16:06:00 #startmeeting Cinder 16:06:01 Meeting started Wed Apr 23 16:06:00 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is thingee. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:06:02 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:06:04 The meeting name has been set to 'cinder' 16:06:27 hey all 16:06:30 o/ 16:06:34 hello 16:06:35 Hi 16:06:37 Howdy. 16:06:38 Hi 16:06:39 hi 16:06:56 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderMeetings#Next_meeting 16:07:07 got our agenda today, pretty small 16:07:18 #topic Cinder specs 16:07:25 jungleboyj: you have the floor 16:07:58 thingee: Thanks. I am not sure how much progress we can make on this but wanted to start the conversation. 16:08:44 Just wondering if we have any thoughts/definition around how this cinder-spec process is going to work. 16:08:57 When I mentioned it here to our developers I get questions for more details. 16:09:25 Anyone know more? 16:09:52 is this the new blueprint process? or something different? 16:10:00 kmartin: Yes. 16:10:39 did jgriffith set up a wiki page with the details yet? 16:10:48 kmartin: Not that I am aware of. 16:11:08 I think most of these questions can be answered from previous threads on the dev list http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-April/032796.html 16:11:38 at least with what nova is doing 16:11:56 * jungleboyj is looking. 16:12:06 I think it would be great to follow suit so the process is consistent across projects. 16:12:24 thingee: +1 16:12:32 and I don't really have any oppositions with nova's terms 16:12:45 Since we don't have a drivers team, it would just be our core review team that is on the hook here . 16:13:10 jungleboyj: yes, and I think it has always been that way. 16:13:29 thingee: Ok, was just making sure. :-) 16:13:54 if we had problems with bps in the past, jgriffith would weigh our opinions in before approving something 16:14:03 just wasn't official 16:14:23 thingee 2 +2's required to move on? 16:14:31 yes 16:14:39 thingee: or I am guessing PTL +2 . 16:15:08 I think the cinder-specs repository needs to be setup still in GitHub, similiar to nova's https://github.com/openstack/nova-specs 16:15:09 I guess this would be slightly different in that it does require someone else to weigh in besides the ptl 16:15:17 kmartin: yes 16:15:50 originally on the list though when nova was moving towards this direction, there was some hesitation in letting nova try it before everybody jumped on board 16:15:55 kmartin: So, PTL +2 and at least one more +2. 16:16:01 it was one of the first threads around this...does anyone remember that? 16:17:15 nova has a small readme but not to that detail: https://github.com/openstack/nova-specs/blob/master/README.rst 16:18:10 kmartin: Thanks. 16:19:00 The other question for Cinder is what the process is for proposing driver changes. Do they all use the same template or is there a less complicated method for driver owners to propose changes. 16:19:16 opinions? 16:19:32 The nova template is quite lengthy. 16:20:02 jungleboyj: yeah, but as I understood it's a way to communicate to ops too 16:20:08 of what this change exactly means 16:20:25 Ok. 16:20:49 for example cinder v2 support https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88500/ 16:20:59 thingee: I wonder if this is a discussion I should take to the mailing list so we can have this all documented. 16:21:25 it would probably be best yes. I don't think a lot of people are present in this meeting, or are just being silent 16:21:50 neutron has started a thread for themselves too 16:21:53 thingee: Agreed. I will get a note put together today with thoughts/proposals and we can go from there. 16:22:38 these meetings get recorded, but I'm sure jgriffith would have input on this topic 16:22:38 #action jungleboyj will put together proposal for cinder-specs and post to openstack-dev ML 16:23:14 I think not having things ready for a new development release makes it hard. 16:23:27 kmartin: Right. Want to also make sure that winston-d_ avishay DuncanT- give input. 16:23:41 yes, this should be in place now if it's required for juno 16:23:43 thingee +2 16:24:22 That was all I had. 16:24:30 #topic Open discussion 16:24:33 heh 16:24:35 easy meeting 16:24:46 :-) I get to go to lunch early. 16:24:49 * jungleboyj is hungry 16:25:00 anything else? 16:25:13 nice and fast, any idea when the cinder design session will be scheduled 16:25:37 jgriffith: ^^ 16:25:57 likely thursday and friday like it usual is 16:26:26 Sorry i got in late here.. cinder design session is in the context of juno summit or somethign else ? 16:26:51 deepakcs: yes the design summit 16:27:30 thingee, ok.. the las ttime i saw the summit.os.org.. it wasnt' clear what summits are in and what are not.. is it frozen now ? 16:28:08 deepakcs: we're more wondering when cinder sessions will be, not what's going to be in it 16:28:21 thingee, do we have any design session to discuss the way to provide a graceful cleanup for cinder plugins .. I had a mail thread on it on -dev in the recent past 16:28:33 thingee, ok :) 16:29:08 deepakcs: I don't think it was proposed at summit.openstack.org 16:29:32 but I believe it's too late too submit now 16:29:35 thingee, Ya, i was not sure of the travel then :) 16:30:25 anything else? 16:30:25 thingee, I also had a mail thread in -dev on the ensure_shares_mounted and issues around it.. need to see if that will get addressed in any of the submitted summits 16:30:34 thingee, do u know ^^ just in case ? 16:31:03 * deepakcs haven't gotten to see all the proposals 16:31:20 deepakcs: If it's not listed in summit.openstack.org, it's not being discussed. I don't remember seeing it myself 16:31:30 thingee, ok thanks... i am done 16:31:52 #endmeeting