak: totally your choice in maintaining a separate implementation. | 18:36 |
| joesavak | yuppers | 18:36 |
| joesavak | also - while i'm not in a meeting - | 18:36 |
| heckj | joesavak: unrelated to XSD contracts and such, there's a pile of BPs on the list with your name. What's the plan with implementing those? Who's working on those elements, and when are they aiming to have it implemented? | 18:36 |
| joesavak | Most likely, it'll be dolph working on those | 18:37 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:37 | |
| joesavak | 2 highest priorities for RAX is RBAC and MFA | 18:37 |
| dolphm | joesavak: not all of em! | 18:37 |
| heckj | joesavak: I've got dolphm on RBAC | 18:37 |
| heckj | joesavak: nothing on multifactor - who's doing that work? | 18:37 |
| joesavak | we'll add the extension contract for MFA - but probably not do the keystone impl.. need help on that | 18:38 |
| dolphm | heckj: does multifactor need to land beyond supporting spec changes? | 18:38 |
| *** lloydde_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:38 | |
| dolphm | joesavak: * | 18:38 |
| joesavak | from my perpsecitve, i'm ok with mfa being an OS-KS* extension that I can implement within RAX. | 18:39 |
| heckj | dolphm: I don't want to claim support in the API for anything that isn't in code. How complex it is, I don't care - but we need something to verify interop. | 18:39 |
| ayoung | joesavak, what two factors do you consider most important? | 18:39 |
| joesavak | sms & email | 18:39 |
| joesavak | outside of password/api-key auth support (first level auth) | 18:40 |
| joesavak | hi ayoung, dolphm, heckj, liemn, and gyee, by the way. ; ) | 18:40 |
| heckj | joesavak, dolph: if you want it to just be a private RS extension, there's no trouble with that - it just won't be part of the official KS release. I thought the intention from the summit was to have a simple multifactor implementation in the public Keystone though. | 18:40 |
| gyee | I was going to refactor the keystone auth as part of access key impl | 18:41 |
| gyee | make it a plugin style | 18:41 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| joesavak | cool | 18:41 |
| gyee | but if RAX wants to do it, you can have it :) | 18:41 |
| joesavak | gyee, be our guest. ;0 | 18:41 |
| joesavak | ;) | 18:41 |
| heckj | gyee: it already is "plugin style" - could you be more specific with your plans? | 18:42 |
| gyee | not really, I mean PAM style | 18:42 |
| gyee | like JAAS | 18:42 |
| dolphm | gyee: plugin to the identity plugin? | 18:42 |
| gyee | that way, you can add you own auth module based on auth type | 18:42 |
| heckj | gyee: you want to add another plugin layer for identity instead of simply writing an alternate backend driver for it? | 18:42 |
| gyee | well, I want to be able to load different plugins based on auth type | 18:43 |
| gyee | i.e. passwordCredential -> password auth module | 18:43 |
| heckj | gyee: if you want to make a configurable backend, have at, but be aware the canonical API is at the keystone.identity.core.Driver class | 18:43 |
| heckj | gyee: okay by me | 18:44 |
| gyee | I haven't dive into that part of the code that much, was just a brain fart | 18:44 |
| liemmn | I think we should keep it simple, and configurable whenever needed... I can discuss it with gyee... | 18:44 |
| heckj | gyee: no worries - dig in and holler w/ questions onto IRC or the list | 18:44 |
| gyee | will do | 18:45 |
| ayoung | I think that the issue is we currently equate authentication with issuing a token. We could easily split that | 18:45 |
| dolphm | in legacy, we talked about supporting a configurable list of auth methods, sorted by priority in the configuration -- the idea being each plugin would be passed the incoming auth blindly, and they could either return False or a successful auth (stopping on the first success) | 18:45 |
| heckj | joesavak: what's your plan re: multifactor at this point? Or is that getting assigned to gyee? | 18:45 |
| ayoung | then authenticate is authenticate. requesting a token requires authentication | 18:45 |
| *** edygarcia_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| joesavak | gyee - will your plans support a half-token (indicating further auth to get a full token)? | 18:46 |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 18:46 | |
| gyee | I can add a generic table to store the state information | 18:47 |
| gyee | just a string, you can call it a half token | 18:47 |
| gyee | I mean the plugins can make use of it | 18:47 |
| joesavak | ok - we may be a rax extension on top of that to get us to what we need | 18:47 |
| joesavak | so mfa --> gyee. Additional bp will be created if that impl needs rax extension to get rax to work | 18:47 |
| heckj | gyee: do you agree? | 18:48 |
| gyee | I am not doing mfa, just the refactoring of the auth part | 18:48 |
| gyee | not the full monty, just half :) | 18:48 |
| *** lcheng has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| *** edygarcia_ is now known as edygarcia | 18:48 | |
| heckj | joesavak: you're the one with it assigned. I'll leave it off the milestones for now - get back to me later? | 18:48 |
| joesavak | ok - target mfa to me for now. gyee - are you targetting folsom 2/3? | 18:48 |
| joesavak | yup - i'll try to build off of what gyee does around folsom4 | 18:49 |
| gyee | joesavak, f2 perhaps | 18:49 |
| joesavak | cool, thanks | 18:49 |
| heckj | updated | 18:50 |
| joesavak | Also - we've cleaned some of the contract out in https://github.com/carlosmarin/identity-api and are discussing here if it looks good to push back into gerrit. Take a look - if you see anything odd let me know. I know that even cleaning a contract could cause uproar. | 18:50 |
| heckj | #action - feedback needed on https://github.com/carlosmarin/identity-api | 18:50 |
| heckj | We have something like 8-9 minutes left | 18:51 |
| dolphm | joesavak: tell him to push it -- feedback happens in gerrit :) | 18:51 |
| heckj | #topic open questions/issues | 18:51 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open questions/issues" | 18:51 | |
| *** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:52 | |
| ayoung | do people prefer https://hostname/keystone or https://hostname/identity for the unified URL scheme? Informal poll. | 18:52 |
| joesavak | dolphm - i will by end of day | 18:52 |
| rafaduran | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6425/ still needs approval | 18:52 |
| joesavak | https://hostname/identity | 18:52 |
| heckj | ayoung: slight pref to 'identity', but I don't honestly care that mch | 18:52 |
| dolphm | /identity | 18:53 |
| rafaduran | I'm aslo thinking about starting a draft for https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/963098 | 18:53 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 963098 in keystone "Keystone isn't acting on consecutive failed logins" [High,Triaged] | 18:53 |
| rafaduran | any suggestion would be appreciated | 18:53 |
| gyee | ayoung, my magic 8 ball says identity | 18:53 |
| dolphm | rafaduran: a bp you mean? | 18:53 |
| dolphm | that's a pretty strong informal consensus lol | 18:53 |
| ayoung | dolphm, I think that is the way that things are going to fo | 18:53 |
| ayoung | go | 18:53 |
| rafaduran | dolphm: I mean gerrit review | 18:54 |
| rafaduran | dolphm: review draft | 18:54 |
| *** Shrews has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:57 | |
| heckj | rafaduran: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6425/ approved | 18:57 |
| heckj | Wrappin' this up for today - back next week, same bat channel, same bat time | 18:57 |
| rafaduran | heckj: ok, thanks | 18:57 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 18:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 18:57 | |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 18:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 18:57 | |
| mtaylor | hrm | 18:58 |
| heckj | where's the damn logs? | 18:58 |
| mtaylor | clarkb: ^^ | 18:58 |
| heckj | grrrr | 18:58 |
| mtaylor | heckj: we'll find em for ya | 18:58 |
| heckj | *sob* *sob* OK *sob* | 18:58 |
| heckj | (thank you) | 18:58 |
| * mtaylor pats heckj on the back | 18:58 | |
| clarkb | hmm, I don't think I touched the endmeeting code ... /me looks | 18:58 |
| mtaylor | it worked earlier today | 18:59 |
| *** comstud_ is now known as comstud | 18:59 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 18:59 | |
| heckj | bot being difficult, ah yeah. | 18:59 |
| *** Transformer has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:59 | |
| mtaylor | darned robots | 18:59 |
| clarkb | mtaylor: did meetingLocalConfig.py change? that is managed by puppet | 19:00 |
| heckj | not seeing anything in http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/ beyond Apr 27th... | 19:00 |
| *** Transformer has left #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| *** pengyong has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| soren | CI meeting, no? | 19:01 |
| mtaylor | #startmeeting | 19:01 |
| openstack | mtaylor: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. | 19:01 |
| *** jsavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| soren | Predictable :) | 19:01 |
| heckj | oooh - now we're screwed | 19:01 |
| mtaylor | clarkb: I didn't | 19:01 |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| mtaylor | so, #endmeeting has just stopped working altogether. neat | 19:02 |
| ayoung | what happens if you try and set status? Does it start a new meeting? | 19:02 |
| *** joesavak has quit IRC | 19:02 | |
| soren | kill -HUP `pidof meetbot` | 19:02 |
| *** rafaduran has quit IRC | 19:02 | |
| ayoung | #end-meeting \ | 19:02 |
| ayoung | #end-meeting | 19:02 |
| soren | sudo #endmeeting | 19:02 |
| mtaylor | hehe | 19:02 |
| soren | Oh. | 19:03 |
| soren | sudo \#endmeeting | 19:03 |
| soren | Hm. | 19:03 |
| soren | I give up. | 19:03 |
| soren | That's all I had. | 19:03 |
| mtaylor | when sudo commands fail soren, I believe the world is ending | 19:03 |
| ayoung | soren is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported. | 19:03 |
| soren | mtaylor: I've made arrangements. It's ok. | 19:03 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: want me to restart the bot? | 19:04 |
| heckj | I just saw a rocket leaving earth... | 19:04 |
| clarkb | LinuxJedi: made a change ~5 hours ago to update the mimetype | 19:04 |
| soren | heckj: I've seen that movie. It turns out to be seafaring ships instead. | 19:04 |
| soren | </spoiler> | 19:04 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: that was to nginx | 19:04 |
| clarkb | could that have borked it? | 19:04 |
| clarkb | ah | 19:04 |
| soren | #ENDMEETING | 19:05 |
| soren | endmeeting, please. | 19:05 |
| * LinuxJedi sshing into it now | 19:05 | |
| heckj | here come the big guns... | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | see, this is better than a ci meeting ... | 19:05 |
| LinuxJedi | crap, it can't write the log file | 19:06 |
| mtaylor | perms? | 19:06 |
| LinuxJedi | yep | 19:06 |
| LinuxJedi | don't know why this is hitting us now though | 19:06 |
| mtaylor | can you grant dir perms for now and have heckj try #endmeeting again? | 19:06 |
| heckj | willing | 19:06 |
| mtaylor | didn't we add control of that dir recently to puppet? | 19:07 |
| soren | If only there was a way to find out. | 19:07 |
| * mtaylor stabs soren with a salmon | 19:07 | |
| soren | Like, some kind of system to track changes to code. | 19:07 |
| heckj | don't waste good fish! | 19:08 |
| * LinuxJedi wonders why it is all owned by mordred all of a sudden | 19:08 | |
| mtaylor | hrm. | 19:08 |
| * mtaylor also wonders that | 19:08 | |
| LinuxJedi | #endmeeting | 19:08 |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:09 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 19:09 | |
| heckj | now? | 19:09 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 19:10 |
| heckj | derp, guess not | 19:10 |
| LinuxJedi | #startmeeting | 19:10 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 19:10:22 2012 UTC. The chair is LinuxJedi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:10 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 19:10 |
| heckj | Ok - might have lost #keystone logs, but looks like it's working now | 19:10 |
| soren | LinuxJedi: Try ending it. Just for giggles. | 19:11 |
| LinuxJedi | I think the log did save on the restart | 19:11 |
| LinuxJedi | #endmeeting | 19:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 19:11 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 1 19:11:21 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:11 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.10.html | 19:11 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.10.txt | 19:11 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.10.log.html | 19:11 |
| soren | Whoo! | 19:11 |
| LinuxJedi | #startmeeting | 19:11 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 19:11:29 2012 UTC. The chair is LinuxJedi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:11 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 19:11 |
