21:02:56 <thingee> #startmeeting crossproject
21:02:56 <harlowja> yo
21:02:58 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jan 12 21:02:56 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is thingee. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:02:59 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:03:01 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'crossproject'
21:03:02 <cdent> o/
21:03:06 <angdraug> o/
21:03:07 * rockyg is still sleepily peeking out from under that stone....
21:03:17 <thingee> sorry for jumping people around. Just making sure they know about this new irc channel for the cross project meeting
21:03:22 <fungi> heh
21:03:30 <annegentle> no worries thanks thingee
21:03:35 <fungi> indeed, i almost forgot after several weeks of no agenda
21:03:52 <thingee> we have a lovely agenda
21:03:55 <thingee> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/CrossProjectMeeting
21:04:11 <thingee> since we have no past items
21:04:24 <thingee> #topic team announcements (horizontal, vertical, diagonal)
21:04:43 <docaedo> o/
21:04:45 <bknudson_> openstack security project meetup is this week
21:04:52 <bknudson_> and barbican
21:05:01 <thingee> do we have a wiki page with all of the meetups?
21:05:07 <bknudson_> yep, sprints
21:05:19 <bknudson_> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints
21:05:28 <thingee> thank you
21:06:21 * jroll lurks
21:06:23 <thingee> just a reminder of dhellmann's release countdown http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-January/083507.html
21:06:45 <thingee> mitaka 2 coming jan 19-21
21:06:54 <thingee> time flies
21:07:08 <elmiko> seriously...
21:07:09 <thingee> #link http://docs.openstack.org/releases/schedules/mitaka.html
21:07:10 <annegentle> when you're having fun
21:07:19 <thingee> ok going, going
21:07:25 <ttx> oh are we here now
21:07:44 <annegentle> welcome ttx!
21:07:57 <thingee> #topic API guides vision - developer.openstack.org and REST API docs
21:08:02 <annegentle> hey
21:08:04 <thingee> annegentle: hi
21:08:25 <annegentle> I wanted to make sure I set up the current situation with application dev docs, so that project teams know what's up.
21:08:44 <bknudson_> in keystone we have the v3 spec is just in rst
21:08:57 <annegentle> it's an exciting time with 900 API calls in OpenStack that are documented. We now have over 30 REST API services, but 12 projects that have API reference info
21:09:10 <annegentle> #link http://developer.openstack.org/
21:09:26 <annegentle> We have a new landing page design, and we're starting to get even more how-to content which is super exciting.
21:09:45 <annegentle> bknudson_: yeah that's part of this launch also, is getting out of Docbook/WADL to RST/Swagger.
21:09:53 * stevemar sneaks into the back of the room to listen
21:10:04 <elmiko> annegentle: sahara is working towards this with out proposed v2 api
21:10:09 <elmiko> s/out/our
21:10:11 <annegentle> So, we need more how-to, we need centralized locations for both the content and the reviewers who know what's up for this audience, and we need standards.
21:10:22 <annegentle> Ask and ye shall recieve.
21:10:25 <annegentle> receive?
21:10:27 <annegentle> I can't spell.
21:10:31 <annegentle> Anyway.
21:10:45 <annegentle> #link http://www.openstack.org/blog/2016/01/whats-next-for-application-developer-guides/
21:11:14 <bknudson_> do you have an automatic conversion from wads to swagger?
21:11:18 <bknudson_> wadl
21:11:27 <annegentle> that post outlines a lot of the vision -- and maybe you got a chance to read it before coming here -- I wanted to be available for any questions
21:11:39 <annegentle> bknudson_: just last week we brought in fairy-slipper, a migration tool
21:12:06 <annegentle> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/fairy-slipper
21:12:32 <jroll> annegentle: so, the docs team doesn't want to add projects to the install guides and such right now... just to be sure, this is open to all projects?
21:12:40 <annegentle> This tool had a proof-of-concept last release, and now we're collaborating more widely with the API working group.
