| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:02 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 00:02 | |
| *** danwent_ is now known as danwent | 00:02 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:05 | |
| *** matwood has quit IRC | 00:06 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:17 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 00:21 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 00:26 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 00:27 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 00:27 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:27 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:27 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 00:29 | |
| *** Guest40240 has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:30 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:32 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 00:34 | |
| *** tongli has quit IRC | 00:36 | |
| *** tongli has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:36 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 00:39 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 00:42 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:44 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:44 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 00:47 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 00:47 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 00:51 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:52 | |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:56 | |
| *** jdurgin has quit IRC | 01:00 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 01:01 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:04 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 01:08 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 01:13 | |
| *** matiu has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 01:27 | |
| *** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:33 | |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 01:33 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 01:38 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:39 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 01:44 | |
| *** tongli has quit IRC | 01:49 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:51 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 01:56 | |
| *** lcheng has quit IRC | 01:56 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 01:57 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 02:03 | |
| *** matwood has quit IRC | 02:06 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 02:08 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:14 | |
| *** MegaTron has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:15 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 02:20 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:22 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 02:27 | |
| *** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:33 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC | 02:33 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:36 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 02:40 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 02:42 | |
| *** ncode has quit IRC | 02:46 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 02:47 | |
| *** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:51 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 02:52 | |
| *** Guest40240 is now known as jgriffith | 02:52 | |
| *** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:53 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 02:56 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:14 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 03:19 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 03:25 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 03:25 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:29 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 03:32 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 03:37 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 03:37 | |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 03:39 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 03:43 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 04:03 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 04:03 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 04:04 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 04:22 | |
| *** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:33 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:42 | |
| *** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:51 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:56 | |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 04:59 | |
| *** jbarratt has left #openstack-meeting | 05:00 | |
| *** jbarratt has quit IRC | 05:00 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:01 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 05:02 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 05:14 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 05:23 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 05:26 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:42 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:48 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:51 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 05:54 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:56 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:04 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 06:07 | |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 06:08 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 06:12 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:17 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 06:30 | |
| *** amotoki has left #openstack-meeting | 06:36 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:36 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 06:47 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:50 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 06:51 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:55 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 06:55 | |
| ttx | danwent: bug squashing day this Thursday | 06:56 |
|---|---|---|
| danwent | ttx: ah, there is. someone mentioned that during the meeting. quantum prob isn't in too bad of shape, so hopefully it will be quick. | 06:56 |
| danwent | do you have those graphs always running, or just during the events? | 06:57 |
| ttx | it's about bug fixing (and closing) this time around | 06:57 |
| *** MegaTron has left #openstack-meeting | 06:57 | |
| danwent | ah, I see. | 06:57 |
| ttx | just during the events so far | 06:57 |
| danwent | we've been developing a pretty amazing set of core contributors who have been doing a good job of making sure the bugs don't pile up too high. I'm really pumped about how much the team has grown just in the past two months. | 06:58 |
| ttx | cool. Quantum still looks like magic for most people out there, so growing a set of experts can't hurt :) | 06:59 |
| danwent | yeah. its really nice to have a whole team of people who can dive in to help. still rough around the edges, but now that we've merged IPAM into quantum and cut nova out of the picture for creating networks, things are actually a lot simpler, which is great. | 07:01 |
| danwent | btw, i'm planning on putting together a video soon that will hopefully be a pretty clear demonstration of how things work. | 07:02 |
| ttx | that would be great :) | 07:06 |
| ttx | nova-network has never been clear enough so that people would not put themselves into bad situations | 07:07 |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 07:09 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:09 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 07:30 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 07:37 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:43 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:55 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:05 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 08:17 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:28 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 08:38 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 08:57 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:57 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 08:57 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:58 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:19 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 09:40 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:44 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 09:45 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:02 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 10:11 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 10:18 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:28 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 10:33 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 11:00 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:26 | |
| *** writerDi_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:27 | |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 11:29 | |
| *** writerDiane has quit IRC | 11:30 | |
| *** writerDi_ has quit IRC | 11:32 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:35 | |
| *** janisg has quit IRC | 11:39 | |
| *** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:43 | |
| *** ncode has quit IRC | 11:43 | |
| *** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:43 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:57 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 12:01 | |
| *** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:03 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:06 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 12:06 | |
| *** dachary has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:06 | |
| *** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:29 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:31 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:37 | |
| *** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:43 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:43 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 12:47 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:50 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:55 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 12:58 | |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 12:58 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:59 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 13:06 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:07 | |
| *** dhellmann_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:07 | |
| *** shh_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:10 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 13:11 | |
| *** dhellmann_ is now known as dhellmann | 13:11 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 13:11 | |
| *** shh_ has quit IRC | 13:12 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:16 | |
| *** rkukura has quit IRC | 13:16 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 13:19 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 13:26 | |
| *** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:27 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:31 | |
| *** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:33 | |
| *** matiu has quit IRC | 13:39 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:39 | |
| *** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:39 | |
| *** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:39 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 13:41 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:41 | |
| *** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:44 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:45 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:46 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 13:46 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:47 | |
| *** writerDiane has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:48 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:48 | |
| *** mnaser has quit IRC | 13:51 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 13:51 | |
| *** wabat has left #openstack-meeting | 13:52 | |
| *** writerDiane has quit IRC | 13:54 | |
| *** writerDiane has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:55 | |
| *** writerDiane has quit IRC | 13:55 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:56 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 13:57 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:00 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:00 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:00 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has quit IRC | 14:03 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:03 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:05 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:05 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has quit IRC | 14:05 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:06 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:07 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 14:09 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:10 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 14:10 | |
| *** tongli has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:11 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC | 14:12 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:12 | |
| *** dachary has quit IRC | 14:13 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:14 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:19 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:19 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:23 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 14:23 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 14:26 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:26 | |
| *** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:26 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:30 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has quit IRC | 14:30 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 14:30 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:30 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 14:33 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:35 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 14:35 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:36 | |
| *** aclark_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:37 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 14:38 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:38 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has quit IRC | 14:39 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 14:40 | |
| *** aclark_ is now known as AlanClark | 14:40 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 14:42 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:42 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:44 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:46 | |
| *** mestery_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:46 | |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 14:47 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 14:52 | |
| *** aclark_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:52 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 14:52 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 14:52 | |
| *** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:53 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 14:57 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:59 | |
| *** aclark_ has quit IRC | 15:00 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:04 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 15:07 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:20 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 15:24 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:30 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 15:36 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:37 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 15:39 | |