| mtaylor | whee! | 19:11 |
| *** jaypipes is now known as jaypipes-afk | 19:11 | |
| soren | Thanks everyone. SEe yo unext week. | 19:11 |
| mtaylor | great! | 19:11 |
| mtaylor | so - first item, as you may have noticed, we did some work on meetbot | 19:12 |
| LinuxJedi | http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-meeting/%23openstack-meeting.2012-05-01.log appears to be the previous meeting | 19:12 |
| heckj | found'em | 19:12 |
| LinuxJedi | doh, I mean http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-18.01.log.txt | 19:12 |
| heckj | Linked into the wiki - I thin the MIME types at eavesdrop aren't working for the HTML though - it's forcing my browser to download rather than display directly for the HTML | 19:13 |
| LinuxJedi | heckj: already a bug open for that | 19:14 |
| clarkb | things are just going to break today for LinuxJedi I think | 19:14 |
| heckj | cool, thanks LinuxJedi! | 19:14 |
| LinuxJedi | heckj: I'm already doing a 12-14 hour day today though so unlikely it will get fixed before tomorrow morning | 19:14 |
| heckj | no worries | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: bah. I thought you usually did 20 hour days! | 19:15 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I'm slipping ;) | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | hehe | 19:15 |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 19:16 | |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: plus my wife gets pissed if I work too much now | 19:16 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: anyway, meeting is running :) | 19:16 |
| clarkb | but yes voting has been added. use the '#startvote some question? option1 option2' command to begin a voting session then vote using #vote option1 | 19:16 |
| mtaylor | clarkb: ++ | 19:16 |
| clarkb | check vote status with #showvote and end voting with #endvote | 19:17 |
| mtaylor | this makes me happy. thanks clarkb | 19:17 |
| *** kevin-lewis-9 has quit IRC | 19:17 | |
| LinuxJedi | #startvote do we love voting? yes no | 19:17 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: do we love voting? Valid vote options are yes, no. | 19:17 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 19:17 |
| LinuxJedi | #vote yes | 19:18 |
| mtaylor | #vote yes | 19:18 |
| clarkb | #vote no | 19:18 |
| clarkb | #showvote | 19:18 |
| openstack | yes (2): mtaylor, LinuxJedi | 19:18 |
| openstack | no (1): clarkb | 19:18 |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:18 | |
| LinuxJedi | awesome | 19:18 |
| soren | #vote whuh? | 19:18 |
| LinuxJedi | #endvote | 19:18 |
| Shrews | #vote yes | 19:18 |
| openstack | soren: whuh? is not a valid option. Valid options are yes, no. | 19:18 |
| Shrews | #vote yes | 19:18 |
| openstack | Voted on "do we love voting?" Results are | 19:18 |
| Shrews | #vote yes | 19:18 |
| openstack | yes (2): mtaylor, LinuxJedi | 19:18 |
| openstack | no (1): clarkb | 19:18 |
| soren | Aw. | 19:18 |
| Shrews | #showvote | 19:18 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi ended the vote already | 19:18 |
| Shrews | damn | 19:18 |
| * Shrews wanted to break it | 19:19 | |
| LinuxJedi | anyway, that was a quick demo ;) | 19:19 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:19 | |
| LinuxJedi | Shrews: I believe clarkb has a test channel to break it on | 19:19 |
| clarkb | #testmeetbot here on freenode | 19:19 |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| *** lcheng has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| clarkb | I dno't promise the bot will always be listening through :) | 19:19 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 19:19 | |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| *** anderstj has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| mtaylor | jeblair is hiking in the utah desert this week, but he's going to be looking at some improvements to the gerrit trigger plugin when he gets back | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | I also brought the irclogs back to meetbot today and knocked up a quick 30 second homepage on http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/ to be themed at a later date | 19:20 |
| mtaylor | specifically, support for matrix jobs, dependent jobs, and optimistic branch prediction-based building (all of which kind of tie in together) | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | and in addition to beating his head against a brickwall trying to get new trystack machines properly stood up, devananda is going to poke at openvz support on our build slaves | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: what're you up to these days? | 19:22 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: so, we not have meetbot under puppet control, which mostly works great apart from the logging blip just now | 19:23 |
| LinuxJedi | I've done lots of CI docs | 19:23 |
| LinuxJedi | including a couple of useful howtos for people wanting to work with CI stuff | 19:23 |
| LinuxJedi | Jenkins job filler has had a lot of work done to it, but there are still a few things to be sorted out | 19:24 |
| LinuxJedi | Stackforge gerrit managed to run out of disk which was a barrel of fun | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | whee! | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | (Shrews is adding some logrotation there) | 19:25 |
| LinuxJedi | yes, it was all mysql backups | 19:25 |
| LinuxJedi | and the puppet server on stackforge fell over which caused some more fun | 19:25 |
| *** justinsb has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| LinuxJedi | I've worked on adding the Ceilometer project to Stackforge, that should be ready tomorrow | 19:25 |
| LinuxJedi | and that is about all I remember off the top of my head | 19:26 |
| mtaylor | sounds like a good week | 19:26 |
| *** justinsb has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:26 | |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: two things that came up, lists and whether or not to do translations for logs | 19:26 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I argued for translations for logs with error codes, but I'm not sure if that is a CI thing or a "something else" thing | 19:27 |
| mtaylor | yes... someone from dreamhost is going to help with mailinglists, right? | 19:27 |
| clarkb | I was looking at nova and its use of gettext and it looks like nova will currently attempt to put translations in the logs | 19:27 |
| clarkb | with error codes | 19:27 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I believe so, I'm a little behind catching up on that to be honest. | 19:27 |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 19:29 | |
| mtaylor | we've had a few issues arise with the wiki over the last week, which brings up that we need to actually manage it | 19:31 |
| mtaylor | annegentle requested that we migrate to mediawiki, and suggested that our friends at wikipedia might be interested in helping us with that | 19:31 |
| annegentle | woo woo | 19:31 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: we inherited another server? | 19:32 |
| mtaylor | well, we have it now already - we just don't do anything with it | 19:32 |
| LinuxJedi | ah, fair enough | 19:33 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: this also falls into "what should be docs and what should be wiki" | 19:33 |
| LinuxJedi | similar problem to what we had in Drizzle | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | I don't have any specific action plan at the moment - just that it's one of those things we should probably actually, you know, care for | 19:33 |
| LinuxJedi | :) | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | also "manage the wiki" really menas "ensure that someone is managing the wiki" | 19:34 |
| LinuxJedi | ah, like the mailing lists then ;) | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | yup | 19:35 |
| * LinuxJedi is less concerned now | 19:35 | |
| mtaylor | goal for this week from me is to try to finish getting the tox alignment done and then turning jenkins job filler on for the rest of the projects | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | our jenkins job divergence is a little silly at the moment | 19:35 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: is that wise considering Jim just turned it off for everything? | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | as part of that, we're also making sure that when jenkins runs the tests it grabs xunit output | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: well, what I mean is... | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: get the tox alignment done this week _so_that_ we _could_ turn on the jenkins job filler | 19:36 |
| LinuxJedi | ah! ok then :) | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: now that you bring it up though... the bit we can't do in puppet at the moment (override messages) | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: did jeblair talk to you about his idea to just have a python script do that bit? | 19:37 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I'm planning on fixing the remaining issues with the job filler this week | 19:37 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: no | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: idea: rather than implementing all of the things directly inside of ruby/puppet extension ... just drop a python script on the box and run that | 19:38 |
| LinuxJedi | I'm sure I could do it in ruby, but I'm also sure I will kill someone in the process | 19:38 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: cool :) | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | anyway - if you get that stuff going, and I get the projects ready for it | 19:39 |
| mtaylor | maybe next week we can actually move them all to puppet/git management | 19:39 |
| LinuxJedi | ++ | 19:39 |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:39 | |
| mtaylor | oh - one more thing... | 19:41 |
| mtaylor | although it's mildly hp specific... we finally got our internal legal stuff done which allowed those of us who work for hp to sign the google cla for gerrit | 19:41 |
| mtaylor | which means our patches to gerrit are finally starting to go upstream | 19:41 |
| LinuxJedi | yay :) | 19:42 |
| * LinuxJedi upstreams a patch to re-write it in Python ;) | 19:42 | |
| mtaylor | hehe... that's actually just a git reset command ... | 19:42 |
| LinuxJedi | lol :) | 19:42 |
| mtaylor | that would be a re-re-write | 19:42 |
| LinuxJedi | indeed :) | 19:43 |
| mtaylor | that's all I've got ... anybody else out there have anything? | 19:43 |
| LinuxJedi | I really do plan on having the stackforge www up this week | 19:44 |
| * clarkb is working on getting i8ln working now | 19:44 | |
| LinuxJedi | if only as a basic holding page | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | w00t to both things | 19:44 |
| clarkb | looks like Horizon is pushing hard to use transifex so it looks like we will be starting there | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | fine by me | 19:44 |
| soren | What, Gerrit used to be written in Python? | 19:44 |
| mtaylor | soren: yup | 19:45 |
| soren | Hm. Interesting. | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | soren: check out the v1.0 tag in the repo | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | it's a django app | 19:45 |
| soren | Neat. | 19:45 |
| clarkb | also, to fix nova i8ln whats the easiest way to stand up a quick dev/test environment for nova/openstack | 19:45 |
| clarkb | devstack? | 19:45 |
| * LinuxJedi can only guess it because Android is Javaish (depending on your side of the Oracle suit) | 19:45 | |
| soren | I wonder what motivated the rewrite. | 19:45 |
| mtaylor | clarkb: devstack | 19:45 |
| soren | LinuxJedi: There's probably a connection there, yeah. | 19:46 |
| mtaylor | also, jgit | 19:46 |
| *** anderstj has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| mtaylor | although python-git is pretty good these days | 19:47 |
| LinuxJedi | anyway, anyone have anything else before I find out that meetbot is broken again? | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | nope | 19:49 |
| LinuxJedi | ok then | 19:49 |
| LinuxJedi | #endmeeting | 19:49 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 19:49 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 1 19:49:39 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:49 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.11.html | 19:49 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.11.txt | 19:49 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-19.11.log.html | 19:49 |
| clarkb | it didnt break this time :) | 19:50 |
| LinuxJedi | after meeting note: I'll fix the mime types on those links tomorrow ^ | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | w00t | 19:50 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: it is no longer all owned by mtaylor (I can't even see in any bash history or log how that happened either) | 19:51 |
| clarkb | was the bot running under mtaylor at some point? | 19:51 |