21:12:45 <bknudson_> really what we need to do is convert our v3 api spec to swagger -- http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/keystone-specs/api/v3/identity-api-v3.html
21:12:53 <elmiko> annegentle: i'm curious about adding links to the api-wg wiki and guidelines on developer.os.o, wondering if adding another section to the API portion would be appropriate
21:13:17 <annegentle> jroll: yes, there isn't as heavy a testing requirement on REST API and app dev docs
21:13:27 <jroll> annegentle: cool, ty :D
21:13:27 <elmiko> we've got "References" now, but about a "Working Group" section or something?
21:13:28 <annegentle> elmiko: sure
21:13:57 <annegentle> elmiko: it'd be great to rework that landing, but the first step was to get the landing page looking closer to a real web design :)
21:14:07 <elmiko> right
21:14:26 <annegentle> We won't do all the WADL migration at once, so teams should continue to update WADL in api-site so that we know to migrate it
21:14:46 <annegentle> teams can also investigate building how-to documents for API guides similar to what Compute is doing
21:14:53 <elmiko> will the individual teams eventually be responsible for creating their own swagger?
21:14:59 <annegentle> #link http://developer.openstack.org/api-guide/compute/
21:15:10 <annegentle> elmiko: yes, that's idea, since the teams can review the design the best
21:15:16 <annegentle> elmiko: while following api-wg guidelines
21:15:21 <elmiko> annegentle: awesome, thanks
21:15:29 <annegentle> source for that api-guide is in the nova repo
21:16:22 <jroll> oh, the source goes in the project tree, awesome
21:16:23 <annegentle> Teams should generally be aware of developer docs helping out their application devs immensely.
21:16:33 <annegentle> jroll: cool, glad you see the vision :)
21:16:56 <annegentle> We
21:16:56 <bknudson_> Maybe it would be worth it to start fresh with the identity docs rather than convert the wadls, since keystone team hasn't been looking at wadls.
21:17:22 <elmiko> bknudson_: yea, i almost feel the same about sahara. i'm not sure how far behind the wadls are
21:17:39 <annegentle> it's interesting, we had over 120 contributors to the WADLs last release
21:17:47 <elmiko> nice
21:17:51 <annegentle> so even if you think they're not updated, they're the most contributed to docs as of late
21:18:31 <annegentle> our most recent docs core contributors worked mostly on the API reference docs, KATO Tomoyuki.
21:19:04 <bknudson_> we don't want to have 2 sources of truth for the api spec.
21:19:12 <annegentle> so I think migration's the way to go, unless a team really has a great Swagger file. For example, me and a coworker wrote one for Magnum since they didn't have a WADL anyway.
21:19:18 <annegentle> bknudson_: for sure
21:19:54 <annegentle> now, to jroll's point, we are starting with the six infra-services for migration purposes
21:20:21 <annegentle> Identity, Compute, Images, Networks, Block Storage, Object Storage
21:20:33 <annegentle> since we need to test the migration
21:20:44 <annegentle> Additional needs and calls to help:
21:21:26 <annegentle> We need to know the WADL-to-Swagger captures the API definitions complete as possible. That's fairy-slipper work.
21:21:43 <annegentle> We need to publish Swagger plus RST using flat files and file copy similar to how docs jobs work today.
21:22:03 <annegentle> We need build jobs and content in project's repos for how-to and tutorial examples for how to use your REST APIs
21:22:16 <annegentle> That's all I've got!
21:22:31 <bknudson_> the how-tos are in the project repo and the swagger is elsewhere?
21:22:34 <annegentle> Feel free to ask me anything in #openstack-sdks or #openstack-doc and please check out fairy-slipper
21:23:10 <annegentle> bknudson_: yes, we have a couple of ideas for further integration, and ideas for generating swagger, but have to take small steps that give continuous deliverables to this audience.
21:23:16 <thingee> annegentle: so where do we go from here to get people involved from their respected projects?
21:23:39 <annegentle> thingee: each project should have an API liaison and I can reach out directly to them
21:23:52 <thingee> excellent
21:24:14 <thingee> anything else for annegentle before we move on...?
21:24:16 <annegentle> Also, people need to write tutorials! There are some cool things you can make with OpenStack infrastructure :)
21:24:21 <elmiko> does the doc team meeting usually cover the topics related to swagger and descriptive api doc gens?