| *** ncode has quit IRC | 15:40 | |
| *** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
| *** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
| *** jbryce has left #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 15:45 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:47 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 15:48 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:59 | |
| *** dcramer_ has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** mnaser has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:12 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 16:12 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 16:12 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:12 | |
| *** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:17 | |
| *** shh_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:24 | |
| *** shh_ has quit IRC | 16:24 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 16:29 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:31 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:35 | |
| *** tongli has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| *** dcramer_ has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** mnaser has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:39 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:46 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has quit IRC | 16:50 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:51 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has quit IRC | 16:53 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:54 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:54 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 16:55 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:57 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:02 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:03 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:04 | |
| *** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:04 | |
| *** mattray1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:05 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:07 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 17:08 | |
| *** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** rohitk has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** rohitk has left #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 17:10 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 17:10 | |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:15 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** somik is now known as s0mik | 17:17 | |
| *** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:17 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 17:18 | |
| *** anniec_ is now known as anniec | 17:18 | |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 17:19 | |
| *** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting | 17:20 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 17:20 | |
| *** PotHix has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:20 | |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:30 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:30 | |
| *** mattray1 has quit IRC | 17:34 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 17:35 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 17:37 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 17:38 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:39 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 17:39 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 17:40 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 17:43 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 17:43 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:44 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:47 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 17:47 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:50 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:50 | |
| *** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:54 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 17:55 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:57 | |
| *** kevin has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:57 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 17:58 | |
| ayoung | Keystone! | 17:58 |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 17:58 | |
| rafaduran | yea! | 17:59 |
| ayoung | heckj, dolphm ? | 18:00 |
| heckj | morning morning! | 18:01 |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| heckj | #startmeeting | 18:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jul 10 18:01:24 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 |
| heckj | ola all | 18:01 |
| rafaduran | hi | 18:01 |
| heckj | #topic Folsom Release and general planning | 18:02 |
| ayoung | How do? | 18:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Folsom Release and general planning" | 18:02 | |
| *** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| heckj | So… looking at the release schedule, we're getting pretty close. | 18:02 |
| heckj | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/FolsomReleaseSchedule | 18:02 |
| ayoung | I wrote this up. https://gist.github.com/3085149 | 18:03 |
| ayoung | That way maybe I don't hijack the whole meeting. | 18:03 |
| heckj | The general idea is that all feature work is wrapped up bu the end of folsom-3, which is scheduled for Aug 16th - about 4-5 weeks from now | 18:03 |
| heckj | ayoung: nice | 18:03 |
| heckj | Looking at the folsom blueprints and work, I'm guessing we're not going to get even half of this wrapped up: https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3 | 18:04 |
| heckj | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3 | 18:04 |
| ayoung | heckj, yeah...PKI tokens probably the only thing from that list that will get in | 18:04 |
| heckj | Outside of the PKI work, and the basic AD identity backend, I think everything is pending work on the V3 API | 18:05 |
| ayoung | Maybe the token ID thing? | 18:05 |
| rafaduran | heckj: Do you think V3 is ready to start coding some features? | 18:05 |
| heckj | I suspect we can make a good start on the V3 API work, but I don't know that we'll have it ready to roll in 4 weeks | 18:05 |
| ayoung | Stop Implementing Token IDs as part of URIs | 18:05 |
| heckj | #link PKI Status: https://gist.github.com/3085149 | 18:06 |
| ayoung | heckj, that is not really status so much as "actions" | 18:06 |
| heckj | er, sorry | 18:06 |
| heckj | yeah - just getting notes in the logs, sorry about that | 18:06 |
| heckj | #link PKI work items/actions: https://gist.github.com/3085149 | 18:07 |
| ayoung | status is more like: have proof of concept working, need to hammer out those details. | 18:07 |
| heckj | soudns good | 18:07 |
| heckj | related, the V3 api has it's third draft now up - I spammed the OpenStack mailing list with it this past saturday: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VP-bTBbwsn6q-rDzuS9CEKb2ubE1VjbWRFd4BkkjoOY/edit | 18:07 |
| ayoung | I'm still feeling confident in getting this in | 18:07 |
| heckj | #link V3 draft3 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VP-bTBbwsn6q-rDzuS9CEKb2ubE1VjbWRFd4BkkjoOY/edit | 18:07 |
| heckj | ayoung: it looks like you're making excellent progress | 18:07 |
| heckj | So to answer rafaduran question, I think we're at the spot where we can start implementing the V3 API | 18:08 |
| ayoung | heckj, can we break it down to a series of tickets? | 18:08 |
| *** marek_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:08 | |
| heckj | I'm explicitly leaving open the API spec so that when we realise we painted ourselves into a corner, we can change the room and paint ourselves back out of it | 18:09 |
| rafaduran | heckj: I'm interested on the querying stuff, I can implement that part | 18:09 |
| *** Haneef has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:09 | |
| heckj | ayoung: I'd absolutely love to do that - LP has a "workitems" thing, we could open "bugs" related to it, or we could use a different method. Any preferences? | 18:09 |
| rafaduran | maybe blueprints | 18:10 |
| ayoung | bugs works for me...keep using the same system | 18:10 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, they can all link to one blueprint | 18:10 |
| heckj | rafaduran: would love to have the help! One of the pending "Hmm, how's that going to work" is the request from Horizon (gabrielhurley) to allow the queries to request back related objects from the given REST resources. I don't have a good answer there. | 18:10 |
| ayoung | just the individual line items | 18:10 |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:11 | |
| rafaduran | heckj: that's a interesting, issue, I will try to do some research whenever I have some free time | 18:11 |
| heckj | #action: heckj to create tags and bugs with an initial work breakdown | 18:11 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:12 | |
| heckj | I'll make a first sweep of it (starting today) - will hit the mailing list with a reference to it, and we can iterate. I normally break down things with a group, so I expect it'll need revisions. | 18:12 |
| heckj | So - all the stuff depending on V3 IMPL, I'm going to drop from folsom today | 18:13 |
| heckj | #action heckj to drop all dependent pieces on V3 API implementation from Folsom series | 18:13 |
| heckj | I'm expecting some hollerin', but I just don't see the work getting done otherwise. | 18:14 |
| heckj | Any questions? | 18:15 |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 18:15 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:16 | |
| heckj | Okay - ayoung, did you want to get into any more detail about the PKI/signed tokens stuff? | 18:16 |
| heckj | (and we have rafarduran's topic pending) | 18:17 |
| ayoung | heckj, just to give a 1 line summary | 18:17 |
| ayoung | I am going to make it so the two types of tokens can coexist in order to simplify the upgrade process. | 18:17 |
| ayoung | Anyone interested in the details (beyond the gist I wrote above) can chat after the meeting | 18:18 |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:18 | |
| heckj | sounds good, thanks ayoung | 18:18 |
| heckj | rafaduran: you're up | 18:18 |
| rafaduran | ok, thanks | 18:19 |
| heckj | #topic rate limiting middleware - feedback and corner cases | 18:19 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "rate limiting middleware - feedback and corner cases" | 18:19 | |
| ayoung | BTW, please send me review requests | 18:19 |
| ayoung | I'' try to grab them if I see them, | 18:19 |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 18:19 | |
| rafaduran | As I said in previous meetings I'm working on a rate limit middleware | 18:19 |
| rafaduran | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/keystone-rate-limiting | 18:19 |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:20 | |
| rafaduran | I've updated the related bluprint | 18:20 |
| rafaduran | and the code start looking good | 18:20 |
| rafaduran | #link https://github.com/rafaduran/keystone/tree/bp/keystone-rate-limiting | 18:20 |
| heckj | #link https://github.com/rafaduran/keystone/tree/bp/keystone-rate-limiting | 18:21 |
| rafaduran | but I still need some feedback/help on some situations | 18:21 |
| rafaduran | specially on how to map requests to limits | 18:21 |
| rafaduran | I consider thre cases | 18:21 |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 18:22 | |
| rafaduran | requests that doesn't need authentication, authentication requests and authenticated requests | 18:22 |
| rafaduran | so my first idea was map tokens to user id | 18:22 |
| rafaduran | but now I'm not really sure, maybe it would be more useful map to usernames | 18:23 |
| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:23 | |
| rafaduran | a use case is devstack, if this is ever used would be much more difficult the devstack configuration | 18:23 |
| *** sparkycollier has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:24 | |
| rafaduran | you need to create users, get the id and if you wan a custom limit then change keystone configuration | 18:24 |
| heckj | rafaduran: I suspect you're making this more complex than it needs to be. I'd guess you could map a limit to the REST URI and call it good at that for a first cut. | 18:24 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, can you write up the issues you are dealing with and send it to the mailing list? I would be great to have them documented, and we could spend the time to get the answers correct. | 18:24 |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:24 | |
| heckj | rafaduran: did you specifically want to not ratelimit by a user? I'm not clear on that use case and why that would be needed... | 18:24 |
| heckj | ayoung: ++ | 18:25 |
| rafaduran | heckj: not, I want limits by user | 18:25 |
| rafaduran | but, how to map that user to the request is not clear | 18:26 |
| rafaduran | but as ayoung said probably is better send an email to the mailing list | 18:26 |
| heckj | I'm with ayoung that I think this is something that would be very worthwhile to take onto email, but in the more immediate timeframe, I'm not clear on why you want to map it to a user - what does that get you that you want to take advantage of? | 18:26 |
| heckj | I'm happy to wait if you'd prefer to do that | 18:27 |
| rafaduran | I want map users because I think I need track somhow the reqeusts | 18:28 |
| ayoung | #action rafaduran to write up design questions for rate limiting | 18:28 |
| heckj | #action rafaduran to write up design questions for rate limiting | 18:28 |
| rafaduran | I mean, I need limit someone/something | 18:28 |
| rafaduran | maybe I'm wrong with that | 18:28 |
| heckj | (I think I need to do all those to get them into the logs - very annoying, but I'm not sure) | 18:29 |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:29 | |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:29 | |
| rafaduran | the idea also comes from how nova middleware works (it maps by username) | 18:30 |
| rafaduran | and my work started from it | 18:31 |
| rafaduran | ayoung: It would very useful if you can check what I'm doing, in order to be sure that is PKI compatible | 18:33 |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:33 | |
| rafaduran | since there is no API changes it should be, but I can miss something | 18:33 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, I'd be happy to. If you have partial work, please commit it to your account on github and send me a link...or share some other way | 18:33 |
| rafaduran | ayoung: I've added the link when start writing | 18:35 |
| rafaduran | https://github.com/rafaduran/keystone/tree/bp/keystone-rate-limiting | 18:35 |
| ayoung | SOunds good | 18:35 |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 18:35 | |
| *** somik is now known as s0mik | 18:35 | |
| rafaduran | it's not finished and I need solve what the mapping issue | 18:35 |
| rafaduran | but that's pretty much my idea | 18:36 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, OK...It will take me some time to digest. | 18:36 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:36 | |
| rafaduran | ayoung: you can check the middleware stuff directly | 18:37 |
| rafaduran | https://github.com/rafaduran/keystone/blob/bp/keystone-rate-limiting/keystone/contrib/rate/core.py#L283 | 18:37 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, OK, so with PKI, getting info out of the token should be cheaper....no need for a remote call | 18:38 |
| ayoung | hmmm | 18:38 |
| ayoung | heckj, once we get PKI tokens merged, we might want to think about somehow taking the info from the token and putting it into the request context so that we don't have multiple calls to openssl | 18:39 |
| rafaduran | yes, I was thinking about that too | 18:40 |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 18:40 | |
| rafaduran | ayoung: you might add the compatibility layer into it | 18:40 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, give me a day or so to clean up the PKI stuff and repost to github, and we can work through these two issues together | 18:40 |
| rafaduran | ok | 18:41 |
| ayoung | rafaduran, sounds about right...I'd have to look in to it to grok completely | 18:41 |
