00:00:50 <ekcs> #startmeeting congressteammeeting
00:00:51 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jun  8 00:00:50 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ekcs. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
00:00:52 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
00:00:54 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'congressteammeeting'
00:01:04 <ramineni_> ekcs: hi
00:01:34 <ekcs> Hi all. As usual, topics are ketp here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/congress-meeting-topics
00:01:41 <ekcs> feel free to add & comment.
00:01:47 <ekcs> hi ramineni_  !
00:01:59 <ekcs> good to have you back  = )
00:02:26 <ramineni_> :)
00:03:27 <masahito> hi
00:04:12 <ekcs> hi masahito !
00:06:25 <ekcs> great let’s go ahead and get started then.
00:07:14 <ekcs> #topic pike-2
00:07:26 <ekcs> quick announcement. Pike-2 release is in progress this week. I’ve started basic testing. expecting to tag a release today.
00:08:22 <ramineni_1> ekcs: great
00:08:47 <ekcs> #topic policy library tasks
00:09:17 <ekcs> again just a quick announcement. Some policy library tasks are up. #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/congress/+bugs?field.tag=policy-lib
00:09:45 <ekcs> feel free to discuss, comment, modify, and sign up if interested.
00:10:21 <masahito> got it
00:10:53 <masahito> the release of policy-library is targeting Pike?
00:12:01 <ekcs> yup. might be a little tight cuz the design and discussions took longer than expected. but I’m still aiming for pike.
00:12:15 <ekcs> In the ML email: https://openstack.nimeyo.com/114043/openstack-dev-congress-policy-library-tasks
00:12:49 <ekcs> I mentioned how we can ship just the essential pieces if we run out of time.
00:13:47 <ramineni_1> ekcs: may be you can tag as pike3 for essential pieces
00:15:36 <ekcs> yea not sure how we use the targeting exactly. I have some non-essential pieces targeted to pike-3 as well but lower priority.
00:16:23 <ekcs> And since we’re on the topic of policy library, here’s some patches going on: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:policy-library
00:16:45 <ekcs> several minor changes to the spec as the implementation happens.
00:17:22 <ekcs> the bigger one is the bulk of the DB interfaces for policy library. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471954/
00:17:27 <ekcs> comments appreciated =)
00:18:10 <ekcs> ramineni_1: back to pike3 tagging, is it more helpful if anything lower priority is not targeted for pike-3?
00:19:03 <ekcs> I’ne been using target is when we’d LIKE to get it done, knowing that we probably won’t get everything done, and that’s where the importance field comes in.
00:19:07 <ramineni_1> ekcs: yes
00:20:03 <ramineni_1> ekcs: sounds good
00:20:44 <ekcs> ok maybe more discussion later about what’s most helpful to everyone with launchpad. We need to go through and retarget a bunch of things too.
00:20:55 <ekcs> anything else on policy library?
00:21:21 <ramineni_1> ekcs: no
00:21:32 <ekcs> ok moving on then =)
00:21:34 <ekcs> #topic policy monitoring UI
00:22:02 <ekcs> Last week I put up a very rough mockup based on PTG discussions.
00:22:06 <ekcs> #link https://wireframepro.mockflow.com/view/congress-policy-monitor
00:22:29 <ekcs> thinrichs and masahito and I had some discussion and I’ve updated the mockup based on the discussion.
00:23:24 <ramineni_1> ekcs: how are we classifying errors and warnings
00:23:36 <ramineni_1> ekcs: tables starting with error_ ?
00:23:52 <ekcs> Basically the main page gives a table of violated policies, inculding color-coded column counting how many tuples there are in the table `error` and the table `warining`
00:24:08 <ekcs> and user can cilck into each policy to go to that specific page.
00:24:29 <ekcs> the `error` table and `warning` table would be treated as special in each policy (by the UI)
00:25:27 <ramineni_1> ekcs: there cannot be multiple error/warning tables in one policy?
00:25:55 <ekcs> correct. is that a problem?
00:26:24 <ekcs> different types of error can ultimately be summarized into an error table. for example
00:26:56 <ekcs> error(…) :- error_A(…)
00:26:58 <ekcs> error(…) :- error_B(…)
00:27:02 <ekcs> error(…) :- error_C(…)
00:27:53 <ramineni_1> ekcs , ok
00:28:03 <ekcs> ultimately we may want to make the system more flexible, but using the special table now (only for UI purpose) leaves the door open for adding more customization down the road.
00:28:43 <ekcs> Anyway and when a user clicks one of the rows, we take the user to the policy page (already exists today).
00:29:00 <ekcs> but we can add some more details tailored to the violations.
00:29:09 <ekcs> for example, displaying the error and warning tables.
