16:01:52 #startmeeting api-wg 16:01:53 Meeting started Thu Dec 15 16:01:52 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is cdent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:54 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:01:56 The meeting name has been set to 'api_wg' 16:02:04 #chair elmiko etoews edleafe 16:02:05 Current chairs: cdent edleafe elmiko etoews 16:02:20 #link and https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-WG#Agenda 16:02:54 #topic previous actions items 16:02:59 there weren't any 16:03:16 #link last week's meeting notes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/api_wg/2016/api_wg.2016-12-08-16.00.html 16:03:25 #topic new biz/open mic 16:03:33 welcome edleafe to api-wg coreness 16:03:40 \o/ 16:03:40 \o/ 16:03:43 hi 16:03:44 welcome =) 16:03:49 you've been added to the gerrit group and also made a member of some launchpad groups 16:04:04 in the process I made everyone who is core an admin in the launchpad groups 16:04:47 Anyone else have some new business they'd like to bring up? Or continuing business? 16:05:32 okay then 16:05:36 #topic guidelines 16:05:51 there are no new guidelines, the capabilities guidelines continues slowly but surely 16:05:57 and this one is ready to merge 16:06:09 #link clarify 404 v 400: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/405515/ 16:06:16 still not thrilled with the cap guideline 16:06:33 me neither, but it is hard to articulate why 16:06:48 it is a mish-mash of several things 16:07:08 policy, authorization, cloud hardware 16:07:49 maybe quotas, too 16:08:43 I left a comment earlier today that I thought some of it could be accomplished by having better representations on instances of resources and where that was the case capabilities was not the answer 16:09:13 #link capabilities proposal: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/386555/ 16:09:29 ty 16:12:00 just noticed a new proposal/fix from edleafe 16:12:15 #link tidy up capitalization rules: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/411391/ 16:12:22 yes, getting a bit pedantic here 16:12:43 nothing of substance 16:12:55 I went to fast approve it but then decided not to, thinking it was one of those things where everyone would want to get their oar in first 16:13:18 just noticed it when looking at the bugs for boolean and state/status, since it was the line above :) 16:13:39 * cdent nods 16:13:40 Sure, everyone grab a paintbrush! 16:13:46 :) 16:15:07 anyone have anything further to say about capabilities? I rather think it is going to be a tough one as the history of desire behind the functionality is long 16:15:32 only that it seems like a vibrant discussion 16:15:44 ;) 16:15:46 tru dat 16:16:10 It feels premature. There is no real consensus on what 'capabilities' means to projects 16:16:41 We should really know what it is we are talking about before trying to write guidelines that apply to everyone 16:16:52 indeed 16:16:57 that seems entirely too sensisble 16:17:11 elmiko: sorry, then I must have mis-typed :) 16:17:30 haha 16:18:37 This stuff showed up in the cross-project-spec world in the past and has moved to the api-wg from there, presumably because there are at least some people who think is mature/required enough to need to move 16:18:57 which I agree probably indicates that there are widely varying degrees of understanding 16:20:20 may haps we should more explicitly invite participation (by linking from the sardonic introductory paragraph of the newsletter?)? 16:20:37 cdent: sure, couldn't hurt 16:20:51 +1 16:21:02 although a lack of response might be more related to holiday timing than lack of interest 16:21:12 good point 16:21:13 #action (whoever newsletters) agitate for more action on capabilities in newletter 16:21:23 it's been under review for several weeks 16:23:31 #topic bug review 16:23:32 #link https://github.com/openstack/api-wg/blame/384803a489af7ccdab59a2b52f6fa2c3e5db76c2/guidelines/naming.rst#L37-L39 16:23:45 "Start discussion on the naming of boolean and state/status " 16:23:49 * cdent looks at edleafe 16:24:12 Yeah, I was looking through the bugs and thought it would be good to get everyone's feelings on these 16:24:26 Or I could put up a strawman for you to beat up 16:24:55 did the early days already gather the status quo? 16:26:06 cdent: you mean survey how they are currently implemented? 16:27:10 yeah, I seem to recall (mostly before my time) that there was a period of data gathering 16:27:16 on the state of the art 16:27:28 so I wondered if we already know what the norm is for booleans 16:27:33 yeah, those studies have been pretty revealing and helpful in the past 16:27:56 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group/Current_Design 16:28:56 I'm not aware of any for boolean 16:29:55 here's state and status: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group/Current_Design/State_vs_Status 16:30:13 (probably out of date) 16:31:20 'state' seems more limited in usage 16:31:38 semantically, not just in those survey numbers 16:32:31 Can someone explain (just for the record and for my own clarity) the goal on providing guidance on these sorts of things? Presumably consistency when reused across service apis? 16:32:55 that was my impression 16:33:11 cdent: yeah, that's the idea. 16:33:12 consistency, but also an attempt to provide /limited/ sanity 16:33:44 that last part only really becomes an issue if we can get to the guideline before everyone has an impl though 16:33:45 Part of the reason I ask is because to some extent that aspect of guidance has kind of ended up playing second fiddle to "make sure you follow the HTTP spec". 16:33:45 When developing an SDK for the APIs, there were many such "why is it A here, but B there?" moments 16:34:37 * cdent nods 16:34:44 cdent: I think the value in having these sorts of things is to help settle arguments over stuff before it descends to bikeshedding 16:34:56 blue 16:34:58 of course 16:35:12 except on every other tuesday 16:35:23 So how does this sound: I'll do some quick checking, and then put up strawmen as a first pass 16:35:35 If you have the cycles that's awesome 16:35:35 +1 16:36:02 #action edleafe to provide strawmen on booleans and state/status 16:36:25 damn, I had just about finished typing that exact #action when yours appeared 16:36:30 * edleafe has to type faster 16:36:37 any other bug topics? 16:37:19 #topic weekly newsletter 16:37:33 #link newsletter https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/api-wg-newsletter 16:40:00 I promised no such thing! 16:40:43 haha 16:41:43 edleafe: are you red? 16:42:01 yes - isn't my name showing up? 16:42:35 new guidelines has historically meant "stuff that was merged recently" (and I've just merged the 404 v 400 thing). The idea being that it's not really until it has merged 16:43:02 (the chat was in the way) 16:43:19 cdent: ah, sorry 16:43:44 * edleafe was working with a different definition of 'new' 16:47:03 yeah, I had the same confusion 16:47:32 * cdent tunes up the title slightly 16:49:33 anyone have anything to add to newsletter? or edits to fix my typos? 16:52:37 good add edleafe 16:52:57 lgtm 16:53:15 any last words from anyone? 16:53:15 agreed 16:53:27 I'm off after Friday for the rest of December 16:53:38 have a good holiday to all =) 16:53:44 cheers! 16:54:35 next two meetings are cancelled, back in biz in january 16:54:48 thanks everyone for a good year of api stuff 16:55:02 Hear hear! 16:55:23 \o/ 16:55:30 #endmeeting