| *** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:41 | |
| rafaduran | heckj: implementation apart, I'm not really sure how to proceed in order to get the bp reviewed/approved | 18:42 |
| heckj | sec... | 18:42 |
| heckj | reading backtrace really quick - had to take a phone call | 18:44 |
| heckj | ayoung: re: populating the request context from the token, yes - I think that's an excellent idea | 18:44 |
| heckj | rafaduran: for the BP, I think we only really need to nail down the specifics of your use cases and what you're solving for, and once that's clear it is down to implemenation | 18:45 |
| ayoung | #action auth_token middle populates request context with data from signed token so it does not have to be fetched multiple times. | 18:46 |
| *** devananda has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| heckj | I'm not OCD about mananging the blueprints with their various status' and such - it's more about the code to me, with a blueprint being a handy indicator that someone is wanting to do some feature work, and a means of linking review requests together | 18:46 |
| *** tim_chan has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:46 | |
| heckj | rafaduran: anything more? | 18:47 |
| rafaduran | no, I think that's all for now | 18:47 |
| heckj | #topic open discussion | 18:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 18:47 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 18:47 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:48 | |
| heckj | I don't have anything more - just finished cleaning up the blueprints and unlinking a pile of things from Folsom | 18:48 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:48 | |
| heckj | #info If you have a BP that you think can get done in the next 4 weeks, let heckj know and we'll link the BP's back up | 18:48 |
| *** dcramer_ has quit IRC | 18:49 | |
| rafaduran | heckj: one more thing about the querying | 18:49 |
| heckj | rafaduran: shoot | 18:49 |
| rafaduran | heckj: API 3 defines URL for all resources so I think we can send links, and additionaly, somehow (maybe at querystring) accept a eager load (I think that was Gabriel suggestion) of objects | 18:50 |
| rafaduran | so it can be included into the querying | 18:51 |
| heckj | rafaduran: yeah - that "eager load" was Gabriel's request - the idea being able to pull in specific sets of related objects with the query parameters. | 18:51 |
| ayoung | I am going to be speaking at the Boston Openstack Meetup on July 24th about Keystone, and what to expect in Folsom. I guess I'll modify the slide about the V3 API | 18:51 |
| heckj | ayoung: heh, sorry :-) | 18:52 |
| heckj | ayoung: I think we'll have a good implementation by then - but I don't want to set an expectation of other projects being able to use it in Folsom. It's just too late in the cycle to ask folks to change all that stuff up | 18:52 |
| heckj | I was wayyyyyy to naive about how long it would take to nail down a revised and consolidated API | 18:53 |
| heckj | BTW: Any complains about renaming tenants back to projects? Now's the time to bitch... | 18:53 |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 18:53 | |
| ayoung | heckj, that is fine. I want to be able to give an honest picture of what to expect. I was actually posting in order to solicit input: what are the most important things to communicate about Keystone? | 18:53 |
| *** danwent_ has quit IRC | 18:53 | |
| heckj | My highlights would be PKI, bug fixes and stability, solid work towards an updated core API | 18:54 |
| ayoung | heckj, so long as they are called projects *Everywhere* I am fine. I think the term *tenants* is too loaded, and we don't really meet the letter of the law on them anyway | 18:54 |
| heckj | dtroyer: since you're online, how's the progress on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/command-options? | 18:54 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| dtroyer | heckj: it was merged last week | 18:55 |
| heckj | ayoung: I aimed to do a global search and replace, and move everything to back to "projects". The API certainly encapsulates that, and I'll make some work items with the V3 Implementation to revise the docs with it | 18:55 |
| heckj | dtroyer: fully implemented to what you wanted? (I haven't looked) | 18:56 |
| *** atiwari has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| dtroyer | heckj: yes | 18:56 |
| heckj | dtroyer: thxusir! BP updated | 18:56 |
| dtroyer | heckj: thx, I forgot to do that... | 18:56 |
| ayoung | heckj, are all of the openstack projects aligned with using the term "project" ? | 18:56 |
| heckj | ayoung: that was nova's original term, and they never changed from it. horizon still uses project, and swift never moved to "tenant" from whatever they were calling that grouping. | 18:57 |
| ayoung | heckj, good | 18:57 |
| ayoung | works for me | 18:57 |
| heckj | Glance uses different terms entirely (members, grouping) - which can be applied to whatever | 18:57 |
| heckj | thanks all - I've got to wrap this up and make a meeting in 2 minutes. | 18:58 |
| heckj | I'll post the BP update stuff to them mailing list since we didn't see dolph, guang and liem here today | 18:58 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 18:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 18:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jul 10 18:59:03 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-18.01.html | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-18.01.txt | 18:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-18.01.log.html | 18:59 |
| jaypipes | heckj: glance uses the term tenant. | 19:00 |
| jaypipes | heckj: and swift uses account IIRC. I would prefer account vs. tenant or project. | 19:00 |
| mtaylor | anybody wanna talk about CI hooplas? | 19:01 |
| jeblair | hoola. | 19:01 |
| jaypipes | aren't we having a PPB meeting? | 19:01 |
| jeblair | after the ci meeting, usually. | 19:01 |
| clarkb | mtaylor punches people that try to steal his meeting away | 19:01 |
| *** sparkycollier has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| jaypipes | oh, must have the time wrong... sorry! | 19:01 |
| * mtaylor punches jaypipes | 19:01 | |
| mtaylor | #startmeeting | 19:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jul 10 19:02:00 2012 UTC. The chair is mtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 19:02 |
| mtaylor | first order of business ... hey jaypipes, anytihng new with tempest this week? | 19:02 |
| *** Haneef has quit IRC | 19:02 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:02 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 19:03 | |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: you're kiddin, right? :) | 19:03 |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 19:03 | |
| jeblair | pretty sure something notable happened regarding tempest... | 19:04 |
| mtaylor | jaypipes: I'm not! it was a leading question | 19:04 |
| jeblair | i'm ecstatic. it's something we've wanted to do since the essex design summit! | 19:04 |
| *** tim_chan has quit IRC | 19:04 | |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: what jeblair said :) | 19:05 |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: we are now gating core projects on the tempest smoke tests. | 19:05 |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:05 | |
| jeblair | jaypipes: so what do we need to do before we can stop running exercise.sh? | 19:05 |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: in addition, the full tempest test suite (minus smoke, but after successful completion of smoke) are being run for tempest merges | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | jaypipes: w00t! | 19:06 |
| mtaylor | jaypipes: that's super exciting! | 19:06 |
| jaypipes | jeblair: I just need to do the analysis gap coverage | 19:06 |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| jaypipes | jeblair: put a bug in on openstack-ci and assign to me? | 19:06 |
| jeblair | jaypipes: will do! | 19:06 |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| jeblair | jaypipes: just keep in mind devstack-gate isn't running all the exercise scripts, so it may not be that bad. | 19:07 |
| jaypipes | jeblair: k. everything but boot from volume, right? | 19:07 |
| soren | It's worth noting that getting tempest trunk to pass against stable/essex is just a few small patches away. I got it working today, and will propose patches tomorrow. | 19:07 |
| soren | So we should be able to use the same gate there. | 19:08 |
| jeblair | soren: oh good, those are going to come in handy real soon i bet. :) | 19:08 |
| jaypipes | nice | 19:08 |
| jeblair | right now the config is the same for all branches, but we can modify that if needed before your patches land (but hopefully that won't be necessary) | 19:08 |
| soren | Dunno. I've only tested it with one configuration, so maybe. | 19:09 |
| *** rafaduran has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| * mtaylor does a little dance | 19:09 | |
| soren | ...but I can expand that for sure now. I just needed the ball to be green so that I could block stuff from getting in if it went red. | 19:10 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| soren | Anyway, carry on. | 19:10 |
| mtaylor | I think that's it on that one. | 19:11 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: you had something to do with that one, anything else interesting from you? | 19:11 |
| jeblair | on a related note... | 19:11 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:11 | |
| jeblair | i'm working on adding more flexibility to zuul regarding which jobs are run and how... | 19:11 |
| jeblair | so hopefully we can have a sane way of expressing that devstack-gate jobs for stable/diablo should run on oneiric slaves | 19:12 |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 19:12 | |
| jeblair | (regardless of how much longer that's going to be relevant, i'm pretty sure it's going to be useful in the future too) | 19:12 |
| mtaylor | yup | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | agree | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | speaking of zuul - clarkb, did you add a feature people might care about this week? | 19:14 |
| clarkb | there were some minor tweaks to the status page and you can now retrigger jobs by leaving comments on changes | 19:14 |
| clarkb | a comment of "recheck" retriggers check jobs and a comment of "reverify" retriggers gate jobs | 19:15 |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 19:15 | |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: if I say "reverify" 10 times straight on one review will zuul poo itself? | 19:16 |
| clarkb | potentially | 19:16 |
| LinuxJedi | awesome :) | 19:16 |
| jeblair | yeah, adding 'skip enqueuing a second build set for the same change' is a todo. :) | 19:16 |
| mtaylor | what does zuul poo look like? | 19:17 |
| * LinuxJedi python exceptions I guess | 19:17 | |
| jeblair | a big jenkins backlog. | 19:17 |
| * LinuxJedi doesn't know why I did /me there | 19:18 | |
| mtaylor | heh. you said log | 19:18 |
| mtaylor | ANYWAY | 19:18 |
| LinuxJedi | better than drizzledump | 19:18 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: what's the status of stackforge? | 19:18 |
| jeblair | hey, i'm eating here. | 19:18 |
| LinuxJedi | well, we had lots of fun last week... | 19:18 |
| LinuxJedi | a bug in HP Cloud completely blew away Stackforge Jenkins | 19:18 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:19 | |
| LinuxJedi | so we had 2 options: 1. rebuild, 2. go with the migration plan we talked about a couple of weeks ago | 19:19 |
| LinuxJedi | for those not following along at home the migration plan was to move gerrit and jenkins into Openstack's gerrit and jenkins | 19:19 |
| LinuxJedi | but keep github stuff separate | 19:19 |
| LinuxJedi | the US was out celebrating the fact they kicked us out | 19:20 |
| jeblair | yay us! | 19:20 |
| mtaylor | woohoo! | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | so I made the decision to do option 2 | 19:20 |
| mtaylor | stinky british people | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | lol :) | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | and the migration went pretty smoothly considering | 19:20 |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| LinuxJedi | so Stackforge now uses review.openstack.org and jenkins.openstack.org | 19:21 |
| LinuxJedi | and that is about it | 19:21 |
| LinuxJedi | oh, we now have no persistent servers on HP Cloud | 19:21 |
| * LinuxJedi destroyed what was left of Stackforge on HP Cloud on Friday | 19:22 | |
| soren | Where are they instaed? | 19:22 |
| soren | Rackspace? | 19:22 |
| soren | Just curious. | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | soren: we're just using the openstack ones | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | soren: which are all at rackspace | 19:22 |
| LinuxJedi | soren: they are part of Openstack's gerrit and jenkins, so yes | 19:22 |
| soren | Ok. | 19:22 |
| LinuxJedi | on a positive note that gives us another tenant in HP Cloud to do evil things with | 19:23 |
| mtaylor | bwahahahaha | 19:23 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:23 | |
| * LinuxJedi is thinking using CentOS 3 to fail everyone's code | 19:23 | |
| *** dcramer_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:24 | |
| *** somik has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:24 | |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:24 | |
| * mtaylor decides to use all of the compute resources in that tennant to set up a giant distcc cluster... | 19:24 | |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 19:24 | |
| clarkb | devananda's openvz devstack stuff will apparently do evil things | 19:24 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: that is an unlimited tenant, so knock yourself out ;) | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: BALLER | 19:24 |
| jeblair | oh, we should get openstackjenkins to be unlimited... | 19:25 |
| mtaylor | yeah - how do we do that? | 19:25 |
| LinuxJedi | jeblair: ok, I assumed they were all unlimited, because I didn't hit a limit when I did crazy stuff | 19:25 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: also, I just sent you email, but we have blockstorage enabled now on that hpcloud tenant | 19:25 |
| jeblair | oh, i think devstack-launch hits a quota sometimes. | 19:26 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: that's great, i should be able to finish backups soon then! | 19:26 |
| mtaylor | so - for those following along at home, we're going to use hp's block-storage-as-a-service thing to get a persistent volume for backups | 19:26 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: w0t! | 19:26 |
| LinuxJedi | damn, they aren't unlimited then, that broke my world a bit | 19:26 |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 19:27 | |
| *** somik is now known as s0mik | 19:27 | |
| mtaylor | hrm. in other news, I've been working on landing some patches to get the version code applied to the server projects as well as the clients | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | and am continuing to work on an openstack-requires repo | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | for those who haven't looked at it - we have some REALLY interesting discrepancies between what we install in venvs for unittests and what devstack installs on the system via apt | 19:29 |
| clarkb | more dramatic then different versions? | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | well, no - just different versions | 19:30 |
| LinuxJedi | damn, I was hoping for a 'Dallas' kind of drama | 19:30 |
| mtaylor | but it's interesting to see VERY specific version pins in pip-requires that are not what we install for devstack :) | 19:30 |
| mtaylor | devananda: how's openvz coming along? | 19:31 |
| devananda | we got the nova driver code from rackspace last week | 19:32 |
| devananda | so i spent several days figuring out how to get it to work with our ubuntu kernel | 19:32 |
| LinuxJedi | devananda now has square eyes reading through it all | 19:32 |
| devananda | and it does :) | 19:32 |
| devananda | on my bare metal box at home, i've got a working devstack with oepnvz containers and bridged networking | 19:32 |
| mtaylor | yay | 19:33 |