00:29:26 <ekcs> see the “per policy page” on mockflow.com
00:29:40 <ramineni_1> ekcs: and one question, yesterday myself and masahito also were discussing regarding this, is there a way to retrive the rule id of the action policy executed or policy violated
00:30:28 <ekcs> hmmm
00:30:58 <ekcs> so say execute[action] :- p(a)   {rule id: 19823}
00:31:14 <ramineni_1> ekcs: for nitification feature, carlos wants to add rule_id, project_id also as part of message
00:31:36 <ramineni_1> ekcs: yes
00:32:24 <ekcs> hmmm. I’m sure there is a way. but probbaly not built in currently. I think it’d require a small change.
00:32:49 <ekcs> we discussed a little with thinrichs last week about the explanation code in congress
00:33:01 <ekcs> that shows derivation of any result.
00:33:13 <ekcs> it’ll show the rules and tuples used to derive each thing.
00:33:37 <ekcs> but it right now shows only the rule text now the rule ID.
00:33:48 <ekcs> probably not hard to make it get rule ID.
00:34:33 <ekcs> there is a question of what exactly is desired.
00:34:48 <ekcs> rule ID of only the last rule? or of all the rules involved in deriving?
00:34:59 <ekcs> a(x) :- b(x)
00:35:10 <ekcs> execute[action] :- a(x)
00:35:29 <ekcs> we could report both rule IDs or just one.
00:35:48 <ramineni_1> ekcs: he is inetrested in only in rule_id where th action is executed
00:35:50 <ekcs> we could also report the whole derivation tree. and sometimes there are multiple derivations for the same action.
00:36:14 <ramineni_1> ekcs: the featue already there, are to be added?
00:36:42 <ekcs> there is already the explanation code to trace derivation. mostly just used for debugging now.
00:36:52 <ekcs> that can be used to find the rule that executed.
00:37:08 <ramineni_1> ekcs: can you point me to the link of that code
00:37:18 <ekcs> sure I’ll look for it after meeting =)
00:37:28 <ramineni_1> ekcs: thanks
00:38:03 <ekcs> ramineni_1: was there a thought about how monitoring UI can use rule ID as well?
00:38:38 <ekcs> or any other thoughts about the monitoring UI?
00:40:02 <ramineni_1> ekcs: yes, we could add if we can retireve it , and also we thought before about adding actions also to UI
00:40:51 <ramineni_1> ekcs: possible action, but may be will be complicated for initial design,  could look into it later
00:41:17 <ekcs> do you mean a display of recent actions executed?
00:41:25 <ekcs> or suggested actions for resolving a violation?
00:42:13 <ramineni_1> ekcs: both, this UI doesnt show, if the actions are defined for violations right as it wont be part of eror/warning
00:42:46 <ekcs> ramineni_1: right that’s a weakness right now.
00:43:42 <ramineni_1> ekcs: makes sense to show by adding modal tables there
00:43:43 <ramineni_1> ?
00:44:12 <ramineni_1> apart from errors/warnings
00:44:53 <ekcs> like the execute table? we could do that. but it might be a little confusing.
00:45:23 <ramineni_1> ekcs: ya , ok
00:45:29 <ekcs> it’d be a combination of things that have already triggered an action and things that are about the trigger an action.
00:45:55 <ekcs> an action is executed for each NEW row in the execute table.
00:46:12 <ekcs> what do you think would be helpful?
00:47:12 <ramineni_1> ekcs: i think it will be good to show, actions performed as part of policy violations
00:47:38 <ramineni_1> ekcs: but not sure which place would be better
00:48:14 <ekcs> yea showing actions performed is definitely helpful. problem right now is the modal table doesn’t give you exactly that.
00:49:01 <ekcs> but anyway we can find a way to track actions performed in relation to a policy.
00:49:11 <ramineni_1> ekcs:hmm, right
00:49:26 <ekcs> so would it be good on the main page or only on the per policy page?
00:50:15 <ekcs> maybe one more column on the main page showing number of actions performed in the last period of time (1 hr, 10 min, whatever)?
00:51:25 <ekcs> then in the per policy page showing history of actions executed and the rule that triggered each?
00:52:11 <ramineni_1> ekcs: ya, sounds good.
00:52:40 <ekcs> cool. yea may not be for phase 1, but definitely something we want.
00:52:51 <ekcs> any thoughts masahito ?
00:54:19 <masahito> that sounds good.
00:55:23 <ekcs> ok then
00:55:26 <ekcs> #topic open discussion
00:55:31 <ekcs> anything else to talk about today?
00:55:44 <masahito> just fyi
00:56:11 <masahito> I'll attend OPNFV summit next week. So I won't join the next meeting.
00:56:53 <ekcs> gotcha!
00:56:55 <masahito> And in the summit, OPNFV Doctor project will have its demo that uses Congress
00:57:31 <ekcs> exciting. is it similar to the one at openstack before?
00:57:44 <ramineni_1> masahito: nice
00:58:11 <masahito> ekcs: yes. but not cutting a cable :-)
00:58:23 <ekcs> hahaha. great!
00:58:45 <masahito> that's from my side.
00:59:21 <ekcs> ok then. time’s up too. great discussions on UI. talk more later!
00:59:41 <ekcs> have a great week all.
00:59:44 <ekcs> #endmeeting