| LinuxJedi | nope, clean server installed using puppet | 19:52 |
| clarkb | weird | 19:52 |
| LinuxJedi | ah, I know what happened | 19:52 |
| *** tong has quit IRC | 19:52 | |
| LinuxJedi | I migrated the old logs over, they must have been owned by mtaylor, the cp command must have changed the dir ownership | 19:52 |
| LinuxJedi | or they must have the same uid as mtaylor | 19:52 |
| LinuxJedi | damn | 19:52 |
| * LinuxJedi is an idiot for not thinking of that | 19:53 | |
| clarkb | well at least we know what broke now. I am off to find lunch now. | 19:53 |
| *** Shrews has left #openstack-meeting | 19:55 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 19:55 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| *** anotherjesse_zz is now known as anotherjesse | 20:00 | |
| ttx | o/ | 20:00 |
| heckj | o/ | 20:00 |
| vishy | o/ | 20:00 |
| anotherjesse | o/ | 20:01 |
| ttx | did anyone hear from jbryce ? | 20:01 |
| * heckj nopes | 20:01 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:01 | |
| ttx | this is starting to look like a recurrent bad joke | 20:02 |
| bcwaldon | but waldon's here this time! | 20:02 |
| heckj | yeah!!! | 20:02 |
| vishy | 5 ppb members? | 20:03 |
| vishy | that's all we got? | 20:03 |
| heckj | yeps | 20:04 |
| anotherjesse | I only came because vishy said to - I assumed no email from jbryce == no meeting | 20:04 |
| *** devcamcar_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| heckj | devcamcar is probably out in the Seattle riots having fun | 20:05 |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 20:05 | |
| devcamcar_ | o/ | 20:05 |
| heckj | er, guess not | 20:05 |
| vishy | I sent an email requesting a meeting last week and it was pushed to this week | 20:05 |
| devcamcar_ | just set a cop car on fire | 20:05 |
| vishy | but oh well | 20:05 |
| anotherjesse | glad that is on the record | 20:05 |
| danwent | anotherjesse: are IRC logs admissible in court? | 20:06 |
| notmyname | I'mhere | 20:06 |
| bcwaldon | god I hope not | 20:06 |
| ttx | we might need to select a more... available chair. And no, I'm not volunteering. | 20:06 |
| bcwaldon | I propose vishy | 20:06 |
| notmyname | heh, I'm sure he doesn't have enough free time already ;-) | 20:07 |
| * vishy hides | 20:07 | |
| devcamcar_ | I propose anotherjesse :) | 20:07 |
| cloudfly | danwent yes | 20:07 |
| cloudfly | ish | 20:07 |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:07 | |
| * anotherjesse hides | 20:07 | |
| ttx | well, anotherjesse or johnpur would make sense, since they are appointed :P | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | heckj: there are riots in seattle? | 20:07 |
| ttx | or joshua, but he isn't even around :) | 20:08 |
| heckj | the riots are busting windows a block away from the office | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | REALLY? | 20:08 |
| notmyname | mtaylor: the indie music coffee shop closed early, but you probably haven't heard of it | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | wow | 20:08 |
| heckj | and there go the cops after them.. | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | notmyname: haha | 20:08 |
| heckj | if you're bored: http://www.kirotv.com/videos/news/live-event-from-kiro-7-eyewitness-news/vC4c3/ | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | heckj: here in nyc there's helicopters going overhead a lot, but I dont' think it's turned into rioting | 20:09 |
| cloudfly | occupy related. | 20:09 |
| heckj | mtaylor: just a few of the usual suspects doing stupid shit. Most of the protest downtown looks to be quite peaceful. | 20:09 |
| cloudfly | surprising lack of rioting in sf | 20:09 |
| anotherjesse | occupy openstack meeting | 20:09 |
| termie | cloudfly: uh, there was a bunch of rioting | 20:10 |
| cloudfly | where? | 20:10 |
| heckj | There's jesse! Quick, tag him at chair! | 20:10 |
| termie | cloudfly: http://www.missionmission.org/ | 20:10 |
| termie | cloudfly: in the mission | 20:10 |
| cloudfly | i missed it all apparently. | 20:10 |
| termie | cloudfly: today there are protests all over | 20:10 |
| termie | but also mayday != occupy | 20:10 |
| termie | they just using the same day | 20:10 |
| cloudfly | could be a cinco de mayo event early. | 20:10 |
| termie | mayday is a traditional protest day, it is international worker's day | 20:10 |
| ttx | an holiday in France. | 20:11 |
| heckj | So we're bagging the PPB meeting without a chair, or carrying on? | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | ttx: isn't every day a traditionaly protest day in france? | 20:11 |
| bcwaldon | I could go play some ping poing | 20:11 |
| notmyname | do we have enough people here for a meeting? | 20:12 |
| ttx | heckj: we should appoint anotherjesse so that next week we have a meeting ? | 20:12 |
| devcamcar_ | Yup | 20:12 |
| vishy | i think we do have enough now | 20:12 |
| * mtaylor doesn't have a seat, so don't count him | 20:12 | |
| notmyname | then we should have a meeting | 20:12 |
| * vishy appoints mtaylor a seat | 20:12 | |
| bcwaldon | are there 9 or 12 of us? | 20:12 |
| bcwaldon | or 14 | 20:12 |
| mtaylor | neat! | 20:12 |
| * notmyname is very interested in a 3rd party policy | 20:13 | |
| mtaylor | we should have just started appointing people a while ago... | 20:13 |
| ttx | we are 15. Needs 8 | 20:13 |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 20:13 | |
| ttx | we are only 7 | 20:13 |
| ttx | oh dan is here. 8. | 20:13 |
| danwent | :) | 20:14 |
| vishy | ttx, heckj, devcamcar, bcwaldon, anotherjesse, vishy, notmyname, danwent! | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | ok, and we have clear goals for this meeting? | 20:14 |
| vishy | woo | 20:14 |
| vishy | yes | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | ok, then lets get going | 20:14 |
| vishy | decide if we have a policy about 3rd party apis | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | who wants to chair this | 20:14 |
| heckj | #startmeeting | 20:14 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 20:14:45 2012 UTC. The chair is heckj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:14 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | thank you | 20:14 |
| notmyname | heckj: thanks :-) | 20:14 |
| vishy | thanks heckj! | 20:14 |
| heckj | #topic: 3rd party API policy | 20:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to ": 3rd party API policy" | 20:15 | |
| mtaylor | heckj: try not to break #endmeeting again | 20:15 |
| heckj | mtaylor: pbbbbbbbbbbbb | 20:15 |
| notmyname | so we can either have a general policy or let project decide right? and if it's a general policy, what is it? | 20:15 |
| heckj | who has proposals? | 20:15 |
| vishy | so i think the first question is do we have a 3rd party api policy | 20:15 |
| notmyname | I don't think we do right now | 20:15 |
| vishy | should we have one? | 20:15 |
| notmyname | I think we should :-) | 20:16 |
| vishy | i think it is important that the ppb has an opinion | 20:16 |
| bcwaldon | guidelines, at least | 20:16 |
| devcamcar_ | what does it mean to have one? | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | for the sake of the peanut gallery, what is meant by 3rd party api policy? | 20:16 |
| vishy | even if we say up to the ptls | 20:16 |
| vishy | mtaylor: so other apis esp. open standards | 20:16 |
| vishy | do we include them in core projects | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | kk | 20:16 |
| cloudfly | a generic api rules of conformity would be nice. | 20:16 |
| anotherjesse | devcamcar_: it means if someone whats to build another API to openstack, they would know how to do it … (eg, if we aren't going to accept it into the core projects they would know they should build a proxy or external plugin) | 20:16 |
| * mtaylor now understands the conversation | 20:17 | |
| ttx | so the question is: is each project free to add a new external API, or does it need to go through PPB approval ? | 20:17 |
| *** russellb has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:17 | |
| anotherjesse | we currently have AWS interop APIs in the projects. one thought is that openstack should only expose the openstack API, but have external projects that provide translation to the openstack api | 20:17 |
| ttx | or is it more complex than that ? | 20:17 |
| vishy | ttx: that is one of the quesions | 20:18 |
| bcwaldon | anotherjesse: not necessarily tranlation to the OpenStack API, but even able to plug into the compute API (nova/compute/api.py) | 20:18 |
| vishy | we have stated in the past that openstack is about the apis, not the implementation | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | bcwaldon: no, I was saying one proposal is that we don't do that, we just have http proxies | 20:18 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I think the first question is "should openstack have a policy on this at all" ... then "should it be global or per project" ... then, if global "what should the policy be" | 20:18 |
| vishy | if so does that mean that core openstack should only include the openstack api | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | bcwaldon: another is that it is a 3rd party plugin | 20:18 |
| bcwaldon | anotherjesse: ok, loud 'n clear | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | another is that we have a contrib folder with alternative APIs | 20:18 |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:19 | |
| anotherjesse | ttx: I think the issue is that multiple groups care about different apis but using openstack implementation - so it would be good for them to know how we want them to interact with us | 20:19 |
| devcamcar_ | contrib implies python only? | 20:19 |
| vishy | also, if we decide that apis are external, is there a process by which they can become part of core | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | vishy: ++ | 20:19 |
| bcwaldon | vishy: would becoming core mean OpenStack has full control over that contract? | 20:19 |
| vishy | or do we just say, not our problem, talk to the distributions | 20:19 |
| bcwaldon | vishy: thinking about EC2 here... | 20:19 |
| anotherjesse | mtaylor / vishy - what advantage would having a way of becoming core ? | 20:20 |
| vishy | bcwaldon: no, i mean, included in the core tarballs with the release | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | ok | 20:20 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 20:20 | |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 20:20 | |
| anotherjesse | I personally lean towards making openstack have one api that others proxy against | 20:20 |
| vishy | bcwaldon: no advantage for us, lots of advantage for the 3rd parties :) | 20:20 |
| notmyname | devcamcar_: not really. contrib could simply be a list of compatible plugins manages separately | 20:20 |
| * mtaylor leans towards anotherjesse | 20:20 | |
| vishy | er anotherjesse: ^^ | 20:20 |
| anotherjesse | keeps the surface area of the project smaller from a security and complexity point of view | 20:20 |
| * bcwaldon leans towards mtaylor | 20:20 | |
| bcwaldon | the proxy approach is the easiest for us, but we'd have to bite the bullet performance-wise | 20:21 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: what is the advantage? that we are now in charge of keeping it up-to-date and working? | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | also means external api proxies are themselves easier to verify in isolation | 20:21 |
| anotherjesse | it also has the disadvantage of coupling release | 20:21 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: the advantage for them is that they gain visibility | 20:21 |
| *** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman | 20:22 | |
| devcamcar_ | anotherjesse: did that just become a proposal to remove ec2 API? | 20:22 |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 20:22 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:22 | |
| vishy | devcamcar_: unfortunately that is not so easy | 20:22 |
| devcamcar_ | I know | 20:22 |
| vishy | devcamcar_: after rpc versioning it is possible, but we still have to figure out what to do with the mapping tables. | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | devcamcar_: long term yes - it would require a project to exist and the APIs to fully expose the required features | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | but that would be good to do ;) | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | ++ | 20:23 |
| heckj | devcamcar_: while I'd prefer any *additional* APIs be external myself, I think asserting the removal of EC2 support would send a very poor message publicly | 20:23 |
| jog0 | heckj: +1 | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | well, if we talk about it in terms of elevating it to a core (separate) project rather than "removing it" | 20:23 |
| devcamcar_ | I'm not proposing it | 20:23 |
| ttx | We should treat EC2 as a historical corner case | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | it might could be shaped to not send the wrong message | 20:23 |