| devananda | one or two issues to work out with the networking, and i should be able to start running tests on it | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | excellent. which means we can then start actually get a jenkins stood up to do that regularly | 19:34 |
| devananda | indeed | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | on a similar track, spoke with primeministerp this past week who is doing similar work to get a hyper-v lab stood up | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | so maybe by end of cycle we'll have a couple of contrib testers checkout out different hypervisors! | 19:35 |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:35 | |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| jeblair | notmyname: ping | 19:36 |
| notmyname | yo | 19:36 |
| jeblair | notmyname: so what are your thoughts on adding swift to the devstack gate? | 19:36 |
| notmyname | jeblair: I'd need to talk to the other core devs first. when could it keep us from merging a change? | 19:38 |
| *** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:40 | |
| jeblair | when a change breaks interoperability with the other prjects. or in the case of transient failures (like the test node can't download a package). or when a non-deterministic bug has crept into any included project. | 19:40 |
| notmyname | and what problem is it solving? | 19:41 |
| jeblair | preventing changes from being merged that break interoperability with the other projects. | 19:42 |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:43 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:43 | |
| soren | The alternative is that a breaking change in Swift will block everyone else? | 19:44 |
| soren | Right? | 19:44 |
| jeblair | well, swift isn't tested at all in the devstack-gate right now, so breaking changes don't get noticed by the testing infrastructure. | 19:45 |
| notmyname | jeblair: ok, I'll take it up with the rest of the core devs. can we discuss it again at next week's CI meeting? | 19:45 |
| jeblair | sure thing. | 19:46 |
| notmyname | jeblair: or, we can talk about it later this week after I've had a chance to talk to everyone else | 19:46 |
| soren | jeblair: Ok. Can we agree that these things need to happen at around the same time? | 19:46 |
| jeblair | okay, i'll be around | 19:46 |
| jeblair | soren: yes, inclusion in the tests implies gating on that project, in my mind. | 19:46 |
| soren | jeblair: I.e. using swift in the devstack gate and applying the same gaate to swift. | 19:46 |
| soren | Good. | 19:46 |
| clarkb | mtaylor: apache in front of git-http-backend is now live? | 19:47 |
| mtaylor | oh! yeah | 19:47 |
| mtaylor | I totally forgot | 19:47 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 19:48 | |
| mtaylor | we're serving out git anonymous http from gerrit using straight apache and not gerrit/jgit | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | so we should never see a java thread pool limit issue preventing us from being able to clone a repo | 19:48 |
| LinuxJedi | also, clarkb should probably talk about the gerritbot changes | 19:48 |
| mtaylor | and similarly, those threads and stuff in the java can be spent doing helpful things | 19:49 |
| clarkb | gerritbot has a new channel config yaml file that tells it which channels to join and what projects + events each channel cares about | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | ttx: as a result of that, we changed a replication setting- so we should no longer be replicating draft changes to github | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | ttx: so they may be more secure now - you may want to re-test their suitability | 19:50 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: isn't gitweb still an issue? | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | is it? | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | was that where the issue was? | 19:50 |
| ttx | hmm, I don't think I touhced github i nmy hack :) | 19:50 |
| * ttx searches for bug | 19:51 | |
| clarkb | it was one place with an issue | 19:51 |
| clarkb | we can turn it off if the tradeoff is acceptable | 19:51 |
| ttx | mtaylor: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+bug/902052/comments/2 | 19:51 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 902052 in openstack-ci "Gerrit should support private reviews for security bugs" [Wishlist,Triaged] | 19:51 |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 19:51 | |
| mtaylor | gotit. well - alternate idea - use github links instead of gitweb, and we just won't have github preview links for draft changes | 19:52 |
| mtaylor | we could also have gitweb serve out the local replicas that apache is serving out, since those also will not have draft changes | 19:52 |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:52 | |
| *** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:53 | |
| * mtaylor may be drifting off topic | 19:53 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: wouldn't "git https://review.openstack.org/openstack/$PROJECT" still expose the chnage somehow ? | 19:53 |
| mtaylor | ttx: nope | 19:53 |
| mtaylor | ttx: we're replicating to a set of local repo copies... | 19:53 |
| mtaylor | ttx: but we're only replicating refs that are visible to users in the authenticated users group | 19:54 |
| ttx | mtaylor: do it and I'll do my best breaking it :) | 19:54 |
| mtaylor | ttx: please do! check out the github replicas and the anon-http urls | 19:54 |
| jeblair | so as for gitweb, i guess we should see if we can have the gerrit-managed gitweb use the 'public' local repos... | 19:55 |
| mtaylor | ttx: if those two are solid enough for you, we'd just have to decide whether we wanted to give up having revision preview links for draft changes | 19:55 |
| ttx | mtaylor: so gitweb is off-limit because it would be turned off if we were to go that way, right | 19:55 |
| jeblair | or otherwise, shut it off. | 19:55 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: ++ | 19:55 |
| ttx | I need to access them *without* ging through gitweb now | 19:56 |
| mtaylor | well, it would either be shut off if we went the github route, or it would serve the local replica repos | 19:56 |
| ttx | going* | 19:56 |
| jeblair | gitweb has a minor secondary use of making the other branches like meta/config easily viewable. :( | 19:56 |
| jeblair | but people can always pull those i reckon. | 19:56 |
| mtaylor | hrm. yeah | 19:56 |
| LinuxJedi | time to start winding up the meeting I think | 19:57 |
| LinuxJedi | or down, depending on how you look at it | 19:57 |
| mtaylor | ok. anybody got anything else? | 19:58 |
| heckj | ... | 19:59 |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| mtaylor | #endmeeting | 20:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 20:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jul 10 20:00:54 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-19.02.html | 20:00 |
| mtaylor | thanks all | 20:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-19.02.txt | 20:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-19.02.log.html | 20:01 |
| ttx | yeehah | 20:01 |
| nijaba | o/ | 20:01 |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:01 | |
| jbryce | #startmeeting | 20:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jul 10 20:01:49 2012 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:01 |
| heckj | o/ | 20:01 |
| johnpur | o/ | 20:01 |
| nijaba | o/ | 20:02 |
| jaypipes | o/ | 20:02 |
| jgriffith | o/ | 20:02 |
| jbryce | sorry i'm late... | 20:02 |
| *** jk0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| ttx | \o | 20:02 |
| jk0 | o/ | 20:02 |
| notmyname | here | 20:02 |
| *** torgomatic has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| jbryce | great...that's 7 ppb members (anyone want to double check my count?) | 20:02 |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB - agenda | 20:02 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 20:02 | |
| ttx | hmmm | 20:02 |
| *** anotherjesse_zz is now known as anotherjesse | 20:02 | |
| ttx | yes 7 | 20:02 |
| danwent | o/ | 20:02 |
| pvo | o/ | 20:03 |
| ttx | 8 | 20:03 |
| jbryce | #topic cinder core progress | 20:03 |
| ttx | .. | 20:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "cinder core progress" | 20:03 | |
| anotherjesse | o/ | 20:03 |
| jbryce | so we had agreed to fast track cinder provisionally for core in Folsom with a check at the f-2 milestone | 20:03 |
| jbryce | the requirement was enough feature parity to replace nova-volumes as default | 20:04 |
| anotherjesse | vishy is on the way | 20:04 |
| *** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| ttx | From a release management perspective, the project hit its deadlines and followed the procedured, even if jgriffith is obviously still learning the ropes | 20:04 |
| vishy | o/ | 20:04 |
| ttx | so no blocker from my release-management-hat side | 20:04 |
| jbryce | jgriffith: could you give us a status update from your perspective? | 20:04 |
| mtaylor | jgriffith talks to me, so CI is not unhappy | 20:04 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| *** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:05 | |
| jgriffith | jbryce: Yes, for the most part we're at feature parity | 20:05 |
| jgriffith | jbryce: Remaining issues are availability zones and quota implementation | 20:05 |
| jgriffith | jbryce: After that we have mostly the same bugs as Nova-V today :) | 20:05 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: can those be done by F3? | 20:05 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: Absolutely!! | 20:05 |
| jaypipes | k | 20:06 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: We hit my goals for F2 | 20:06 |
| jaypipes | excellent. | 20:06 |
| jgriffith | Remaining is slated F3 | 20:06 |
| jgriffith | May not get to the "new" features I had hoped for but... | 20:06 |
| * jaypipes has noticed an increase in coordination with dtroyer around devstack and cinder, which is great to see | 20:06 | |
| jbryce | anyone have other questions for jgriffith? | 20:07 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 20:07 | |
| jgriffith | dtroyer along with other folks have been very willing to help | 20:07 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: I'd like to see some more involvement between cinder folks and tempest team | 20:07 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: I'll email you about it. | 20:07 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: You got it | 20:07 |
| johnpur | looks like the project is tracking and being managed well. jgriffith, what are your concerns? | 20:08 |
| jgriffith | johnpur: time :) | 20:08 |
| johnpur | lol, always | 20:08 |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 20:08 | |
| *** anniec_ is now known as anniec | 20:08 | |
| jgriffith | johnpur: Really it's getting better, more folks becoming interested | 20:08 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: my final question is how have you been regarding coordination with annegentle and the docs team. that is an absolutely critical integration point IMHO considering the accelerated core promotion. | 20:08 |
| johnpur | do we have POC installs that we trust? | 20:09 |
| jbryce | jaypipes: +1 | 20:09 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: I've chatted with anne a number of times.... | 20:09 |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:09 | |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: I have a lot of work to do there but I'm keeping in communication with her | 20:09 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: I have a plan for F3 | 20:09 |
| jaypipes | good to hear! | 20:09 |
| johnpur | remind me... if cinder is pushed to core is nova volume deprecated? what is the plan? | 20:10 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: see johnpur's ? above... I agree would be cool to see some demo/POC envs for cinder | 20:10 |
| jgriffith | johnpur: There's some debate on if/when that happens | 20:10 |
| jaypipes | johnpur: no, shouldn't be. similar to Quantum, IIRC. | 20:10 |
| jaypipes | johnpur: deprecated over the following release series, right? | 20:10 |
| johnpur | so nova volume is being maintained? | 20:10 |
| anotherjesse | jaypipes: actually we are hoping that we remove nova-volumes | 20:10 |
| jgriffith | johnpur: correct | 20:10 |
| anotherjesse | since the code was literally a cp -r | 20:10 |
| jaypipes | oh, ok... | 20:10 |
| jgriffith | johnpur: Maintained in terms of bug fixes yes | 20:11 |
| anotherjesse | since otherwise we have to port between them | 20:11 |
| jgriffith | johnpur: crtical features as well | 20:11 |
| anotherjesse | hopefully we can just take the bugs in nova for volumes and move them to cinder | 20:11 |
| anotherjesse | and they are relevant | 20:11 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: well, if it *can* be a drop-in replacement, I suppose I could go along with that... if it truly is drop-inable by F3 | 20:11 |
| * jaypipes adds drop-inable to Merriam Websters | 20:11 | |
| jgriffith | anotherjesse: currently I'm fixing any bugs in "both" and will continue to do so as long as feasible | 20:11 |
| johnpur | anotherjesse, you seem to be disagreeing with jgriffith? | 20:11 |
| anotherjesse | johnpur: yes, doing double work for literally the same code base doesn't add value | 20:12 |
| vishy | I think we have to leave nova-volumes in for compatibility in Folsom, but mark it deprecated. | 20:12 |
| johnpur | anotherjesse +1 if we can pull it off | 20:12 |
| ttx | vishy: +1 | 20:12 |
| johnpur | vishy: that makes sense to me | 20:12 |
| jaypipes | vishy: I actually thought that was the plan... am a bit surprised about the planned exorcism of nova-volume in Folsom. | 20:12 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: There was some concern raised from lunar team to me | 20:13 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: Being the new guy trying to keep people happy :( | 20:13 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: could you elaborate? | 20:13 |
| johnpur | but that means that there is a level of maintenance that has to continue, at least until the code is deprecated | 20:13 |
| ttx | I think we need to maintain both until the end of Folsom, and mark it deprecated there | 20:13 |
| * bcwaldon shows up late | 20:13 | |
| anotherjesse | so, what is the messaging? do we recommend anyone uses nova-volumes? | 20:14 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: They're not likey to be ready to switch at F3, they are just asking to make sure we don't rip nova-v out | 20:14 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: which we wouldn't | 20:14 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: no, we wuld recomment people use cinder fir volumes (and quantum for networking) in folsom | 20:14 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: But that means IMO that there is still some bug maintenance that has to be done, at least up until F3 | 20:14 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: ok, I see. it seems you and anotherjesse need to discuss? | 20:14 |
| johnpur | we cannot "force" everyone to move overnight | 20:14 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: or is it just a matter of timing? | 20:15 |
| * ttx should fix his keyboard | 20:15 | |
| *** kbringard has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:15 | |
| *** alrs has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:15 | |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: I think it's timing more than anything. TBH I think it's handled and not going to be a major issue | 20:15 |
| jgriffith | I've had a number of talks with cthier about it | 20:15 |
| jgriffith | anotherjesse: I'm not proposing full on support of both either | 20:15 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: k. so are we saying that n-vol will be deprecated through f3 and beyond, or removed? | 20:16 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: deprecated | 20:16 |
| *** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:16 | |
| * creiht bows | 20:16 | |
| creiht | :) | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | k. I *think* anotherjesse was saying removed though :) | 20:16 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: I would propose removal in the H release | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | creiht: afternoon! | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: hmm... ok. not G? | 20:16 |