21:24:31 <nikhil> annegentle: should we add a section to the CPL list for API Liaison work?
21:24:40 <annegentle> elmiko: yep, we have a standing item on the agenda as a "specialty team"
21:24:48 <elmiko> annegentle: awesome, thanks
21:25:02 <annegentle> nikhil: that would be great, I was just going to look for that. A while back we had API specialists, but I'm not sure that list is maintained.
21:25:16 <nikhil> gotcha
21:25:17 <elmiko> what about the api-wg liaisons?
21:25:18 <smcginnis> Pretty sure it's not. :)
21:25:26 <nikhil> I am thinking this page for tracking
21:25:29 <nikhil> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons
21:25:35 <annegentle> I would be amiss if I didn't thank people like Russell Sim and Karen Bradshow for getting us this far!
21:25:52 <annegentle> elmiko: that's the list I was thinking of, api-wg liaisons!
21:25:59 <elmiko> \o/
21:26:03 <annegentle> elmiko: do you have that list?
21:26:03 <thingee> thanks annegentle!
21:26:19 <elmiko> #link http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/liaisons.html
21:26:26 <annegentle> #info Many thanks to Russell Sim and Karen Bradshow for getting us this far!
21:26:43 <annegentle> elmiko: fancy json no less! Nice.
21:26:54 <elmiko> we used to have a nice table in the wiki, not sure what happened to it
21:27:10 <thingee> #topic Cross-Project Spec Liaisons
21:27:36 <fungi> by default these should be ptls
21:27:53 <thingee> ok so so some time ago I spoke on the idea of having representatives from each project who can help with cross-project specs
21:27:55 <thingee> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/crossproject/2015/crossproject.2015-12-01-21.00.html
21:27:57 <thingee> #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/crossproject/2015/crossproject.2015-12-01-21.00.html
21:28:02 <thingee> fungi: definitely
21:28:07 <fungi> at least that's how our other liaisoning is done (i think i just made up a word)
21:28:40 <lifeless> liasing I think
21:28:44 <thingee> unfortunately expressed at the summit ptls don't always have time for this meeting or the efforts happening in cross-project areas. Alarming I agree, but I need someone from teams to participate and get ptls involved when necessary
21:28:54 <sdake> fungi liasing
21:28:56 <sdake> is the word ;)
21:28:58 <elmiko> lifeless: +1
21:29:15 <fungi> anyway, consider infra to be ptl-liaisonated for now, and i'll gladly delegate i it becomes necessary
21:29:28 <thingee> that leads me to the first attempt of defining this group
21:29:30 <thingee> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266072/3
21:29:31 <fungi> liaisonated is definitely a word ;)
21:29:37 <elmiko> it should be =)
21:29:37 <thingee> as stated ptls are default.
21:30:04 <thingee> it will be listed in https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons for someone else to sign up
21:30:11 <rockyg> thingee, maybe a weekly crossproject posting of open reviews, summary/title and status?  Then lots of people would get a gentle reminder every week
21:30:18 <thingee> but the responsibilites are more or less of what we discussed in that previous meeting.
21:30:21 <cdent> I thikn I managed to volunteer or get volunteered for nova
21:31:25 <thingee> assuming we can agree on the responsibilities in the project team guide, I will announce on the ML the signup table for each team
21:31:29 <thingee> cdent: thank you!
21:31:46 <cdent> (as the guy who comes here)
21:31:58 <gordc> so with the 'big-tent' there are "who knows how many" liasons/ptls. i'm not sure how successful 'all you people look at this' approach is.
21:32:03 <fungi> thingee: sounds great
21:32:04 <elmiko> i'd like to talk with our ptl (sahara), but i'm certainly up for liasing on sahara's behalf
21:32:55 <thingee> elmiko: wonderful
21:33:09 <dhellmann> gordc : it doesn't have to be everyone, but it needs to be more people than are reviewing them now
21:33:11 <gordc> i would think being cross project, the scope of specs requires quite a detail knowledge of not just one's own project but others
21:33:20 <nikhil> thingee: what tag should we expect on the subject?