| anotherjesse | heckj: there is a group already working on a http-proxy based aws implementation -- if that got traction we might we able to "remove it" | 20:23 |
| notmyname | removal of AWS APIs doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. it would be moved into an external proxy/plugin right? | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | yeah. kind of like we're "removing nova-volume" right now | 20:24 |
| ttx | rather than having it influence the decision on how to treat additional ones | 20:24 |
| cloudfly | the phasing out of major components should have a formal process | 20:24 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: ++ | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ++ | 20:25 |
| ttx | but yes, the decision we'll take will influence where EC2 might end up one day. | 20:25 |
| heckj | anotherjesse: sorry, I missed your original bits - lost connectivity for a bit. Do you have a discrete proposal that's in the logs? | 20:25 |
| notmyname | cloudfly: not really. the way swift has done it in the past is to provide the pieces in another location | 20:25 |
| ttx | s/EC2/EC2 APi support/ | 20:25 |
| notmyname | s/EC2/AWS/ | 20:25 |
| anotherjesse | heckj: I was saying I propose 3rd party APIs be done as http proxies | 20:25 |
| heckj | anotherjesse: thanks | 20:25 |
| ttx | i don't have strong feelings either way. I'd lean towards considering 3rd party APIs as optional add-ons | 20:26 |
| ttx | be them magic plug-ins that plug into the internal compute API... or proxies | 20:26 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: I'm not against that, it requires us to stabilize a plugin api - which we haven't done | 20:26 |
| devcamcar_ | anotherjesse: +1 | 20:26 |
| vishy | is there any way that we can provide a process for a 3rd party api to be shipped as "part" of openstack? | 20:26 |
| ttx | the second option sounding a lot more doable in the short term | 20:26 |
| heckj | anotherjesse: +1 | 20:26 |
| vishy | does it mean applying for incubation? | 20:26 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: no | 20:26 |
| devcamcar_ | vishy: could also | 20:26 |
| anotherjesse | incubation is a path to core | 20:26 |
| vishy | i know | 20:27 |
| devcamcar_ | make it an upstream problem? | 20:27 |
| vishy | so we are saying that no other api could ever be in core? | 20:27 |
| heckj | vishy: I think we're asserting an API can become part of core if it applies for and gains acceptance through the incubation process. | 20:27 |
| devcamcar_ | if not core then upstream packaging issue, if core then it's included | 20:27 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: requirements change, but under the current situation I think that would be ideal | 20:27 |
| ttx | We should have official projects developed within openstack that are not part of the core product. | 20:27 |
| heckj | devcamcar_: I think you mean downstream, yes? (i.e. ubuntu, fedora, etc) | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | ttx: ++ | 20:28 |
| devcamcar_ | heckj: yes | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | ttx: we should propose a formal definition of that at some point | 20:28 |
| ttx | so that we can extend our ecosystem of projects without diluting the values of our core product | 20:28 |
| ttx | mtaylor: rather soon than late, I think | 20:28 |
| vishy | ttx: what does an official project mean in that case? | 20:28 |
| anotherjesse | if you belive that most systems will be cloud enabled, and we hope that openstack is a major part of that, then the surface area of a complete cloud solution is huge | 20:28 |
| anotherjesse | we shouldn't try to own everything | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | we should focus on being a great "kernel" for the cloud | 20:29 |
| ttx | vishy: developed withing our infrastructure ? | 20:29 |
| heckj | anotherjesse: +1 | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | anotherjesse: ++ | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | trying to own every layer and impose our processes on it will limit inovation | 20:29 |
| notmyname | anotherjesse: +1 | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | we already use many non-us components too ... mysql, rabbit, etc | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | having resources available (like mtaylor's stackforge) that help developers / projects out is great | 20:29 |
| vishy | ttx: ok I'm not sure what the benefit is though. Why would a third party project go through the overhead of being 'official'? What do they get out of it? | 20:29 |
| ttx | vishy: some amount of openstack branding ? | 20:30 |
| ttx | if you have openstack core, openstack official and ecosystem... | 20:30 |
| ttx | For example, as of today, openstack-common is an official project. | 20:30 |
| anotherjesse | owning the ecosystem could limit the ecosystem | 20:30 |
| ttx | it's not core. It's like... used to build core | 20:31 |
| notmyname | anotherjesse: s/could/would/ | 20:31 |
| ttx | but it's still very much officially openstack | 20:31 |
| devcamcar_ | core^2 | 20:31 |
| vishy | ttx: ok, so the current proposal is third party apis are not allowed in core, they are welcome in the ecosystem, and at some point there will be a process to become official? | 20:31 |
| anotherjesse | supporting external projects that live outside openstaack but work with openstack would be my proferrence. | 20:31 |
| anotherjesse | that might mean test suites, api work, ... | 20:31 |
| devcamcar_ | vishy: we better plan how to plan for that process though | 20:31 |
| devcamcar_ | otherwise we are just deferring the issue | 20:32 |
| anotherjesse | because in the end the people selling / distributing openstack will go through and make decsisions about what their users get (what is possible / what is default) | 20:32 |
| ttx | vishy: they should be developed as a plug-in or a proxy, so that they can be either a separate plug-in, an official plug-in (tested with core), or a core plugin (shipped with core) | 20:32 |
| vishy | devcamcar_: i think we should also mandate an effort by the core projects to make 3rd party apis as easy as possible. | 20:32 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: again - I don't see advantages to making them core | 20:32 |
| ttx | vishy: +1 | 20:33 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: there is no core in the above proposal | 20:33 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| notmyname | an API "becoming official" would be up to the PTLs. look at how the project is being used and make the best choice for the project (?) | 20:33 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: sorry, I meant making them official | 20:33 |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:33 | |
| vishy | anotherjesse: there is no advantage for us, but it is good for the ecosystem | 20:33 |
| *** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:33 | |
| heckj | damn, bad network day for me | 20:33 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: if they don't see an advantage, they will stay non-official | 20:33 |
| ttx | For example, I wouldn't gate on something non-official | 20:34 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: what advantage for openstack | 20:34 |
| ttx | so Tempest will be an official project (not core= | 20:34 |
| ttx | ) | 20:34 |
| anotherjesse | not that I don't think they should exist | 20:34 |
| anotherjesse | err, not that I think they shouldn't exist | 20:34 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: gives us some amount of control. | 20:34 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: we don't want it. owning our official APIs are enough work | 20:34 |
| anotherjesse | and being a cloud platform - instead of a cloud product - means we need to give control to people to write stuff on top of openstack | 20:35 |
| mtaylor | yeah - and other people, such as canonical, who have vested interests in other apis can own those for their purposes | 20:35 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: think devstack being used as a gate mechanism. Making it official forces devstack to play by our rules... and lets us influence it so that we can keep using it as a gate | 20:35 |
| vishy | anotherjesse, ttx: perhaps that is exactly the definitition of official. We feel it is an important enough use case to do some gating on it | 20:35 |
| mtaylor | vishy: ++ | 20:35 |
| heckj | vishy: I can stand by that definition of official | 20:35 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: and if devstack guys didn't want to play by those rules DVCS has easy ways of *OPENSTACK* adding process without limiting the external project | 20:35 |
| ttx | I hate gating on something we don't control. | 20:36 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: sure. | 20:36 |
| mtaylor | dvcs solves all the worlds problems... | 20:36 |
| *** jsavak has quit IRC | 20:36 | |
| vishy | anotherjesse: but that is just adding a dependency | 20:36 |
| ttx | Personally I see our copre infrastructure as an official project too. Though we don'ty formally gate on it... it's THE GATE. | 20:37 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: exactly | 20:37 |
| ttx | core* | 20:37 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: which is different from actively working on the code | 20:37 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: and keeping it up to date | 20:37 |
| anotherjesse | openstack will want to expose a stable interface to build things upon | 20:37 |
| anotherjesse | if we break upstream projects like a http proxy api - then will probably are breaking LOTS of other people building custom integrations | 20:37 |
| anotherjesse | but that doesn't mean we have to mark something as official | 20:38 |
| anotherjesse | I want to know if we are breaking for users or use-cases | 20:38 |
| anotherjesse | but that doesn't imply that those users/use-cases code needs to be official | 20:38 |
| anotherjesse | we are an API | 20:38 |
| anotherjesse | we need to support the users of the API regardless of "official"-ness | 20:38 |
| mtaylor | but we can support them by testing the api... we don't have to test all of the users of the api, yeah? | 20:39 |
| anotherjesse | and if we start blessing the high level projects on top of openstack we will end up being even more bureaucratic | 20:39 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: from a community perspective I think there is a lot of perceived value to having some kind of official openstack support. | 20:39 |
| anotherjesse | mtaylor: exactly - that is what we can focus on to help these guys | 20:39 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: i don't know how you can avoid it. So either we do it via technical requirements or we punt let marketing people decide what to do with it | 20:40 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: I'm saying you are looking at it backwards | 20:40 |
| mtaylor | memcached has a great tool called memcapable that you can run against your api thing to ensure that your non-memcached implementation works | 20:40 |
| ttx | vishy: yes, maybe "official" is not the best term to describe that state. | 20:40 |
| anotherjesse | we should have APIs that 3rd parties can say they work with and have tests suites that show that they have integration | 20:40 |
| soren | mtaylor: A memcached that just doesn't cache anything? | 20:41 |
| mtaylor | if we're testing the api with something, and we can hand that something to people consuming the api that they can use to verify their side of things, then we're taking care of those consumers, right? | 20:41 |
| mtaylor | soren: yup | 20:41 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: so you would prefer 3rd party APIs being completely separate ? | 20:41 |
| soren | mtaylor: I'm not sure what the equivalent would be here? | 20:41 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: that still makes no sense, they run the test suite themselves and tell us it works | 20:41 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: yes | 20:41 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: and we say, awesome, use our logo? | 20:41 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: we say "here are the branding guidelines" - if you are compatable with openstack 2.0 api, then you say that | 20:42 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: that still fits perfectly in what i was proposing, just that we have some way to specify officialness | 20:42 |
| anotherjesse | just like software boxes show mac / windows logos on the side of the box ... | 20:43 |
| ttx | vishy: did you raise the thread on this on the ML ? I haven't seen it, but I'm a bit behind on ML processing | 20:43 |
| vishy | we can say: must pass these tests | 20:43 |
| vishy | ttx: no i did not | 20:43 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: we can say that "this logo means you pass the tests" - but we don't run the tests | 20:43 |
| anotherjesse | they do | 20:43 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: that's fine | 20:43 |