| jbryce | let's hold on a minute | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | k | 20:17 |
| jbryce | sounds like we're digging into a separate issue | 20:17 |
| jaypipes | yes | 20:17 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: vote on cinder core promotion? | 20:17 |
| jbryce | first, does anyone have any objections to cinder being core in folsom? then we can decide if we need to make a call on it's relationship to nova-volumes or if that's just up to the nova team to decide | 20:17 |
| jbryce | jaypipes: exactly | 20:17 |
| jbryce | #startvote Has cinder met the folsom-2 milestone requirements and should be included in the Folsom core release? yes, no, abstain | 20:17 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: Has cinder met the folsom-2 milestone requirements and should be included in the Folsom core release? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:17 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:17 |
| jaypipes | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| notmyname | #vote abstain | 20:18 |
| ttx | jaypipes: don't believe everything anotherjesse says. | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | #yes | 20:18 |
| jbryce | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| danwent | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| pvo | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| johnpur | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| heckj | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| jk0 | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| ttx | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| bcwaldon | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| vishy | #vote yes | 20:18 |
| jaypipes | quorum reached. | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | jaypipes: I dislike nova-volumes it in G, but that is a different topic | 20:18 |
| jbryce | anotherjesse: do you want to revote just to make yours count? | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | no | 20:18 |
| jbryce | #endvote | 20:18 |
| jaypipes | lol | 20:18 |
| openstack | Voted on "Has cinder met the folsom-2 milestone requirements and should be included in the Folsom core release?" Results are | 20:18 |
| openstack | yes (10): bcwaldon, johnpur, jbryce, vishy, heckj, jaypipes, jk0, ttx, danwent, pvo | 20:18 |
| openstack | abstain (1): notmyname | 20:18 |
| anotherjesse | my irc is really delayed | 20:18 |
| * koolhead17 looks around | 20:19 | |
| * mtaylor too | 20:19 | |
| jaypipes | so it looks like that's settled... jbryce move on to ceilometer proposal? | 20:19 |
| jbryce | so the second issue is what to do in relation to nova-volumes and the options seem to be rip out completely in F or deprecate in Folsom and remove in G (or H). is that correct? in | 20:19 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: you should move to a 1st-world country. | 20:20 |
| *** jtran has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:20 | |
| jgriffith | My vote is deprecated in Folsom | 20:20 |
| vishy | anotherjesse is suggesting that we should delete it | 20:20 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: I think we were just discussing the possibilities there... not sure the technical committee is needed to decide that? the PTL can/should be able to? | 20:20 |
| ttx | I think it would be a bad message to send (and contrary to our lately-established practices) to deprected and rip in the same release | 20:20 |
| creiht | ttx: ++ | 20:21 |
| johnpur | Deprecate in Folsom, remove in G seems logical | 20:21 |
| ttx | deprecate* | 20:21 |
| anotherjesse | jbryce: I don't like having the same code in two places… multiple places to fix bugs, we have to explain when to use one versus another | 20:21 |
| vishy | ttx: who is going to commit to maintaining the nova-volumes code? | 20:21 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: but it isn't a rewrite or a remove, it is a MOVE | 20:21 |
| vishy | ttx: is that the cinder team? | 20:21 |
| * mtaylor agrees with anotherjesse | 20:21 | |
| creiht | it is effectively a remove though | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | this is a reorg, not a rewrite | 20:21 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: then it's not a question of deprecating. | 20:21 |
| vishy | mtaylor: can the packaging issues be solved? | 20:22 |
| jbryce | how much does it change the user experience though in terms accessing and using block storage? | 20:22 |
| creiht | jbryce: a huge amount | 20:22 |
| johnpur | anotherjesse: we should be recommending/pushing folks to Cinder in Folsom... Deprecation implies that the Volumes code will be static and not updated. | 20:22 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: good question. | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | jbryce: we never had a release of a client or library that used the nova volumes extension | 20:22 |
| jgriffith | I disagree with that | 20:22 |
| vishy | jbryce: if they were using essex nova client it works exactly the same way | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | anotherjesse: would it be possible to list cinder as a dep of nova, and replace nova-volume with a proxy shim? | 20:22 |
| ttx | anotherjesse: it's a question of reorganizing, and we can do that in a single release alright. There is nothing being "deprecated" | 20:22 |
| vishy | jbryce: or they can switch to cinder client. | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | ttx: yes, because in essex we had a VOLUME endpoint | 20:22 |
| creiht | anotherjesse: python-novaclient uses nova columes | 20:22 |
| creiht | volumes | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | and nova-client used the VOLUME endpoint | 20:22 |
| mtaylor | vishy: I do not know what all of the packaging issues are | 20:22 |
| anotherjesse | not the volume extension for COMPUTE | 20:23 |
| creiht | mtaylor: I don't like that idea | 20:23 |
| creiht | at one time it did use the volume extension | 20:23 |
| vishy | creiht: it actually doesn't, the essex (and current release) uses /volumes | 20:23 |
| creiht | before you guys just ripped it out | 20:23 |
| anotherjesse | creiht: right, but it was never in a release | 20:23 |
| * creiht sighs | 20:23 | |
| anotherjesse | it was in the internal release ... | 20:23 |
| *** flacoste has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:24 | |
| vishy | creiht: so the only change is switching the endpoint in keystone | 20:24 |
| creiht | I will just say that I think we set a very bad president if we make that drastic of change by removing nova-volume and only having cinder in the next release | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | vishy: but I'm happy to go bang on figuring them out if I someone has a list | 20:24 |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 20:24 | |
| creiht | from a client perspective that is correct vishy, but not from a provider perspective | 20:24 |
| jaypipes | vishy: and what abvout the migration story... will volumes regiastered using nova-volumes work with cinder (and the vbolume endpoint) out of the box? | 20:25 |
| anotherjesse | creiht: if the code is the same on both sides, how is it a different story? | 20:25 |
| creiht | I'm about to release a whole set of infrastructure, and if you do this you will rip the carpet right out from under us | 20:25 |
| jgriffith | jaypipes: yes | 20:25 |
| jaypipes | jgriffith: k, thx | 20:25 |
| vishy | creiht: if there is an upgrade path for packaging, is it still an issue? | 20:25 |
| creiht | anotherjesse: it isn't exactly the same on both sides | 20:25 |
| *** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:25 | |
| *** kevin has quit IRC | 20:26 | |
| anotherjesse | creiht: elaborate? | 20:26 |
| creiht | the code | 20:26 |
| creiht | can't be exactly the same | 20:26 |
| creiht | specifically for attach | 20:26 |
| creiht | /detach | 20:26 |
| creiht | either way | 20:26 |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:26 | |
| creiht | you have a prescident of infrastructure for nova with nova-volumes that has already been a pain to track | 20:26 |
| creiht | and now you are saying you want to rip the whole rug out from under the table | 20:27 |
| anotherjesse | creiht: so for your internal project, just don't delete it? | 20:27 |
| jbryce | is this different than if those changes were made in nova-volumes inside of the nova codebase? | 20:27 |
| creiht | I don't think that is acceptable | 20:27 |
| anotherjesse | creiht: rax has their own branches for this stuff right? | 20:27 |
| creiht | nope | 20:27 |
| vishy | creiht: since you're the advocate of keeping nova-volumes in, can you commit to helping keep it maintained | 20:27 |
| creiht | not for volume | 20:27 |
| creiht | we are tracking trunk | 20:27 |
| creiht | as close as we can | 20:27 |
| vishy | creiht: the main issue with leaving it in deprecated is it doubles maintenance for bug fixes | 20:28 |
| vishy | creiht: and nova-core has already demonstrated that they don't really care about keeping that up-to-date | 20:28 |
| ttx | creiht: so if I understand correctly, it's technically a move, but it affects you because you were expecting it not to chnage in Folsom release, is that right ? | 20:28 |
| *** dcramer_ has quit IRC | 20:28 | |
| creiht | vishy: I understand, we will help where we can, but I can't promise to take over all maint | 20:28 |
| jbryce | creiht: is deprecating in f and removing in g going to be better for you? | 20:28 |
| jbryce | or is it still the same problem just later | 20:28 |
| creiht | jbryce: I think that is very reasonable | 20:29 |
| vishy | jbryce: it allows them to switch over at there leisure | 20:29 |
| creiht | That gives providers time to adjust | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | what about leaving the code in there the deprecation means that we don't even release it.... | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | if people want to notice it is there | 20:29 |
| anotherjesse | then they can use it? | 20:29 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:29 | |
| jgriffith | anotherjesse: +1 | 20:29 |
| creiht | anotherjesse: define don't even release it | 20:30 |
| *** alrs has quit IRC | 20:30 | |
| anotherjesse | creiht: we don't have packages of it | 20:30 |
| anotherjesse | and don't recommend that redhat, ubuntu or other distros/companies ship it | 20:30 |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
| vishy | I think we need to take this to the mailing list and see if we are causing anyone else pain | 20:30 |
| *** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
| jbryce | vishy: +1 | 20:30 |
| notmyname | I didn't think openstack provided any packages for anything | 20:30 |
| mtaylor | we don't | 20:30 |
| creiht | vishy: +1 | 20:30 |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 20:30 | |
| jbryce | i don't think this is a ppb call ultimately, but i think it's a worthwhile discussion to be had and the mailing list is a better place | 20:30 |
| creiht | anotherjesse: I can't speak for everyone, but for me personally that wouldn't bother me | 20:30 |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
| jbryce | let's move on to ceilometer | 20:30 |
| mtaylor | but we can do what anotherjesse said and recommend that redhat and ubuntu don't make packages for it | 20:31 |
| johnpur | jbryce: agree | 20:31 |
| jbryce | #option ceilometer incubation application | 20:31 |
| vishy | my compromise would be to leave it in in the source tree for people building their own packages | 20:31 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 20:31 | |
| mtaylor | we _could_ filter it out from the source tarball | 20:31 |
| vishy | and ++ mtaylor anotherjesse | 20:31 |
| jbryce | #topic ceilometer incubation | 20:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "ceilometer incubation" | 20:31 | |
| creiht | vishy: would you commit to continued bug fixing? | 20:31 |
| jbryce | (reading and typing at the same time...) | 20:31 |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/Ceilometer | 20:31 |
| vishy | creiht: well hopefully there are no bug reports because no one is using it! | 20:31 |
| vishy | :p | 20:32 |
| ttx | jbryce: I'd say it's a cinder+Nova call, the PPb should only be involved if the decision creates issues... not to make the call | 20:32 |
| * creiht sighs | 20:32 | |
| vishy | creiht: I have no problem merging bugfixes | 20:32 |
| jbryce | ttx: i agree | 20:32 |
| creiht | lol | 20:32 |
| * creiht stands down | 20:32 | |
| jbryce | creiht: sighs and laughter? | 20:32 |
| vishy | creiht: but I plan on immediately dumping the code, so it will have to be a backport from cinder i guess? | 20:32 |
| anotherjesse | jbryce: incubation meaning that it is on the way to becoming core? | 20:32 |
| * ttx has been missing creiht sighing lately. happy to see you're back :) | 20:32 | |
| vishy | creiht: it would be ship folsom, remove code right after release | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: yes, the same meaning for incubation we've had for the past year :P | 20:33 |
| creiht | vishy: if it is the same code, then why don't they share some *gasp* common codebase? so that they could share bug fixes? | 20:33 |
| anotherjesse | jaypipes: right - just making sure :) | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | :) | 20:33 |
| vishy | creiht: craziness! | 20:33 |
| anotherjesse | do we expect a metering project to be part of core? | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | Are we on the Ceilometer topic? | 20:33 |
| anotherjesse | I think so | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: I think that's what we're about to discuss. | 20:33 |
| jbryce | yes...on the topic of ceilometer incubation... | 20:33 |
| mtaylor | creiht: that's what I was suggesting earlier when I suggested making cinder a dep of nova and having nova/volume just be proxy calls to the cinder code, btw | 20:33 |
| anotherjesse | (think that we are on the topic - I am not sure if metering should be core) | 20:34 |
| creiht | vishy: I don't like that idea either, but will wait to see what the mailing list turns up | 20:34 |
| vishy | creiht: ok. Am I on the hook for the email? | 20:34 |
| jbryce | can we take the other discussion to the mailing list? or we can hit it again next week if we need to | 20:34 |
| creiht | vishy: depends... do you *really* want the mailing list email from me? ;) | 20:34 |
| jbryce | jgriffith: can you take point on sending a mailing list email out? | 20:34 |
| jgriffith | jbryce: Yes!! | 20:34 |
| jbryce | thanks | 20:35 |
| creiht | jgriffith: thanks | 20:35 |
| jbryce | CEILOMETER! | 20:35 |
| creiht | :) | 20:35 |
| jbryce | NOW! | 20:35 |
| jbryce | = ) | 20:35 |
| vishy | jgriffith: talk with me offline | 20:35 |
| jaypipes | nijaba: you're up. :) | 20:35 |
| jbryce | ceilometer has applied for incubation | 20:35 |
| * nijaba is here :) | 20:35 | |
| jbryce | nijaba: would you like to give an overview of what you all are trying to build? | 20:35 |
| * dhellmann is here, too | 20:35 | |
| ttx | On Ceilometer, the application says, incubation in F, core in G: I think in all cases it would need to incubate longer than just one month (core projects for G need to be decided before the G cycle starts, which means somewhere in August) | 20:35 |
| jaypipes | dhellmann: welcome. | 20:36 |
| nijaba | so we are trying to collect all metering information from various projetcs so that billing system and others have a single point of contact to callect all info | 20:36 |
| ttx | so we are talking incubation for the rest of F and for G, I think | 20:36 |
| jbryce | ttx: i agree | 20:36 |
| *** kindaopsdevy_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:36 | |
| * nijaba makes a note of it | 20:36 | |
| koolhead17 | ttx, can`t extra effort make it possible to have metering in G ? | 20:37 |
| soren | Just because it's not core doesn't mean it doesn't exist. | 20:37 |
| vishy | the ceilometer team has been doing a great job of being open, using common code and practices, etc. I'm just not totally convinced that it needs to be a core project. | 20:37 |