21:33:20 <ttx> thingee: we could mention the open specs in the weekly dev digest too, I guess
21:33:28 <thingee> yeah ideally I will mention it on the list and then start bugging individual project meetings to announce it who aren't having someone from their team attend this meeting
21:33:31 <fungi> gordc: i think it reflects on those projects well or poorly depending on how involved they get in the cross-project specs discussions and implementations
21:33:33 <lifeless> +1 ttx
21:33:39 <thingee> ttx: I did that once or twice
21:33:40 <dhellmann> fungi : ++
21:33:46 <thingee> ttx: I will continue though :)
21:34:01 <gordc> fungi: well there's also resource constaints
21:34:12 <gordc> not all projects have 100s of devs like nova.
21:34:15 <thingee> nikhil: cross-project
21:34:15 <lifeless> bandwidth...
21:34:21 <rockyg> gordc, if you or the project liaison covers your project's view and every project comments, then you don't have to worry about knowing other projects
21:34:22 <nikhil> thx
21:35:06 <ttx> gordc: the work for a smaller project is also likely to be more reasonable, but I see your point
21:35:08 <thingee> gordc: yeah so I have a bullet that addresses that... I think for implementing, that's a different story. But it needs to be prioritized by the liaison bring it to the groups attention and ptl
21:35:11 <fungi> gordc: of course, resource-constrained projects already have plenty of things to cause them strife. i expect projects who can't keep up with their own work are likely to struggle with following cross-project specs too
21:35:22 <gordc> rockyg: i guess my assumption is that there will be specs that cannot be silo'd to just a single project view. maybe a future concern
21:35:48 <annegentle> fungi: ++
21:36:29 <thingee> ok well again please comment on the review with suggestions. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266072/3
21:36:39 <lifeless> fungi: does anyone truely keep up with their own work ?
21:36:56 <rockyg> also, if all (most) projects comment and there are conflicting views, that's the start of an important discussion for all the involved projects
21:36:56 <thingee> I'd like to get this going start next week with getting initial liaisons so we can help those work on specs to bring attention
21:36:57 <gordc> thingee: i'll comment there. i'm just being negative :)
21:37:00 * lifeless goes off the deep philosophical end
21:37:05 <rockyg> lifeless, ++
21:37:07 <fungi> lifeless: probably not, some just get closer than others
21:37:08 <elmiko> lifeless: lol, so true...
21:37:14 <thingee> and so projects are aware of what's going on from a cross-project perspective
21:37:32 <gordc> rockyg: yeah, that's another concern. how to get agreement with so many possibel voices...
21:37:38 <thingee> anything else before we move onto the next topic?
21:37:47 <gordc> nothing from me
21:38:07 <fungi> i guess my point was that projects will prioritize cross-project spec work differently, so it's not necessary that you prioritize it above, say, getting your project working in the first place
21:38:23 <annegentle> thingee: ttx: have you considered including the product working group or other working groups or asking them to review these?
21:38:46 <thingee> annegentle: absolutely. I work with the product working group, so this sort of plays into their goals as well
21:38:52 <ttx> annegentle: anyone can review these, and I think thingee has started more actively reaching out
21:39:01 <annegentle> thingee: ttx: ok cool
21:39:11 <annegentle> esp thinking of the themes and getting Carol involved
21:39:28 <annegentle> really, I feel like we need to spread the workload
21:39:30 <thingee> carol is going to be out for a bit
21:39:34 <annegentle> and perspective
21:39:57 <thingee> #topic open discussion
21:39:58 <annegentle> like yummy peanut butter
21:40:04 <thingee> announcement
21:40:21 <thingee> The OpenStack Mentoring program sponsored by the women of openstack is looking for mentors!
21:40:41 <dims> oslo has decided to adopt the os-profiler project
21:40:54 <thingee> we need people with experience and we're looking at doing a workshop a day before the summit
21:41:04 <ttx> thingee: following the tc meeting it appears we'll have to document how the tc members are supposed to interact with cross project specs
21:41:09 <thingee> experience with contributing through translations, docs, code
21:41:20 <smcginnis> thingee: Is there an etherpad or something with more details?