| anotherjesse | and if they lie then users will be pissed - at both parties probably | 20:43 |
| anotherjesse | ;) | 20:44 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: that is a hard sales pitch when the tests don't even exist though | 20:44 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: who's going to write them? | 20:44 |
| mtaylor | won't tempest wind up being an API compat test? | 20:44 |
| ttx | vishy: I think some emails would go a long way to crystalize the different options before we can confront them | 20:44 |
| mtaylor | if it's testing everything black box via the APIs? | 20:44 |
| ttx | vishy: we seem to still struggle with the breadth of the topic :) | 20:45 |
| vishy | mtaylor: that doesn't give 3rd party apis or plugins any pth forward. | 20:45 |
| mtaylor | vishy: hrm. k. fair | 20:45 |
| devcamcar_ | mtaylor: I don't think that's a stated goal of tempest | 20:45 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: if we don't write them (as in all of openstack) then how is integrating them directly into the project any better | 20:45 |
| anotherjesse | we end up with a larger project with more brittle integrations | 20:45 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: I don't want to integrate them into the project | 20:46 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: I don't want to be the gatekeeper of the labeling of "works with openstack" | 20:46 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: I want to be able to tell the authors of these that there is a specific process by which they can become "part of openstack". | 20:46 |
| anotherjesse | I want people to compete for adoption rather than wanting to be blessed | 20:46 |
| vishy | because otherwise there is too much perceived value in core | 20:47 |
| vishy | and so they will keep pushing to be in core | 20:47 |
| ttx | vishy: +1 | 20:47 |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:47 | |
| ttx | Part of the "official" concept is to distract people from bwatning "core or nothing" | 20:47 |
| ttx | wanting* | 20:47 |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:47 | |
| anotherjesse | vishy: my point is being part of openstack needs to be bigger than just being in core … I can be part of linux by writing a software project that distros include | 20:47 |
| anotherjesse | I don't have to get the kernel's blessing to write a game for linux | 20:48 |
| anotherjesse | or for distros to include it | 20:48 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 20:48 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:48 | |
| vishy | anotherjesse: I understand your point, but they don't | 20:48 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: in that case we are talking external APIs. Which is like proposing a new executable format for the kernel. | 20:48 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: k - so if we agree that we should be going for an ecosystem that is market driven, then lets work towards enabling that | 20:48 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: not like adding a new game. | 20:49 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: not true, since it is a compatability layer. for performance reasons you might want to be in the kernel but there is no reason to not implement it in userland | 20:49 |
| *** joesavak has quit IRC | 20:49 | |
| soren | anotherjesse: It may or may not be a compatibility layer. | 20:49 |
| soren | anotherjesse: That's the point, isn't it? | 20:50 |
| ttx | soren: +1 | 20:50 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: you can do a new filesystem in userland as well | 20:50 |
| soren | anotherjesse: It's not necessarily just a proxy. Just like the EC2 API implementation in Nova now. | 20:50 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: but there are valid reasons for proposing it into the kernel | 20:50 |
| anotherjesse | soren: we are proposing that the way it is in nova right now is wrong | 20:50 |
| anotherjesse | that you can do it that way but we aren't mature enough to do both http API and internal api with stability of interfaces | 20:51 |
| devcamcar_ | that ec2 API needs to be a proxy to openstack API | 20:51 |
| devcamcar_ | correct? | 20:51 |
| vishy | devcamcar_: undetermined | 20:51 |
| devcamcar_ | what tests do you have to pass? | 20:51 |
| vishy | devcamcar_: either a proxy or communicating through defined rpc api | 20:51 |
| ttx | again, EC2 is a historical corner case, let's not turn this into a EC2 API question | 20:52 |
| vishy | ttx: I don't know if we can consider it that while it still in the code base | 20:52 |
| ttx | the question is: what do we do for the "other" cloud standard APIs | 20:52 |
| soren | anotherjesse: I know that's what being discussed, but the point remains that it doesn't have to be the proxy model. Not eveyone thinks the proxy model is super awesome. | 20:52 |
| devcamcar_ | ttx: yep, not trying to, but it's best example we have atm | 20:52 |
| soren | anotherjesse: Present company included. | 20:52 |
| soren | ttx: Do you think we might keep the EC2 API beucase it's been grandfathered in, but have other policies for new API's that come along? | 20:53 |
| ttx | soren: the alternative is a clean/versioned internal API coupled with a plug-in system, I think | 20:53 |
| anotherjesse | soren: we could go with the linux codebase model where everything is in core - including 3rd party stuff | 20:53 |
| devcamcar_ | soren: my question is how do you measure compatibility for a non proxy api? | 20:53 |
| anotherjesse | soren: but our gerrit process makes it cumbersome already | 20:53 |
| soren | devcamcar_: Compatiblity with what? (and why do I care?) | 20:54 |
| anotherjesse | soren: for instance in the volume code we have drivers that 3rd parties maintain - and we basically have to blind accept them as they come through | 20:54 |
| ttx | soren: yes | 20:54 |
| mtaylor | anotherjesse: for sake of argument, that can be fixed (and remind me to chat with you about some ideas we had) | 20:54 |
| soren | ttx: Ok. | 20:54 |
| ttx | soren: but the decision we take here would definitely influence where the EC2 API could go in the future. | 20:55 |
| devcamcar_ | soren: exactly my point. what are we even trying to measure here? | 20:55 |
| soren | anotherjesse: I'm not sure where you're going? | 20:55 |
| soren | devcamcar_: Are we trying to measure something? | 20:55 |
| soren | :) | 20:55 |
| anotherjesse | soren: if there are snippets of code which could live on their own, they should | 20:55 |
| anotherjesse | since our process sucks for those | 20:55 |
| soren | We could make the OpenStack API external, too. | 20:55 |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:55 | |
| anotherjesse | soren: that was our original proposal a year ago but we lost that battle | 20:56 |
| heckj_ | I'm having the worst damn day with networking | 20:56 |
| devcamcar_ | we have 4 mins | 20:56 |
| devcamcar_ | anything we can vote on thats tangible? :) | 20:56 |
| heckj_ | [tempchair]: we have 4 minutes left. I propose that we synthesize this conversation, post on the mailing list, and discuss further there. Then reconvene next week here to formally decide | 20:56 |
| anotherjesse | devcamcar_: no | 20:56 |
| *** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:56 | |
| ttx | heckj: you should endmeeting as soon as you recover "heckj" | 20:56 |
| anotherjesse | we should enable optional components to thrive with their own coding process, release process and marketing demand process … or figure out how to fix our processes to work with those | 20:57 |
| anotherjesse | right now our processes don't work well for subgroups | 20:57 |
| mtaylor | anotherjesse: or both | 20:57 |
| *** heckj_ has left #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| heckj_ | . | 20:57 |
| *** heckj_ has quit IRC | 20:57 | |
| anotherjesse | and adding more "blessings" where people either land-rush or agreements with project seems less than ideal | 20:57 |
| anotherjesse | which is what the process has been so far | 20:58 |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 20:58 | |
| *** heckj_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| ttx | heckj: you should endmeeting | 20:58 |
| soren | heckj_: "heckj" just left. You can /nick heckj | 20:58 |
| ttx | while you can | 20:58 |
| *** heckj_ is now known as heckj | 20:58 | |
| heckj | finally! | 20:58 |
| soren | Oh, look! It's heckj ! | 20:58 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 20:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 20:58 | |
| soren | Hi, heckj! | 20:58 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 1 20:58:45 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:58 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: i think plugins vs separate projects need to be considered separately | 20:58 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-20.14.html | 20:58 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-20.14.txt | 20:58 |
| *** jerdfelt has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| heckj | before the freakin' wifi dies again | 20:58 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-20.14.log.html | 20:58 |
| ttx | yay | 20:58 |
| heckj | mtaylor: WOOT! It worked ^^ | 20:59 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: for example api extensions | 20:59 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: which suck right now | 20:59 |
| soren | heckj: It'll pass. </pessimism> | 20:59 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: people think that extensions imply official approval | 20:59 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: no argument here, but there needs to be a way for plugins/extensions to become official | 20:59 |
| vishy | external projects like LBaaS etc. I agree should not be officialized | 21:00 |
| ttx | vishy: so you start a thread on this ? Hopefully that wil let us advance the discussion enough to come to decision next meeting | 21:00 |
| vishy | ok | 21:00 |
| anotherjesse | or don't define official - let openstack define "compatbile" and let the market define "desirable" | 21:00 |
| *** davlaps has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| notmyname | anotherjesse: +1 | 21:00 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: we'll need "official" for things like openstack-common | 21:00 |
| heckj | ttx: sounds like you have a proposal to write on what it means to be official | 21:01 |
| ttx | which are not core but are very much openstack | 21:01 |
| vishy | ttx: i think that is a separate discussion as well | 21:01 |
| * mtaylor too | 21:01 | |
| mtaylor | hrm. that was vague of me | 21:01 |
| ttx | yes, I need to work on that | 21:01 |
| anotherjesse | heh | 21:01 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| vishy | a 3rd party api is not really equivalent to devstack or tempest or openstack-ci | 21:01 |
| devcamcar_ | haw | 21:01 |
| mtaylor | vishy: ++ | 21:01 |
| ttx | bcwaldon, danwent; still around ? | 21:01 |
| danwent | yup | 21:01 |
| bcwaldon | maaaaaybe | 21:01 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 21:02:03 2012 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 #startvote. | 21:02 |
| ttx | Welcome everyone to our weekly Project/release meeting | 21:02 |
| ttx | Today's agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting | 21:02 |
| ttx | Should be a quick one. We'll have a look at the current state of the Folsom plans. | 21:02 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status" | 21:02 | |
| ttx | Let's start with heckj while the wifi works | 21:02 |
| ttx | maybe | 21:03 |
| heckj | Keystone meeting this morning nailed down most of the blueprints | 21:03 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/folsom | 21:03 |
| heckj | We have a few undeteremined for who's going to do them, but most are assigned out at this point | 21:03 |
| ttx | service-endpoint-location is marked "obsolete", should we unset the series goal ? | 21:03 |
| ttx | or is it still very much a goal ? | 21:03 |
| heckj | unset - I'll get it | 21:03 |
| ttx | Also I don't really get what draft-v3-blueprint is about. A blueprint about drafting a blueprint ? | 21:04 |
| heckj | it's for drafting the next rev API | 21:04 |
| *** ewindisch has quit IRC | 21:04 | |
| heckj | just typoed the name | 21:04 |
| vishy | heckj: you can change it | 21:04 |
| dolphm | draft-v3-api? | 21:04 |
| ttx | heckj: so this will be a non-code blueprint, right ? | 21:05 |
| dolphm | vishy: the url is a permalink though, i think | 21:05 |
| heckj | vishy: would love to - haven't figured out how | 21:05 |
| vishy | dolphm: nope just fixed it for you | 21:05 |
| heckj | the text in the blueprint is correct | 21:05 |
| dolphm | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/draft-v3-api | 21:05 |
| dolphm | magic! | 21:05 |
| ttx | awesome | 21:05 |
| heckj | thank you! | 21:05 |
| devcamcar_ | ooo | 21:05 |
| * cloudfly reads furiously | 21:06 | |
| vishy | heckj, dolphm : ffr it is the 'Set the URL for this specification' link under the summary | 21:06 |