| ttx | koolhead17: it's not a question of effort, it's a demonstration that you can follow a cycle | 20:37 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 20:37 | |
| *** kindaopsdevy_ is now known as kindaopsdevy | 20:37 | |
| nijaba | koolhead17: having it != core | 20:37 |
| anotherjesse | koolhead17: just because the project isn't core / incubated doesn't mean that it doesn't work | 20:37 |
| ttx | koolhead17: doing just one milestone before an application sounds like an automatic rejection reason for me | 20:37 |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 20:38 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:38 | |
| koolhead17 | ooh okey | 20:38 |
| dhellmann | vishy and anotherjesse, can you elaborate? | 20:38 |
| jbryce | so we have 3 main infrastructure categories with compute, storage and networking. and then we have shared services like dashboard and keystone that make the other categories more unified and more easy to use. seems like metering is something that we get a LOT of requests for and could make sense in the shared services category | 20:38 |
| nijaba | vishy: can you elaborate? I would think it is a piece of code that most if not all deployment will need | 20:38 |
| ttx | jbryce ++ | 20:38 |
| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:38 | |
| koolhead17 | jbryce, ++ | 20:39 |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 20:39 | |
| *** danwent_ is now known as danwent | 20:39 | |
| vishy | nijaba: We've discussed limiting the scope of infrastructure to core IaaS services, metering seems to be right on the border | 20:39 |
| johnpur | my reaction is that the ceilometer project should continue as they have, and the incubation discussion should be just before the G summit. If it makes sense, the project incubates in G and applies for core in H if it makes sense. | 20:39 |
| anotherjesse | jbryce: although I can see it being that we have the hooks for it, and let various entities support it | 20:39 |
| anotherjesse | an opensource project called ceilometer or a commercial product called FOO | 20:40 |
| anotherjesse | johnpur: ++ | 20:40 |
| vishy | anotherjesse: I think the plan is to support multiple backends in ceilometer | 20:40 |
| johnpur | in september we should have a good view on the metering project, and gives the community/mailing list time to react as well | 20:40 |
| nijaba | anotherjesse: FOO would talk to ceilometer, but why have all FOO reimplement the hooks? | 20:40 |
| ttx | johnpur: would be a valid objection if we were questioning their maturity... but apparently we are questioning the coreness of its scope..; and that can be answered today | 20:40 |
| dhellmann | that's right, vishy: we won't be charging users, just collecting data | 20:40 |
| vishy | but i don't know how well it would support commercial implementations | 20:40 |
| anotherjesse | nijaba: because then it requires that everyone runs ceilometer ... | 20:40 |
| jaypipes | johnpur: I don't think there's any reason not to start incubation in F (and continue incubation in G) if the PPB decides Ceilometer has the potential to be core. | 20:41 |
| *** devananda has left #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| anotherjesse | nijaba: if you already have a metering system in place then you might want to use it | 20:41 |
| johnpur | ttx: i am proposing delaying that determination, subject to more discussion | 20:41 |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 20:41 | |
| vishy | jaypipes: yes, i think the question is do we reasonably see that ceilo fits in core | 20:41 |
| heckj | nijaba: reading the roadmap - is there no public API to this in the folsom release? | 20:41 |
| vishy | (at some point) | 20:41 |
| ttx | johnpur: I think that's a bit unfair to them. We can determine the coreness of the matter now. Unless we prefer to punt to the TC | 20:41 |
| nijaba | heckj: it's about to be done | 20:41 |
| jaypipes | vishy: sure, that is a perfectly reasonable question. | 20:41 |
| ttx | (which would be a valid thing) | 20:41 |
| dhellmann | heck, we are starting work on the API in the next week or two | 20:42 |
| vishy | jaypipes: if we say no now, I don't think it is no forever, but we could say lets let it stew a while longer. | 20:42 |
| nijaba | heckj: before folsom is released | 20:42 |
| jaypipes | vishy: sure, agreed. | 20:42 |
| jbryce | i don't think that saying it's attacking a problem that could also be attacked by a commercial entity is necessarily the best argument since everything in openstack has commercial competitors | 20:42 |
| johnpur | ttx: i don't get the attitude that if a project isn't in incubation/tracking to core that it isn't important? | 20:42 |
| jbryce | and as nijaba said, from my understanding, it's more about centrally exposing data from the different projects which could be consumed by zuora or x commercial billing product | 20:43 |
| nijaba | jbryce: exactly | 20:43 |
| dhellmann | jbryce, that's right | 20:43 |
| pvo | heckj: http://wiki.openstack.org/EfficientMetering/APIProposalv1 | 20:43 |
| koolhead17 | jbryce, sounds good | 20:43 |
| dhellmann | at dreamhost we are going to pull data from ceilometer and push it into our existing billing system | 20:43 |
| ttx | johnpur: oh, no. By a bit unfair to them, I just mean, we make them wait and do extra efforts, which will not really help us determine the question of whether metring is core openstack or not | 20:43 |
| nijaba | The project is for collecting resource usage data related to billing, but does not include any facility for recording customer billing details or actually charging customers or for transforming collected data into billing items | 20:43 |
| johnpur | ttx: ok, ic | 20:44 |
| jaypipes | As someone who vote no to Horizon being core (for reasons that I believed core projects to be the building blocks of the infrastructure), I've come to view Horizon as the critical piece of the OpenStack puzzle that it is: while it is not required for Openstack to function, it is the canonical reference implementation for a GUI. And if Ceilometer represents a canonical reference implementation for a metering project, I think it deserves to | 20:44 |
| jaypipes | be incubated. | 20:44 |
| anotherjesse | if ceilometer is incubated and becomes core, does that mean you *HAVE* to use it to be considered an OpenStack cloud (TM) | 20:44 |
| ttx | johnpur: but yes, I can see how waiting could help us see how their API stabilizes and how well they become indispensable to the other projects | 20:44 |
| mtaylor | anotherjesse: I'd say no more than horizon | 20:44 |
| nijaba | anotherjesse: I woudl hope not | 20:44 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: no. you don't require Horizon, but it's still a critical core reference implementation of a part of OpenStack | 20:45 |
| bcwaldon | anotherjesse: can we say that being an OpenStack cloud (TM) is providing all published APIs? | 20:45 |
| anotherjesse | jaypipes: while I'm almost the other way - horizon is critical but it confuses to have a GUI next to the service - I had voted yes originally ;) | 20:45 |
| pvo | anotherjesse: how would you even test that? the others apis, horizion, etc would be easier to test for. | 20:45 |
| pvo | i guess the ceiliometer api could be tenant facing | 20:45 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: funny how time changes our opinions, eh? :) | 20:46 |
| anotherjesse | I'm asking because I want to know what it means to be in core for ceilometer | 20:46 |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 20:46 | |
| jbryce | currently we single out compute and storage apis as requirements for being "openstack", not the shared services | 20:46 |
| nijaba | pvo: not at this point, but is considered for future versions | 20:46 |
| dhellmann | pvo: it isn't clear to me that the ceilometer API needs to be tenant facing, but it could be | 20:46 |
| anotherjesse | I hope that we can grow to have lots of projects that integrate with openstack but aren't core… I'm now pro-small-core ;) | 20:46 |
| dhellmann | I mean in terms of providing features useful to tenants | 20:46 |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:46 | |
| pvo | I would love to know my potential bill through an api | 20:46 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: to me, "being core" means that the project prioritizies integration with the other core pieces of OpenStack. | 20:46 |
| dhellmann | pvo: we don't know how much you might be charged, only how many resources you've used | 20:46 |
| pvo | *potential* | 20:46 |
| dhellmann | so the provider still needs to do some calculation to determine the bill | 20:47 |
| pvo | the usage consumed is the important part | 20:47 |
| koolhead17 | anotherjesse, ask me how much horizon changes openstack. greatly :) | 20:47 |
| nijaba | pvo: from roadmap: "End-User API access to own metering information" | 20:47 |
| pvo | nijaba: totally agree | 20:47 |
| anotherjesse | koolhead17: I know - I and my team has done a lot of work on it | 20:47 |
| mtaylor | and usage consumed metering with an api seems like a useful thing to be consistent across implementations | 20:47 |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 20:47 | |
| mtaylor | to me | 20:47 |
| pvo | mtaylor: ++ | 20:47 |
| jbryce | core designation really has historically been around integration with other releases, coordinated cycles, a level of maturity and meeting a threshold of being generally useful to most openstack users | 20:47 |
| koolhead17 | anotherjesse, :) | 20:47 |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: ++ | 20:48 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: ++ | 20:48 |
| koolhead17 | jbryce, ++ | 20:48 |
| johnpur | also, core projects are packaged by our downstreams, with other projects added by picking and choosing | 20:48 |
| anotherjesse | given that approving for incubation today won't mean it is in core by G, I like johnpur's originally idea of voting before the summit | 20:48 |
| ttx | One thing to note is that the foundation would weigh in on the final core inclusion call anyway | 20:49 |
| jbryce | ttx: good point | 20:49 |
| ttx | (board of directors) | 20:49 |
| jaypipes | anotherjesse: yes, that would be totally fine with me. | 20:49 |
| ttx | so the question of "belonging to the scope of openstack" might end up being decided by them... while the TC vouches that the project is well ru and integrated with the others | 20:49 |
| jbryce | i'm ok with deferring, but could we define what we are hoping to gain in the deferral period so we can make sure we act on it? | 20:49 |
| *** svsujeet has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:49 | |
| jaypipes | jbryce: so shall we vote on whether to delay this incubation vote until September? | 20:50 |
| jbryce | is it more feedback from the mailing list? | 20:50 |
| jbryce | making sure it's taking a sane technical approach? | 20:50 |
| jbryce | scope of openstack? | 20:50 |
| anotherjesse | jbryce: I kinda feel like we should have a section in proposals of integration status and efforts with all existing core projects | 20:50 |
| * jaypipes thought we had that.. | 20:51 | |
| ttx | basically its a bit of bad timing, with Folsom nearing the end and the future BoD/TC split | 20:51 |
| johnpur | since the project is primarily about aggregating and making usage information available to a variety of downstream consumers (billing systems, etc.) it would be cool to get feedback fromt he potential consumers on the approach, API, etc. | 20:51 |
| nijaba | anotherjesse: Nova integration is close to complete, and we have intiated dicussions with all other projects | 20:51 |
| pvo | its on my list to evaluate, just haven't had time | 20:51 |
| vishy | on the other side, there is no reason why we couldn't incubate it and later the TC can decide that it doesn't belong as a core project. | 20:52 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 20:52 | |
| jbryce | vishy: also true | 20:52 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:52 | |
| notmyname | but unlikely | 20:52 |
| anotherjesse | nijaba: cool - I'm just thinking about the meta-process :) that as we incubate things we should have an explicit section on what it means for all the projects - for instance nova has a notification queue, but what does it mean for keystone, or glance | 20:52 |
| ttx | vishy: yes, that would be my preferred option | 20:52 |
| ttx | notmyname: unlikely what? | 20:52 |
| pvo | I don't see the need to vote today. The work is progressing and the decision will be reevaluated later. | 20:53 |
| notmyname | ttx: unlikely that a vote today would be overturned by tomorrows PPB/TC | 20:53 |
| dhellmann | anotherjesse, we are going to be working with the other projects to add notifications as needed | 20:53 |
| jbryce | ttx: i think he's going off the track record that we've sent everything through incubation to core so far | 20:53 |
| johnpur | pvo: +1 | 20:53 |
| dhellmann | anotherjesse, that is easier now that RPC and notifications are in openstack-common | 20:53 |
| ttx | notmyname: right... I think there would actually be more risk that the BoD would turn down our suggestion as "not in their idea of openstack scope" | 20:54 |
| jbryce | i think we should defer and try to gather a little more information | 20:54 |
| notmyname | jbryce: to answer which question? | 20:55 |
| heckj | I think we made a mistake with keystone, incubating it before it was ready to be used. I'd prefer to look about incubation *after* the project is fully operational rather than make a keystone-mistake again | 20:55 |
| jbryce | nijaba: can you add a new section to the application and discuss the integration status with each of the other projects. that does seem key since it's a shared service | 20:55 |
| ttx | and give Ceilometer time to prove they are actually an almost-indispensable companion to other core projects | 20:55 |
| pvo | heckj: ++ | 20:55 |
| jbryce | heckj: i kind of agree. was actually thinking of that example | 20:55 |
| nijaba | jbryce: k | 20:55 |
| jaypipes | ++ | 20:55 |
| nijaba | #action nijaba to add a new section to the application and discuss the integration status with each of the other projects. that does seem key since it's a shared service | 20:55 |
| heckj | to be clear - I'm not against incubation at all, I'd ljust like to see the project mature before talking about it. | 20:56 |
| vishy | +1 to delay | 20:56 |
| jbryce | also, any information you can gather from users along the lines of what johnpur was mentioning would be useful | 20:56 |
| ttx | heckj: like making a few milestones roughly around the core ones | 20:56 |
| vishy | we shouldn't be too anxious to add new projects, it also gives us time to prove that projects can become healthy without having to be in core. | 20:56 |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:56 | |
| nijaba | jbryce: who was your last remark addressed to? | 20:56 |
| jaypipes | nijaba, dhellmann: a hint for your incubation future: if you haven't already, get with dtroyer on getting devstack to set up ceilometer so folks can more easily play around with it. | 20:56 |
| jbryce | nijaba: you, sorry | 20:57 |
| nijaba | jaypipes: noted | 20:57 |
| vishy | I would like ceilo to be a success regardless of whether it s core. | 20:57 |
| anotherjesse | vishy: ++++++ | 20:57 |
| jbryce | 2 minutes | 20:57 |
| nijaba | jbryce: then I am afraid I have lost context :/ | 20:57 |
| johnpur | we have some largeish deployments that are using both commercial billing systems and homegrown ones that can provide some good feedback... if these guys weigh in with plans to utilize ceilometer this would be a big vote of confidence | 20:57 |
| *** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| ttx | and I would like it to be core if the user crowd begs for it, which means it needs to be around a bit | 20:57 |
| heckj | vishy: ++ | 20:58 |
| pvo | johnpur: exactly. I plan on taking a peek at it soon | 20:58 |
| vishy | +1 to the devstack comment as well | 20:58 |
| johnpur | right on, pvo | 20:58 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| jbryce | nijaba: did you see johnpur's last comment? | 20:58 |
| nijaba | jbryce: yup | 20:58 |
| dhellmann | johnpur, we got a lot of feedback from potential users when we designed the list of counters up front. is there something specific you would want us to ask now? | 20:58 |
| johnpur | hint to the hp guys, you should look at how this might work with zuora | 20:58 |
| ttx | (what johnpur said) | 20:58 |
| pvo | dhellmann: I'll reach out soon. | 20:59 |
| jbryce | dhellmann: maybe add some of that into the application as well so it's centrally available | 20:59 |
| nijaba | johnpur: hp been looking at it closely, from the interactions we've had | 20:59 |
| dhellmann | jbryce, ok, we can do that | 20:59 |
| jbryce | thanks | 20:59 |
| dhellmann | pvo, thanks, I'll watch for an email | 20:59 |
| jbryce | ok. we're out of time. thanks everyone! | 20:59 |
| jbryce | #endmeeting | 20:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 20:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jul 10 20:59:58 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-20.01.html | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-20.01.txt | 21:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-20.01.log.html | 21:00 |
| jbryce | ttx: your show = ) | 21:00 |
| *** danwent_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| *** anotherjesse is now known as anotherjesse_zz | 21:00 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| *** anniec_ is now known as anniec | 21:01 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| *** danwent_ is now known as danwent | 21:01 | |
| *** maoy has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| ttx | heckj, notmyname, bcwaldon, vishy, devcamcar, danwent: (still) around ? | 21:01 |
| heckj | o/ | 21:01 |
| notmyname | here | 21:01 |
| vishy | o/ | 21:01 |
| bcwaldon | hello | 21:02 |
| danwent | o/ | 21:02 |
| ttx | ok, let's start | 21:02 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jul 10 21:02:20 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 | Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting | 21:02 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 21:02 | |
| ttx | #info First meeting of the F3 era, we'll have a look at sanitizing plans so that they are a realistic view of what we're likely to achieve | 21:02 |
| ttx | Will also talk about the upcoming bug squashing day on Thursday... and give out the results of the G poll... will the Bear Revolt win ? | 21:03 |
| *** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:03 | |
| ttx | (or will order prevail) | 21:03 |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| mtaylor | GO GRIZZLY OR GO HOME!!! | 21:03 |
| bcwaldon | MUTINY | 21:03 |
| creiht | what? order never prevails with openstack ;) | 21:03 |
| heckj | GRIZZLYYY | 21:03 |
| koolhead17 | mtaylor, :P | 21:03 |
| ttx | #topic Actions from previous meeting | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting" | 21:03 | |
| ttx | * ttx to see how danwent could track bugs outside quantum without creating noise | 21:03 |
| ttx | Not done yet, postponing | 21:03 |
| creiht | I was hoping for gristle | 21:03 |
| creiht | :) | 21:04 |
| ttx | #action ttx to see how danwent could track bugs outside quantum without creating noise | 21:04 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 21:04 | |
| * ttx makes mental note: do not let creiht pick /any/ name | 21:04 | |
| ttx | * ttx to formally announce the G poll on ML/twitter etc. | 21:04 |
| *** flacoste has left #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| ttx | DONE, you have 41 minutes left to cast your vote for the G release name: | 21:04 |
| creiht | I gave up on picking sane names after the first vote :) | 21:04 |
| ttx | https://launchpad.net/~openstack/+polls | 21:04 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status" | 21:05 | |
| ttx | heckj: o/ | 21:05 |
| vishy | creiht: which was your first vote? | 21:05 |
| heckj | o/ | 21:05 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3 | 21:05 |
| * heckj used the ttx.py script to clean things up this morning | 21:05 | |
| *** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:05 | |
| heckj | I think it needs a french accent next | 21:05 |
| ttx | o0 | 21:05 |
| ttx | le ttx.py | 21:05 |
| ttx | heckj: I see you recently removed some targets ? | 21:06 |
| bcwaldon | le definitely | 21:06 |
| ttx | heckj: like... no more v3 ? | 21:06 |
| heckj | We reviewed the work pending for F3, and there was just way too much that it was clear we weren't going to get done | 21:06 |
| zul | no no...en francais | 21:06 |
| ttx | heckj: ++ | 21:07 |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 21:07 | |
| heckj | V3 is still the focus, as it's a dependency on many of the desired pieces, but I don't want to set the expectation that other projects should start using V3 API at the end of a F3 milestone timeframe | 21:07 |
| *** svsujeet has quit IRC | 21:08 | |
| ttx | heckj: so the idea is to have a partial v3 implementation in Folsom ? | 21:08 |
| heckj | I'll be sending email about my un-linking of the BP's to the mailing list too - if more commits come in, I'll link them back up. | 21:08 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:08 | |
| heckj | ttx: My goal is to have V3 fully implemented by the milestone, but given the rate of change lately, I don't think it's likely to be fully there. Something will be - it may be partial, or not fully fleshed out. | 21:08 |
| ttx | but definitely alpha/beta in all cases. | 21:09 |
| heckj | ttx: yes | 21:09 |
| ttx | sounds reasonable. | 21:09 |
| ttx | Other projects: does that create red flags somewhere ? | 21:09 |
| ttx | or general relief ? | 21:09 |
| gabrielhurley | heckj, ttx: how do these changes around the v3 implementation affect RBAC/policy implementations across the stack as a whole? | 21:09 |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:10 | |
| gabrielhurley | (that being the biggest piece that doesn't exist in v2) | 21:10 |
| heckj | gabrielhurley: policy will still be there, and there's a BP to consolidate a "suggested deployment" setup for all of them. Getting policy CRUD implemented in the API should be there, but we'd be greatly pressing to get the full integration will all the projects there in the next 4 weeks. | 21:11 |
| gabrielhurley | so it becomes more of a Grizzly thing to really make that solid, then? | 21:11 |
| ttx | my understanding is that it will make folsom a bit of a transitional release for Keystone, but I'm pretty sure most people can live with that | 21:11 |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 21:11 | |
| heckj | gabrielhurley: the big V3 related change in policy is sourcing it in keystone. That should be possible, and we can even focus on making that happen earlier rather than later | 21:11 |
| gabrielhurley | heckj: yeah, the sourcing is what's important to Horizon | 21:12 |
| gabrielhurley | if that happens I think I'm happy | 21:12 |
| heckj | gabrielhurley: noted | 21:12 |
| ttx | heckj: ok good, anything else ? | 21:12 |
| heckj | that's it for me | 21:13 |
| ttx | Questions about Keystone ? | 21:13 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:14 | |
| notmyname | hi | 21:14 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.5.1 | 21:14 |
| ttx | notmyname: Hi! Target date was pushed back to July 30 ? | 21:14 |
| notmyname | yes it was | 21:14 |
| ttx | Anything specific you wait the completion of ? | 21:14 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:14 | |
| notmyname | we won't be able to get the additional QA this week that we normally have, so I pushed it back | 21:14 |
| notmyname | it's (slightly) possible that we may have it sooner, but I pushed it 2 weeks to be sae | 21:15 |
| notmyname | safe | 21:15 |
| ttx | oh, so it's more a QA sync issue than a missing needed feature ? | 21:15 |
| notmyname | y | 21:15 |
| notmyname | ya | 21:15 |
| notmyname | and I hope, long-term, the recently proposed swift integration into tempest will help alleviate that | 21:15 |
| ttx | Would you include https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swift/+spec/keystone-middleware in it if it's ready by then ? | 21:15 |
| notmyname | absolutely | 21:16 |
| ttx | Sounds good. | 21:16 |
| ttx | notmyname: anything else you wanted to mention ? | 21:16 |
| notmyname | ya, let me find a link | 21:16 |
| notmyname | #link WIP 1.5.1 changelog until LP is updated https://github.com/notmyname/swift/blob/1.5.1-changelog/CHANGELOG | 21:17 |
| ttx | cool, thx | 21:17 |
| notmyname | one more thing | 21:18 |
| notmyname | I'll be talking to the swift core devs this week about integrating swift with the devstack gates. nothing to say there, just stuff being done | 21:18 |
| ttx | Noted. Other questions on Swift ? | 21:19 |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:19 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:19 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: o/ | 21:19 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: hey hey | 21:19 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-3 | 21:19 |
| * ttx preventively refreshes | 21:19 | |
| bcwaldon | ttx: you're safe today | 21:20 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 21:20 | |
| ttx | OK, so there are (still) several things I don't really like here :) | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I know :( | 21:20 |
| ttx | First, the 5 essential blueprints make me a bit nervous. | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: BUT I was working on https://launchpad.net/python-glanceclient ! | 21:20 |
| ttx | but I guess if the ETA on them is reasonable it's not such a big deal | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I'm going to spend my afternoon figuring out what can happen in F3 | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: what's the OS policy on features after F3? | 21:21 |
| ttx | essential stuff gets post-F3 pre-RC1 exceptions | 21:21 |
| vishy | we have a STONITH protocol for features after f3 | 21:21 |
| ttx | and each of those exceptions lowers the general quality of the release | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | vishy: I don't appreciate that | 21:22 |
| bcwaldon | vishy: define: STONITH | 21:22 |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:22 | |
| bcwaldon | ttx: ok, just wanted to make sure we were on the same page | 21:22 |
| vishy | Shoot the other node in the head (in this case the other node is the new feature) | 21:22 |
| heckj | STONITH: Shoot The Other Node In The Head | 21:22 |
| bcwaldon | :| | 21:22 |
| vishy | STNFITH | 21:22 |
| bcwaldon | :| | 21:22 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: SO, it will look better within 24 hours, I promise | 21:23 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: so if any of those look like they might not get completed before the end of the month... I would go the heckj route and question whether they should really be in Folsom | 21:23 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: some of them are planned refactorings | 21:23 |
| ttx | yes, the glance client stuff is clearly on hte map... and the rest is V2 stuff afaict | 21:23 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I just need to look at each one and classify whether it can or can't get done after F3 | 21:23 |
| *** jtran has left #openstack-meeting | 21:23 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:24 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: default answer is "cannot". | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: ok | 21:24 |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 21:24 | |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I did want to talk about python-glaneclient | 21:24 |
| ttx | I really would like if we could not have feature freeze exceptions unless Murphy strikes | 21:24 |
| ttx | i.e. keep the option for spectucular failures rather than business as usual | 21:25 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: since we aren't releasing client libs on the same schedule, they aren't really affected by FF and milestones | 21:25 |
| ttx | indeed. | 21:25 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: ok, and I think we need to decide who has the power to release client libs | 21:25 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: as I now want to do it | 21:25 |
| heckj | bcwaldon: ++ would like to see that nailed down | 21:25 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: the PTL should decide when it makes sense | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I've already decided that | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: i just need to be able to push a button | 21:26 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: the ptl /could/ ask me if I see any reason why that's a bad idea just now | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: are you going to be that button? | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I'm fine with whatever, I just want to get moving | 21:26 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: no, normally taylor shall give you the ability to push tags to gerrit, which is all it takes | 21:26 |
| gabrielhurley | bcwaldon: ++ to PTLs having their finger on the button and not having a bottleneck/bus factor to contend with... | 21:26 |
| ttx | mtaylor* | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: hmm, so if mtaylor isn't around, we can't release? | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: or do I just need to get him to add me to some magical group | 21:27 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: no ;) mtaylor just adds you to magic group once and for all | 21:27 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: so pushing a release is just a command away for you | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: ok, works for me | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: ATTENTION PTLs! Read that ^ | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: that's all for me, then :) | 21:28 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: again, asking me before doing it can't hurt. Like some security issue might be near the end of the tube | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: definitely | 21:28 |
| mtaylor | works for me | 21:28 |
| ttx | but it's not blocking | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: best effort will be given | 21:28 |
| ttx | so if tere is anythign urgent, you can do it | 21:29 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: had another remark about the F3 plan... | 21:29 |
| ttx | The second thing I don't like is the unassigned stuff. At this point, if nobody committed to doing the work, it won't get done. | 21:29 |
| ttx | Or do all those mean "I'll do them if nobody signs up for them" ? | 21:29 |
| mtaylor | ttx: do you want all PTLs just to be in openstack-release? | 21:29 |
| mtaylor | ttx: or you want me to make a separate group? | 21:29 |
| *** anotherjesse_zz is now known as anotherjesse | 21:29 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: I'd prefer not. You could reuse the drivers group | 21:29 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I'm going to do as many of them as I can if nobody picks them up | 21:29 |
| mtaylor | ttx: or you want me to add each ptl to each project | 21:29 |
| ttx | or just make a group with the PTL only | 21:30 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I have soft commitments for some of them | 21:30 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:30 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: k. glance-drivers gets tag push on glance and python-glanceclient then? | 21:30 |
| *** anotherjesse is now known as anotherjesse_zz | 21:30 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: if bcwaldon is ok wit hit. | 21:30 |
| ttx | or with it | 21:30 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: would be good to have hard commitments at least for the essential one :) | 21:30 |
| bcwaldon | I'm not glance-drivers makes sense | 21:30 |
| bcwaldon | sure* | 21:31 |
| ttx | ok, done with Glance... | 21:31 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: Anything else ? | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: at a minimum, I would like PTLs and release team to be able to do it | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: no sir | 21:31 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: release team has it everywhere | 21:31 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: lets talk about this later | 21:31 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: I'll give ptl the magic power per-project | 21:31 |