| ttx | heckj: so this will be a non-code blueprint, right ? | 21:06 |
| * vishy knows way too much about blueprints :( | 21:06 | |
| heckj | ttx: correct. API document opened for feedback - much like what jaypipes/bcwaldon have done for Glance | 21:06 |
| ttx | heckj: ok | 21:06 |
| ttx | Do you expect more blueprints to be targeted to folsom-1, or is the map pretty much complete ? | 21:07 |
| heckj | for F1, we're complete - I expect some churn and change in F2/F3 though | 21:07 |
| heckj | very dependent on the V3 API core BP | 21:08 |
| ttx | sure, that's ok | 21:08 |
| ttx | heckj: anything else ? | 21:08 |
| heckj | nope | 21:08 |
| ttx | Questions about Keystone ? | 21:08 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:08 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:08 | |
| ttx | notmyname: o/ | 21:08 |
| notmyname | o/ | 21:08 |
| ttx | notmyname: Do you expect any major new feature in your next release ? | 21:08 |
| notmyname | yes. object versioning has been added since essex | 21:09 |
| ttx | (something that would warrant a blueprint ?) | 21:09 |
| ttx | notmyname: could you create a blueprint retrospectively ? | 21:09 |
| notmyname | ya, I can do that | 21:09 |
| ttx | Should the next Swift release be 1.4.10, 1.5... | 21:09 |
| ttx | Or do we need to discuss a bit more how we want to actually do it ? | 21:10 |
| notmyname | I think it will probably 1.5 | 21:10 |
| ttx | 1.5.0 probably, then | 21:10 |
| notmyname | but I don't have strong feeling either way | 21:10 |
| ttx | me neither... at least 1.5.0 makes the minor version number mean something (series mapping) | 21:11 |
| ttx | Any vague idea on the date, so that I start planning ? | 21:12 |
| notmyname | I'll add the blueprints for other things that have happened as well | 21:12 |
| notmyname | no, I don't have a date yet. I can work on that this week | 21:12 |
| ttx | doesn't have to be a precise date. More like an indication :) | 21:13 |
| ttx | notmyname: Anything else ? | 21:13 |
| notmyname | nope | 21:13 |
| ttx | Questions on Swift ? | 21:13 |
| ttx | notmyname: I'll create the 1.5.0 milestone so that you can target your blueprints against it | 21:13 |
| notmyname | ok | 21:13 |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:14 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: yo | 21:14 |
| bcwaldon | eyyyy | 21:14 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/folsom | 21:14 |
| bcwaldon | yeah... | 21:14 |
| bcwaldon | I'm looking for feedback on a couple of emails I sent to the list, one about 'Glance Architecture' and one on 'Blueprints!'. | 21:14 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: glance-get-cmd is marked obsolete, should we unset the series goal for it ? | 21:14 |
| bcwaldon | if I marked it Obsolete, then yes | 21:14 |
| ttx | on it | 21:15 |
| ttx | you should start targeting some of them to folsom-1 when they have someone signed up to do it | 21:15 |
| bcwaldon | Yep, definitely will | 21:15 |
| ttx | Would separate-client be a folsom-1 target ? | 21:15 |
| bcwaldon | I've got a couple that are superblueprints that wont be targeted for a while | 21:15 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: definitely | 21:16 |
| bcwaldon | (had to look up when f1 was) | 21:16 |
| ttx | ok, please set the folsom-1 targets before the end of the week | 21:16 |
| *** devcamcar_ has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| bcwaldon | don't you boss me around | 21:16 |
| ttx | so that we can start tracking progress towards the milestone | 21:16 |
| bcwaldon | but I will | 21:16 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: "no target" is a valid answer :P | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | Sounds good. I'm looking for assignees for several of those blueprints | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | So if anybody has been poking me about how to help with Glance inFolsom, go read my email 'Blueprints!' | 21:17 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: Anything else you wanted to mention ? | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: nope, I'm trying to release my thoughts directly to the ML so I don't forget anything around meeting time | 21:18 |
| bcwaldon | so that's it for me :) | 21:18 |
| ttx | works for me :) | 21:18 |
| ttx | Questions on Glance ? | 21:18 |
| ttx | #topic Quantum status | 21:18 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status" | 21:18 | |
| ttx | danwent: hey | 21:18 |
| danwent | https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-1 | 21:18 |
| danwent | hey | 21:19 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/folsom is empty because you didn't set the series goal to Folsom on the blueprints | 21:19 |
| ttx | Setting the series goal lets you compile a list of "Folsom" blueprints which is generally more useful than the list of all blueprints, so I recommend doing it | 21:19 |
| danwent | ah, sorry, i've just been targeting things to milestones | 21:19 |
| danwent | Ok, will do that. | 21:19 |
| ttx | danwent: not a big deal, gives you those nice "Folsom" views | 21:19 |
| danwent | so far, I've flushed out folsom-1 and folsom-2 milestones | 21:19 |
| ttx | for some reason LP doesn't automatically build that | 21:19 |
| danwent | which is where we're targeting to get must of our "must haves" for Folsom release | 21:20 |
| ttx | I see 9 blueprints were targeted to folsom-1... | 21:20 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-1 | 21:20 |
| ttx | You probably should set them to "Approved" and prioritize all of them if you're OK with them. | 21:20 |
| danwent | yup, many of them are fairly small, but two are very large (new API work to merge melange, and authz work) | 21:20 |
| danwent | ok, I was waiting on designs on some of them before approving. | 21:21 |
| ttx | I tend to check status on things that you set Essential/High | 21:21 |
| danwent | will make sure that we get designs and approval for next week. | 21:21 |
| ttx | so lowering prio is a good way to get rid of me | 21:21 |
| * oubiwann makes a note of that... | 21:21 | |
| danwent | ok, i expect only two high/essential blueprints left after this week. | 21:22 |
| danwent | two other ones will be done | 21:22 |
| ttx | oubiwann: priority is an indication of how important the blueprint is for release. So it's not totally a joke :) | 21:22 |
| ttx | danwent: Anything else ? | 21:23 |
| danwent | nope | 21:23 |
| ttx | Questions on Quantum ? | 21:23 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:23 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:23 | |
| ttx | vishy: hey | 21:23 |
| vishy | hi | 21:23 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/folsom | 21:23 |
| vishy | so I've been doing massive blueprint triaging | 21:23 |
| ttx | Looks quite good. You're getting used to that game | 21:23 |
| vishy | had 180 blueprints | 21:23 |
| vishy | i think i'm only about halfway done | 21:24 |
| * oubiwann chokes | 21:24 | |
| vishy | (actually 188) | 21:24 |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:24 | |
| vishy | so I've targetted all the ones i am familiar with, but there are still a few that I have no idea about | 21:24 |
| *** anderstj has quit IRC | 21:24 | |
| ttx | oubiwann: vishy tries to beat me a blueprint-handling LP karma. | 21:24 |
| ttx | at* | 21:24 |
| oubiwann | hehehe | 21:24 |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:24 | |
| vishy | ttx: i'm considering declaring blueprint bankruptcy | 21:24 |
| ttx | You should set the priority for all the undefined ones... | 21:25 |
| ttx | at least those who have a clear assignee that signed up to do the work | 21:25 |
| vishy | basically saying, if you own a blueprint and it isn't targetted for folsom, let me know because i'm going to delete all of the others in 2 weeks | 21:25 |
| ttx | ec2-id-compatibilty is targeted to folsom-1 and has no assignee ? | 21:25 |
| vishy | ttx: does that seem reasonable | 21:25 |
| vishy | ttx: there are a bunch with no assignee | 21:25 |
| *** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:25 | |
| vishy | ttx: I din't man to target a milestone though | 21:26 |
| vishy | * mean | 21:26 |
| ttx | vishy: by "deleting" you mean obsoleting ? | 21:26 |
| vishy | ttx: yes | 21:26 |
| ttx | vishy: oh, hellyes | 21:26 |
| vishy | there are just a whole bunch of random blueprints that are good ideas but have no one to work on them | 21:26 |
| vishy | and a bunch that are just old and I have no idea about | 21:27 |
| vishy | ttx: I haven't prioritized the ones in there yet so a lot are still undefined | 21:27 |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 21:27 | |
| heckj | vishy: burn them all to the ground and start again :-) Worked for me | 21:27 |
| vishy | ttx: i was going to do a prioritization after I got them all targetted to folsom | 21:27 |
| ttx | vishy: sounds good. Try to prioritize the folsom-1 by next week | 21:27 |
| vishy | ok i will do one more pass through all of them, then I will send out an email notifying about pending deletion | 21:28 |
| ttx | the rest is not that urgent | 21:28 |
| ttx | vishy: Anything else ? | 21:28 |
| vishy | nope | 21:29 |
| * vishy sharpens his email pen | 21:29 | |
| cloudfly | it's possible some of the existing side projects satisfy blue prints | 21:29 |
| vishy | cloudfly: ? | 21:29 |
| cloudfly | admin-cli vs unified-cli for instance | 21:29 |
| vishy | cloudfly: possibly, I've been attempting to obsolete those | 21:30 |
| vishy | cloudfly: if you notice any that you feel should be obsoleted, feel free to let me know | 21:30 |
| vishy | cloudfly: I can use help | 21:30 |
| cloudfly | will do | 21:30 |
| *** troytoman is now known as troytoman-away | 21:30 | |
| vishy | actually that is true for anyone, if anyone notices blueprints that should be removed, let me know :) | 21:31 |
| ttx | Other questions on Nova ? | 21:31 |
| *** atiwari has quit IRC | 21:31 | |
| *** littleidea_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:31 | |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status" | 21:32 | |
| ttx | devcamcar: o/ | 21:32 |
| devcamcar | o/ | 21:32 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/folsom | 21:32 |
| ttx | Looks good... | 21:32 |
| devcamcar | most of whats there is only what we've targeted for folsom-1 | 21:32 |
| ttx | devcamcar: there are two blueprints targeted to folsom-1 that don't have series goal = Folsom: | 21:32 |
| devcamcar | still have a lot of blueprints to add from the summit which hopefully i can get to this week | 21:32 |
| devcamcar | oops, which? | 21:33 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/scaffolding | 21:33 |
| devcamcar | i'll fix | 21:33 |
| ttx | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/transition-to-lesscss | 21:33 |
| ttx | I was about to set them but thought you might want to confirm | 21:33 |
| *** Haneef has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| ttx | (series targeting is limited to drivers, while milestone-targeting is open to everyone, so people may add stuff that you don't agree with | 21:33 |
| devcamcar | hm, they both say proposed for folsom | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | oh i see | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | nm | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | fixed :) | 21:34 |
| ttx | devcamcar: soon you'll become a Jedi master | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | but yes, F1 is looking good for us | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | ttx: hah | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | F2 and on are mostly undefined right now | 21:34 |
| devcamcar | i also have a list of tickets we'll be back porting to stable/essex | 21:35 |
| gabrielhurley | devcamcar: maybe we won't be adding features until the last second this release ;-) | 21:35 |
| *** pengyong has quit IRC | 21:35 | |
| devcamcar | https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bugs?field.tag=essex-backport-potential | 21:35 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 21:35 | |
| *** littleidea_ is now known as littleidea | 21:35 | |
| devcamcar | mostly trivial fixes | 21:35 |
| ttx | devcamcar: you can use series targeting there too | 21:35 |
| devcamcar | ok | 21:36 |
| ttx | "Target to series" and select "Essex" | 21:36 |
| ttx | then it shows on https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/essex | 21:36 |
| devcamcar | ahh perfect | 21:36 |
| ttx | and we can track completion | 21:36 |
| devcamcar | i'll update those now as well | 21:36 |
| * ttx still needs to fix the bugstatus-updating gerrit hook so that it understands the series, but otherwise it's pretty functional | 21:36 | |
| devcamcar | yep, i had marked a few as fix released by mistake | 21:37 |
| ttx | for some reason I thought that the weeks after the design summit would be pretty calm for me | 21:37 |
| ttx | devcamcar: Anything else ? | 21:37 |
| devcamcar | ttx: that is all! | 21:37 |
| ttx | Questions for Horizon ? | 21:37 |