| ttx | mtaylor: sssh, that's our secret. | 21:31 |
| mtaylor | bck | 21:31 |
| mtaylor | oops | 21:31 |
| ttx | the idea is to retsrict it to people that actually know that pushing a tag will trigger a PyPI upload. | 21:32 |
| ttx | somehow some people ignore that, go figure. | 21:32 |
| ttx | Questions on Glance ? | 21:32 |
| ttx | #topic Quantum status | 21:33 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status" | 21:33 | |
| ttx | danwent: yo | 21:33 |
| danwent | hey | 21:33 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-3 | 21:33 |
| danwent | don't let your eyes bulge too much | 21:33 |
| ttx | OK, so this one clearly falls in the "optimistic" category, with 31! targeted blueprints | 21:33 |
| ttx | As a data point, you completed 16 in F1+F2 :) | 21:33 |
| danwent | yup, but our team is much bigger now. | 21:33 |
| danwent | just focus on things that are essential or high | 21:33 |
| ttx | heh, ok | 21:34 |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 21:34 | |
| danwent | anything at medium is not critical to the project, but someone said they were going to do it, so I'm taking them at their word and am targeting it for F-3 | 21:34 |
| ttx | danwent: there were a number of them that weren't inthe series goal = Folsom, you should spot them using ttx.py | 21:34 |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:34 | |
| danwent | i think i cleaned those all up this morning with ttx.py | 21:34 |
| ttx | ok | 21:34 |
| danwent | unless someone has added more since then | 21:34 |
| danwent | (always possible) | 21:34 |
| danwent | will do another pass | 21:34 |
| ttx | danwent: ok, I guess we'll refine as we close the F3 deadline | 21:35 |
| ttx | as we get closer to, I mean | 21:35 |
| danwent | yeah. we're going to be more demanding about people creating specs up front for any high or above item, which should help us keep tabs on the progress those issues are making early in the milestone period. | 21:35 |
| ttx | and publicly shame those who said they would do it but didn't | 21:36 |
| danwent | that's the idea (which reminds me, i need to finish my spec....) | 21:36 |
| ttx | Looking at the 3 remaining essential blueprints... | 21:36 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: SDD - Shame Driven Development | 21:36 |
| ttx | danwent: Would like to make sure those will be delivered "early enough" in this milestone timeframe. Do you have an ETA for quantum-v2-public-networks and quantum-l3-fwd-nat ? | 21:36 |
| danwent | sounds like a great book | 21:37 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: I actually do Sarcasm-driven development | 21:37 |
| danwent | I'm hoping for a review 3 weeks into the cycle on those. | 21:37 |
| danwent | likely the l3 BP will be split into several, with non-essential items being handled separately | 21:37 |
| ttx | so..; before the end of the month ? | 21:38 |
| *** oubiwann1 has quit IRC | 21:38 | |
| danwent | at the end of the month, yes :) | 21:38 |
| ttx | danwent: sounds good to me. Anything else ? | 21:38 |
| danwent | i doubt it will be much before :) | 21:38 |
| ttx | Questions on Quantum ? | 21:39 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:39 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:39 | |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-3 | 21:39 |
| ttx | vishy: o/ | 21:39 |
| ttx | 22 blueprints targeted, compared to 20 implemented during F1+F2 | 21:39 |
| ttx | That said, lots of those are actually Low-prio or globally in progress so it's not as bad as it looks ? | 21:40 |
| vishy | yes i think it is ok. the high/essential ones look pretty good | 21:40 |
| bcwaldon | vishy: remove-deprecated-auth is almost done! All the changes are in review (gate failing right now) | 21:40 |
| vishy | they are mostly done | 21:40 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 21:40 | |
| ttx | Ideally we would move a few "High" to "Medium" to better rank their priorities, but meh | 21:40 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:40 | |
| ttx | A few highlights from ttx.py: | 21:41 |
| vishy | the only one that I'm particularly concerned about are no-db-messaging / no-db-compute | 21:41 |
| ttx | yes, not much progress there and a bit lae in the cycle for that anyway | 21:41 |
| ttx | These two need to have their priority set and series goal set to "Folsom" if you approve them: | 21:41 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/add-support-for-pci-passthrough-and-sr-iov | 21:41 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/network-adapter-hotplug | 21:41 |
| vishy | russelb promised to work on that during this milestone now that the roc stuff is done. | 21:41 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:41 | |
| ttx | (that last one has no assignee, so I wonder if it's serious) | 21:41 |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:42 | |
| ttx | vishy: please assess them before next week | 21:42 |
| vishy | did it now | 21:43 |
| vishy | put them both low | 21:43 |
| ttx | vishy: Anything else ? | 21:43 |
| ttx | #info Cinder was just promoted to core project so it will get its own topic starting next week | 21:43 |
| vishy | nope | 21:43 |
| ttx | jgriffith: you'll have to become a regular for this meeting now :) | 21:44 |
| ttx | Questions on Nova ? | 21:44 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Have been anyway | 21:44 |
| ttx | heh | 21:44 |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:44 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status" | 21:44 | |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: \o (I'm filling in for devcamcar) | 21:44 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: awesome | 21:44 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-3 | 21:44 |
| gabrielhurley | I think we're looking pretty realistic. | 21:45 |
| ttx | Plan looks good, realistic and clear :) | 21:45 |
| gabrielhurley | why thank you :-) | 21:45 |
| ttx | I don't really have concerns here. Anything you wanted to mention ? Help needed somewhere ? | 21:45 |
| gabrielhurley | the only thing to mention is the policy/rbac blueprint which is dependent on keystone as we discussed earlier: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/ext-roles | 21:45 |
| gabrielhurley | (currently marked as "blocked") | 21:45 |
| gabrielhurley | heckj and I are gonna work on making it happen, though | 21:46 |
| ttx | ok | 21:46 |
| gabrielhurley | more help is always good ;-) | 21:46 |
| ttx | Questions for Horizon ? | 21:46 |
| ttx | #topic G naming results | 21:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "G naming results" | 21:47 | |
| ttx | And the winner is... | 21:47 |
| ttx | Rules are here to be broken, let's go with "Grizzly" 88/46 | 21:47 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: you win | 21:47 |
| bcwaldon | LIKE A BOSS | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | viva la bear flag revolt! | 21:48 |
| jk0 | grizzly like the chew, or grizzly like the yamaha atv? | 21:48 |
| bcwaldon | grizzly like the jk0 | 21:48 |
| clarkb | grizzly like the flats | 21:48 |
| ttx | Gazelle was the other pick but people chose chaos over order | 21:48 |
| jk0 | \o/ | 21:48 |
| _0x44 | Keep in mind, that per the last "bear" release we had... "ZZ" is silent. | 21:48 |
| _0x44 | Grizzly Hills is actually pronounced "Greely Hills" | 21:48 |
| _0x44 | s/Hills/Flats/ | 21:48 |
| jk0 | we should have went with Gort | 21:48 |
| creiht | gristle | 21:49 |
| jgriffith | creiht: +1 :) | 21:49 |
| jgriffith | creiht: alas... too late | 21:50 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: I'll amend the rules so that order can be restored | 21:50 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: call it the 'waldon clause' | 21:50 |
| ttx | #info G stands for Grizzly | 21:50 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: or the 'bill of brians' | 21:50 |
| ttx | or the Waldon exception | 21:50 |
| bcwaldon | fine with me | 21:50 |
| ttx | #topic Other Team reports | 21:50 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports" | 21:50 | |
| ttx | annegentle, jaypipes, mtaylor: anything you wanted to mention ? | 21:50 |
| annegentle | held the doc meeting yesterday, notes available at http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-09-20.03.html | 21:51 |
| ttx | anything particular you want to highlight ? | 21:51 |
| annegentle | couple of items - the DocImpact flag isn't working, my test of it failed. clarkb and the CI team suspects we need a better mailing list to handle incoming notifications | 21:52 |
| annegentle | - please review the prototype docs translation process posted to the mailing list yesterday (thanks jaypipes for input!) | 21:52 |
| annegentle | - I've uncovered a problem with old html files remaining that Google sinks its hooks into, https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1022712, working it myself | 21:53 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 1022712 in openstack-manuals "About 111 orphaned HTML files still can come up in Google searches" [High,Confirmed] | 21:53 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I'm working on getting setuptools-git rolled out everywhere | 21:53 |
| mtaylor | ttx: and pre-versioning rolled out to the server projects | 21:53 |
| ttx | mtaylor: sounds like the right moment. | 21:53 |
| annegentle | - also will send a note to the mailing list to discuss info architecture around three basics of OpenStack - Compute | Storage | Networking and how to shape docs | 21:54 |
| ttx | mtaylor: does that make us free from Final=True ? | 21:54 |
| mtaylor | ttx: yup | 21:54 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I've got a patch pending for glance, will update the one for nova rsn | 21:55 |
| ttx | annegentle: ok, anything else ? | 21:55 |
| mtaylor | ttx: it also puts most of the logic from create-tarball into the projects themselves | 21:55 |
| annegentle | Final note: we need more documentation updates for folsom - essex looks great now, but without the DocImpact flag I'm having difficulty scoping and prioritizing work for Folsom. | 21:55 |
| annegentle | My request is that you log doc bugs in openstack-manuals for specific known needed updates. | 21:56 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 21:56 | |
| *** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| clarkb | annegentle: did oubiwann get the info he needed to create that new list? | 21:56 |
| annegentle | Until we get DocImpact working. Does that sound reasonable? | 21:56 |
| *** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| ttx | annegentle: certainly. | 21:56 |
| mtaylor | ttx: oh - also, I've got some stuff coming up for review for folks releated to global dep list | 21:56 |
| annegentle | clarkb: was that request via email or IRC? I didn't' catch it, sorry oubiwann | 21:56 |
| ttx | mtaylor: sounds good | 21:57 |
| mtaylor | ttx: I did a pass comparing what we install via packages for devstack vs. what we say we require in the pip-reuqires | 21:57 |
| mtaylor | it's not hte same | 21:57 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: ^^ you're going to love it :) | 21:57 |
| bcwaldon | awesome | 21:57 |
| ttx | #topic Bug squashing day | 21:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Bug squashing day" | 21:57 | |
| mtaylor | yeah. I was thrilled | 21:57 |
| ttx | We'll have a bug squashing day, all day Thursday. | 21:57 |
| annegentle | yay bug squash! Join me at Tech Ranch in Austin. | 21:57 |
| ttx | Join us on #openstack-bugday on that day ! | 21:57 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/BugDays/20120712BugSquashing | 21:57 |
| ttx | We'll try to close as many bugs as possible, either by fixing or marking them Invalid | 21:57 |
| annegentle | #link http://www.meetup.com/OpenStack-Austin/events/72740812/ | 21:58 |
| ttx | annegentle mentioned the in-person meetup in Austin, maybe others ? | 21:58 |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 21:58 | |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:59 | |
| ttx | last words before I close ? | 21:59 |
| * creiht sighs | 21:59 | |
| creiht | ttx: that was for you :) | 21:59 |
| creiht | glad you missed me :) | 21:59 |
| ttx | jeblair: you need to send that flag design to Todd Morey so that we have it on the next summit T-shitrs | 22:00 |
| ttx | creiht: heh | 22:00 |
| * creiht hopes everyone realizes the above was a joke | 22:00 | |
| jeblair | hi | 22:00 |
| jeblair | that's the highest res picture i can find online. :( | 22:00 |
| ttx | jeblair: I'm sure that won't stop an artist like you. | 22:01 |
| jeblair | (sadly, the original flag was burned in the fire that followed the 1906 earthquake) | 22:01 |
| ttx | and on those sad words | 22:01 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 22:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jul 10 22:01:33 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-21.02.html | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-21.02.txt | 22:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-10-21.02.log.html | 22:01 |
| ttx | thanks everyone! | 22:01 |
| ttx | See some of you at OSCON soon ! | 22:01 |
| bcwaldon | jeblair: nobody knows that we just named the G release in commemoration of my moving to Berkeley | 22:02 |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 22:02 | |
| jeblair | i'll keep your secret! | 22:02 |
| ttx | The Berkeley Cabale successfully subverted openstack naming | 22:02 |
| bcwaldon | muahaha | 22:02 |
| ttx | hiding under a Bear revolt disguise | 22:03 |
| bcwaldon | we fooled you all | 22:03 |
| jeblair | i was just hiding under a bear... | 22:03 |
| *** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:03 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 22:04 | |
| *** anniec_ is now known as anniec | 22:04 | |
| ttx | some projects do lazy consensus, we do active disagreement | 22:04 |
| *** gabrielhurley has left #openstack-meeting | 22:04 | |
| *** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC | 22:04 | |
| *** hggdh has quit IRC | 22:04 | |
| *** lzyeval has quit IRC | 22:06 | |
| *** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:06 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 22:07 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 22:07 | |
| *** kbringard has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| *** jk0 has left #openstack-meeting | 22:18 | |
| *** ewanmellor has quit IRC | 22:19 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 22:21 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:24 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:25 | |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 22:28 | |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 22:28 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:29 | |
| *** marek_ has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 22:35 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:36 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:36 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 22:39 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 22:39 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 22:47 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** johnpur has left #openstack-meeting | 22:50 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 22:53 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 22:55 | |
| *** bcwaldon has left #openstack-meeting | 23:01 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 23:04 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:05 | |
| *** oubiwann1 has quit IRC | 23:06 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| *** thingee has left #openstack-meeting | 23:13 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 23:14 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:18 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:38 | |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has quit IRC | 23:39 | |
| *** alrs has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:47 | |
| *** Adri2000 has quit IRC | 23:53 | |
| *** Daviey has quit IRC | 23:54 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:57 | |
| *** Daviey has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:57 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!