| ttx | #topic Other Team reports | 21:38 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports" | 21:38 | |
| ttx | annegentle, jaypipes, mtaylor: ? | 21:38 |
| ttx | Or any other team lead with a status report ? | 21:38 |
| annegentle | me! | 21:38 |
| ttx | hey, you made it :) | 21:38 |
| annegentle | Working on a branch that switches all links to /essex for the docs. | 21:39 |
| annegentle | yup just! | 21:39 |
| annegentle | so I can release docs.openstack.org/essex today and open doc comments on all those pages | 21:39 |
| annegentle | also going to eliminate the /bexar and /cactus "sites" by doing 301 redirects to /trunk | 21:39 |
| ttx | ok | 21:39 |
| annegentle | then I'll get cracking on a blueprint or two. | 21:40 |
| ttx | annegentle: we should open a "folsom" series for openstack-manuals | 21:40 |
| ttx | annegentle: so that you can target your blueprints to the series, at least | 21:41 |
| annegentle | that would be great. | 21:41 |
| ttx | willdo that for you | 21:41 |
| annegentle | also you may have seen on the mailing list a post for an intern, needs to be a full time student and it is the Austin location of Rackspace. Approximately May to August. | 21:41 |
| ttx | saw that. Great opportunity :) | 21:42 |
| ttx | annegentle: anything else ? | 21:42 |
| annegentle | also the docs site now has all nova.conf flags listed at http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/compute-options-reference.html and another writer is working on a list of all swift flags | 21:42 |
| annegentle | and _that_ is all for this week. | 21:43 |
| * oubiwann high-fives annegentle | 21:43 | |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:43 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:43 | |
| ttx | Anything else, anyone ? | 21:43 |
| jog0 | are we still planning on trying a shorter folsom release cycle? | 21:44 |
| ttx | I'll be at UDS in Oakland next week, maybe speaking | 21:44 |
| ttx | jog0: the release cycle will be 6 months | 21:45 |
| jog0 | so folsom-1 will not have an associated 2 week code freeze? | 21:45 |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 21:45 | |
| ttx | jog0: we /might/ consider late Folsom milestones as full releases, but it's pretty unlikely | 21:45 |
| ttx | no it won't | 21:45 |
| jog0 | ttx: thanks | 21:46 |
| ttx | folsom-1 will be cut on the Tuesday and delivered on the Thursday. | 21:46 |
| ttx | May 22-24 | 21:46 |
| ttx | ok then, if nobody has anything, we'll close early | 21:47 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 21:47 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 1 21:47:43 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:47 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-21.02.html | 21:47 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-21.02.txt | 21:47 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-21.02.log.html | 21:47 |
| *** gabrielhurley has left #openstack-meeting | 21:47 | |
| ttx | have a good week! | 21:47 |
| oubiwann | ttx: you too! | 21:48 |
| *** jerdfelt has left #openstack-meeting | 21:48 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 21:51 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:52 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 21:52 | |
| salv-orlando | knock knock? | 22:00 |
| termie | who's there? | 22:00 |
| s0mik | hey salv | 22:00 |
| danwent | netstack's there! | 22:01 |
| danwent | #startmeeting | 22:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 1 22:01:14 2012 UTC. The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 22:01 |
| *** russellb has left #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| danwent | #link agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings | 22:01 |
| GheRivero_ | hi people | 22:01 |
| danwent | hi GheRivero ! | 22:01 |
| rkukura | hi | 22:01 |
| danwent | welcome to the quantum scrum :) | 22:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Hi All! | 22:02 |
| danwent | in terms of reviews outstanding, we have: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/quantum,n,z | 22:02 |
| danwent | and https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/python-quantumclient,n,z | 22:02 |
| garyk | hi guys | 22:02 |
| danwent | in particular, two reviews. First | 22:03 |
| danwent | mnewby: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6545/ | 22:03 |
| danwent | and a similar patch on the client side: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6549/ | 22:03 |
| danwent | these are very valuable style clean-up. | 22:03 |
| danwent | given how many pieces of the code it touches, I'd like to get these merged ASAP, otherwise we'll have a conflict mess | 22:03 |
| danwent | salv-orlando: any chance you can reapprove the main patch (thanks for the review!)? | 22:04 |
| danwent | the client side patch is smaller, and we need folks to take a crack at that as well. | 22:04 |
| salv-orlando | sure | 22:04 |
| danwent | thx… i don't think there have been any significant changes since you reviewed last | 22:04 |
| danwent | later in the meeting we'll talk a bit more about enforcing style guidelines in reviews | 22:04 |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 22:05 | |
| danwent | other big review is from garyk : https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6744/ | 22:05 |
| danwent | I think this is good to go, though there's an interesting question about introducing new mandatory fields in config files. this will break any existing deploys, including devstack environments. | 22:05 |
| garyk | i think that this should be considered for essex stable? | 22:05 |
| danwent | garyk: I think that is reasonable. | 22:06 |
| danwent | but in that case, I'd definitely want to have some default values for the new config params you suggested. | 22:06 |
| garyk | we could set a default value if the field is missing. it would ensure uptime | 22:06 |
| danwent | if we're going to backport, seems like a must for me. | 22:06 |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:06 | |
| danwent | any other opinions on this? | 22:06 |
| garyk | danwent: i agree. | 22:06 |
| rkukura | defaults make sense to me | 22:07 |
| GheRivero_ | agree | 22:07 |
| danwent | ok, sounds good. | 22:07 |
| salv-orlando | garyk proposal seems reasonable to me | 22:07 |
| danwent | only other review is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6606/ | 22:07 |
| danwent | mnewby: you here? | 22:07 |
| garyk | great - i'll make the change | 22:07 |
| GheRivero_ | since quantum is not core in essex, garyk should be no problem to backport | 22:07 |
| rkukura | any ordering issue between Gary's and Maru's patches? | 22:08 |
| danwent | rkukura: yes | 22:08 |
| rkukura | Getting Gary's in 1st would make backport easier | 22:08 |
| danwent | I suspect there will be conflicts. Given that mnewby's patch is huge, and garyk's needs to be resubmitted again for a change anyway, I would suggest we put garyk's on top | 22:08 |
| danwent | haha :) | 22:08 |
| danwent | good point, I hadn't thought about the backport | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | rkukura: backport would consist of cherrypicking commit onto essex-stable, wouldn't it? | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | rkukura: and hence agree with you :) | 22:09 |
| rkukura | if they touch alot of the same code | 22:09 |
| danwent | salv-orlando: yes, but mnewby's change won't be in essex-stable, so if garyk's change was based on it, that would be trickier | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | indeed. I thought about it while I was writing :) | 22:09 |
| salv-orlando | and luckily I refrained just in time from approving Maru's patch. | 22:10 |
| danwent | :) | 22:10 |
| salv-orlando | So just a +2 for now. The approve will come after Gary's patch goes in. | 22:10 |
| danwent | ok, yeah, let's have garyk's patch go in first. | 22:10 |
| danwent | salv-orlando and I can quickly re-approve a rebased version of mnewby's changeset | 22:10 |
| salv-orlando | cool | 22:11 |
| mnewby | I'll likely have to do more than a rebase, but that's fine. | 22:11 |
| danwent | mnewby: thx | 22:11 |
| rkukura | mnewby: I thought you already got garyk to perfect his style:-S | 22:12 |
| danwent | #todo danwent talk to aaron lee about responding to review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6606/ | 22:12 |
| salv-orlando | rkukura: that's a good idea actually | 22:12 |
| danwent | ok, that should be good for reviews | 22:12 |
| danwent | Next up, talking about Folsom-1 | 22:12 |
| mnewby | rkukura: Hard to be pedantic about style if the rest of the code doesn't match up. | 22:12 |
| jkoelker | aarron is no longer working on openstack fulltime | 22:13 |
| jkoelker | just fyi | 22:13 |
| jkoelker | so if someone wants to take that patch and update it would be best | 22:13 |
| danwent | jkoelker: good to know. so should we assume that this patch is abandoned? | 22:13 |
| danwent | ok. | 22:13 |
| danwent | looks worth saving, anyone want to volunteer? | 22:13 |
| GheRivero_ | me? | 22:14 |
| danwent | might suck to rebase after mnewby's chang-set though :) | 22:14 |
| danwent | GheRivero: sold! | 22:14 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 22:14 | |
| GheRivero_ | cool | 22:14 |
| danwent | GheRivero: thanks. | 22:14 |
| danwent | Ok, now on to F-1. Three weeks away from release already. | 22:15 |
| danwent | https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-1 | 22:15 |
| danwent | I took most issues from the summit and assigned them to F-1 or F-2 if I felt like I understood them and who was working on them. | 22:15 |
| danwent | feel free to fill in gaps. | 22:15 |
| danwent | The biggest thing we need to focus on in F-1 is getting the Melange stuff merged in. A bunch of other stuff depends on that. | 22:16 |
| danwent | jkoelker: anything to add as the driver for that issue? | 22:16 |
| jkoelker | we're working on figuring it out as we speak | 22:16 |
| jkoelker | i'll update the blueprint as soon as the arm wrestling is over | 22:17 |
| jkoelker | to determine how wer're going to attack it | 22:17 |
| danwent | Ok, would be good to have something widely visible by next week. | 22:17 |
| rkukura | +1 | 22:17 |
| danwent | there may be layers of arm-wrestling :) | 22:17 |
| jkoelker | yea we want to have a plan of action by tomorrow | 22:17 |
| danwent | ok, and any idea who from troy's team is driving the authn/authz stuff? I pinged him, but haven't heard back. | 22:18 |
| tr3buchet | \(o.o)/ | 22:19 |
| _cerberus_ | We're going to get together in the morning to get everything worked out, and hopefully come out of it with a plan for the API et al | 22:19 |
| danwent | i know heckj was interested in helping as well | 22:19 |
| _cerberus_ | danwent: re: auth, looking at Kevin Mitchell for that | 22:19 |
| _cerberus_ | troy and I need to chat a bit more about it, but that's the plan | 22:19 |
| danwent | _cerberus_: ok, thanks for the info. Those are the top two priority issues I'm tracking for F-1… so you'll definitely get sick of me bugging you for updates :) | 22:19 |
| heckj | o/ willing to help | 22:19 |
| danwent | ok, thanks heckj ! | 22:20 |
| salv-orlando | I can offer my help on authn/authz but cannot be full-time at the moment. | 22:21 |
| salv-orlando | just consider me probably for menial tasks :) | 22:21 |
| danwent | salv-orlando: that would be great, especially since you did a lot of the initial authn work for quantum. | 22:21 |
| tr3buchet | salv-orlando: we'll point kevin at you! | 22:21 |
| danwent | In other F-1 news, I'm working on getting multi-node quantum devstack up. Should be able to propose end of day today, as in my testing, everything seems to work. | 22:22 |
| danwent | Most of the rest of the F-1 tasks are around the open source agents, fixing issues or laying the groundwork for improvements that will be coming in F-2 | 22:22 |
| danwent | oops, except I missed security groups. davlaps is working on that. | 22:23 |
| *** ywu has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:23 | |
| davlaps | yup :) | 22:23 |
| danwent | So feel free to target additional things at F-1 | 22:23 |
| danwent | but remember that it is 3 weeks out :) | 22:23 |
| danwent | https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-2 | 22:23 |
| danwent | a couple items here are probably big enough that we need to be working on them during the F-1 timeframe. particular the nova paraity work for DHCP (carlp) and (L3 forwarding + NAT). Both are needed so we can remove nova-network (tr3buchet) | 22:24 |
| danwent | I also have items slotted for reworking the client lib + doing the horizon integration. | 22:25 |
| danwent | our goal from the summit is the have all of the "base" items needed to make the argument for quantum being the default done by F-2 | 22:25 |
| tr3buchet | danwent: i plan on doing some work with the nova network quantum api as well soon | 22:25 |
| danwent | rkukura: are you going to make a BP for "provider networks"? | 22:25 |
| rkukura | I did today | 22:25 |
| rkukura | Also did one on scalable agent comms | 22:26 |
| danwent | tr3buchet: great. I know you've done a lot of that work already, but I figured to put it in F-2 as it would have to wait until the merged API is finalized. | 22:26 |
| tr3buchet | danwent: that's fine, i'm working closely with koelker enough to keep it up to date anyway | 22:26 |
| danwent | rkukura: great. can you target them for the folsom release and a particular milestone? | 22:26 |
| danwent | and set me as the approver. | 22:26 |
| rkukura | OK | 22:27 |
| danwent | tr3buchet: ok, great | 22:27 |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| danwent | is carlp missing again? | 22:27 |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| danwent | he's always leaving me hanging :P | 22:27 |
| danwent | #todo: get carlp to send an update on dhcp plans | 22:28 |
| danwent | Ok, anything else to discuss on F-1 or F-2 before moving on to some community questions? | 22:28 |
| danwent | Ok, first topic is "enforcing style guidelines" | 22:28 |
| danwent | #info mnewby's patch highlights that we're being a bit lax on enforcing pep-8 style guidelines (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/) | 22:29 |
| danwent | the automated pep8 checker doesn't warn about a handful of things that are still good style to follow. | 22:30 |
| danwent | i'd encourage all core devs to take a look at the patch and see what things were missed. we may even compile a "commonly missed style issues" writeup. | 22:30 |
| danwent | but now that we're core, we need to get better at enforcing this. | 22:30 |
| danwent | going through the review, I even realized a few things about our style guidelines that I didn't know :) | 22:31 |
| danwent | any questions/comments? | 22:31 |
| danwent | Ok, next topic is about tempest integration with Quantum. | 22:31 |
| danwent | A recent review was proposed to add quantum tests for tempest: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/4896/3 | 22:31 |
| danwent | We're looking for someone to help take a lead on this. | 22:32 |
| *** onfun has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:32 | |
| danwent | mnewby and I will continue to drive work on this review, but hopefuly someone else will step up as well. | 22:33 |
| danwent | New topic: commit gating | 22:33 |
| mnewby | I'm going to work with Darryl to explore generative testing. | 22:33 |
| mnewby | This will tie into client improvements, too. | 22:33 |
| tr3buchet | generative testing? | 22:34 |
| mnewby | My pet name for functional tests driven by machine-readable api specification. | 22:34 |
| mnewby | It's probably in error - data-driven is more accurate. | 22:34 |
| tr3buchet | sounds like magic! | 22:35 |
| *** mugu has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:35 | |
| danwent | mnewby: that would be really cool. | 22:35 |
| danwent | tr3buchet: but if its magic that makes our software better, that's great! | 22:35 |
| danwent | back to the topic of gating | 22:36 |
| mnewby | It should allow automation of the mechanical types of testing. More exploratory testing will still be required, but hopefully we'll have more effort to apply towards it. | 22:36 |
| tr3buchet | ಠ_ಠ | 22:36 |
| danwent | i'm going to reach out to mtaylor and jeblair to get quantum and python-quantumclient gating on unit tests, then gating on excercise.sh tests | 22:36 |
| danwent | if anyone feels passionately about this and wants to help drive, let me kno | 22:37 |
| danwent | w | 22:37 |
| danwent | ok, open discussion | 22:37 |
| danwent | any other topics? | 22:37 |
| shwetaap | danwent: Going back to reviews .. Could you and davlaps review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/6246/ - its regarding Linuxbridge plugin iinstall support using devstack. Dean Troyer wanted a few others to approve it since he could not test it on his end. Its been there for a while. I will re-open it. | 22:38 |
| davlaps | no problem. | 22:38 |
| shwetaap | Thanks Dave! | 22:39 |
| danwent | shwetaap: sure. | 22:39 |
| danwent | ok, last call? | 22:39 |
| shwetaap | cool thanks | 22:39 |
| *** kpepple_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:41 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 22:46 | |
| *** martines has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** notmyname has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** cloudfly has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** _cerberus_ has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** mugu has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:55 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 22:58 | |
| *** deshantm has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:59 | |
| *** kiffer84 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** glenc has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** sleepson- has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** chmouel_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** chuck_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** anderstj has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** justinsb has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** lloydde_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** Amw3000 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jacky has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jaypipes-afk has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** Adri2000 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jakedahn has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** cp16net has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** zykes-_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jkoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** Daviey has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** fattarsi has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** nikhil__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** clarkb has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** med_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** xtoddx has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** _0x44 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** anticw has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** sleepsonzzz has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** comstud has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** Madkiss has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** edleafe has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jamespage has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** termie has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** LinuxJedi has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** tr3buchet has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** pknouff has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** ttrifonov has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** troytoman-away has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** Kiall has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** carlp has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** no`x has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** hazmat has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** anotherjesse has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:00 | |
| *** jkoelker has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** dendrobates has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** mtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** kiffer84 is now known as Guest34196 | 23:01 | |
| *** mugu has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** martines has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** notmyname has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** cloudfly has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** _cerberus_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** phantomcircuit has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** annegentle has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** antonym has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** dragondm has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** jbarratt has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** phantomcircuit has quit IRC | 23:02 | |
| *** jkoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:02 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 23:04 | |
| danwent | #endmeeting | 23:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Status and Progress (Meeting topic: keystone-meeting)" | 23:06 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 1 23:06:08 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 23:06 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-22.01.html | 23:06 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-22.01.txt | 23:06 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-05-01-22.01.log.html | 23:06 |
| clarkb | o_O so it decided to eventually be happy? | 23:08 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| s0mik | apparently took a couple of tries but that made MeetBot happy | 23:11 |
| *** davlaps has quit IRC | 23:12 | |
| *** phantomcircuit_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:14 | |
| *** jdurgin has quit IRC | 23:14 | |
| *** galstrom has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:15 | |
| *** mugu has quit IRC | 23:16 | |
| *** mugu has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:16 | |
| *** lloydde_ has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:19 | |
| *** rkukura has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 23:21 | |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:24 | |
| *** mtaylor1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:25 | |
| *** dtroyer- has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:26 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:26 | |
| *** ohnoimde1d has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:27 | |
| *** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:27 | |
| *** anotherjesse is now known as anotherjesse_zz | 23:29 | |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 23:30 | |
| *** dendroba` has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:30 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:31 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 23:31 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** DuncanT has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** dendrobates has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** ohnoimdead has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** dtroyer has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** mtaylor has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** somik is now known as s0mik | 23:32 | |
| *** dtroyer- is now known as dtroyer | 23:32 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:34 | |
| *** zykes- has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:37 | |
| *** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:39 | |
| *** ewindisch has quit IRC | 23:41 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:42 | |
| *** sdague_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:42 | |
| *** zykes-_ has quit IRC | 23:42 | |
| *** glenc has quit IRC | 23:42 | |
| *** glenc_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:42 | |
| *** Madkiss has quit IRC | 23:43 | |
| *** Madkiss_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:43 | |
| *** Madkiss_ is now known as Madkiss | 23:43 | |
| *** jog0_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:44 | |
| *** troytoma` has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:45 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 23:47 | |
| *** gakott has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:49 | |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:50 | |
| *** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:50 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** troytoman-away has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** anotherjesse_zz has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** no`x has quit IRC | 23:50 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
| *** Adri2000 has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
| *** Kiall has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
| *** jog0_ is now known as jog0 | 23:51 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:51 | |
| *** anotherjesse_zz has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:51 | |
| *** anotherjesse_zz is now known as anotherjesse | 23:51 | |
| *** no`x has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:51 | |
| *** Kiall has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:54 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 23:54 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:54 | |
| *** mnewby_ has quit IRC | 23:55 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:57 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 23:57 | |
| *** mtaylor1 is now known as mtaylor | 23:57 | |
| *** galstrom has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!