21:41:25 <thingee> signup https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1YQITea0ygvusZAeRdR6jL1VUfaNcZTCr2UqHTFSsxR4/viewform?c=0&w=1
21:41:40 <smcginnis> thingee: Thanks!
21:41:47 <rockyg> dims, ++
21:42:09 <thingee> Hopefully we can dedicate sometime before the summit to helping our community grow healthy
21:42:38 <elmiko> +1
21:42:42 <thingee> dims: oh interesting, I think I missed that on the ML
21:42:56 <rockyg> exercises for people huddled on the floor with their laptops ???
21:43:13 * elmiko chuckles
21:43:13 <docaedo> hopefully I'm not dense, but looking for mentors of all genders right (and it's just *sponsored* by Women of OpenStack) right?
21:43:26 <thingee> if people want more information on the OpenStack mentoring program please contact ekhugen on #openstack-women
21:43:38 <annegentle> docaedo: oh yes, mentors can be anyone
21:43:40 <thingee> docaedo: good question, yes all genders are welcome!
21:43:53 <nikhil> annegentle: what's the scope of this program?
21:44:05 <nikhil> is this different from official internship?
21:44:11 <thingee> please spread the word too if you can't participate. Every bit helps
21:44:13 <annegentle> nikhil: this isn't Outreachy, this is new, right thingee?
21:44:35 <annegentle> nikhil: career mentoring or technical mentoring
21:44:45 <nikhil> gotcha
21:44:45 <dims> thingee : spec merged just today, will drop a note on ML
21:45:11 <thingee> correct this is different from outreachy. It has no set schedule like outreachy, and it's a way to have a pool of mentors accessible to people who need help contributing
21:45:46 <thingee> aside from the scheduled in person mentoring at the summit ;)
21:45:49 <fungi> so not funded internships, more a mechanism for connecting people who want to learn with people who want to help them?
21:45:58 <thingee> fungi: yes
21:46:08 <thingee> fungi: thank you
21:46:25 <thingee> anything else?
21:46:34 <nikhil> excellent
21:46:58 <thingee> ok, comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266072/3 now and thanks everyone!
21:47:04 <nikhil> I have one
21:47:05 <thingee> yay cross-project \o/
21:47:10 * thingee stops
21:47:15 <nikhil> there's a very likely "openstack hackathon" global event happening  in the week of feb 29
21:47:16 <thingee> nikhil: yes
21:47:33 <elmiko> ooh, neat
21:47:44 <annegentle> nikhil: cool!
21:47:49 * thingee every week is a hackathon
21:47:51 <nikhil> currently planned in east & west coast US, one location in UK and one in China
21:47:57 <rockyg> Yeah.  It's an outgrowth of the China Hackathon.  It's for bug fixes
21:48:11 <nikhil> I am working on one location in India
21:48:22 <rockyg> nikhil, ++
21:48:25 <thingee> link details?
21:48:35 <nikhil> I need help getting estimate of interest from people
21:48:55 <nikhil> We are coming up with it as logistical bottlenecks are being solved
21:48:56 <rockyg> It's likely Huawei will host in SF Bay area
21:49:06 <nikhil> Seemed like a good place to declare
21:49:11 <annegentle> rockyg: nice
21:49:23 <jroll> there's a texas location too
21:49:25 <jroll> afaik
21:49:32 <rockyg> So, we'll need lots of cores ready to review the fixes...and others
21:50:00 <annegentle> yeah get the dates and locations published as soon as you can
21:50:08 <rockyg> Maybe PTLs and cores could work up the list of bugs they want folks to focus on?
21:50:14 <bknudson_> hopefully the participants will also do reviews
21:50:37 <thingee> nikhil: I think it would be good if there it's a signup form/etherpad and mention on the ML
21:50:45 <thingee> I'm just now hearing about this anyways :)
21:50:53 <nikhil> thingee: surely, I will try to get one before next mtg
21:50:55 <rockyg> Definitely.  Part of this is so folks with different languages can do most of the discussion in their own languages.
21:51:17 <thingee> ok thanks everyone!
21:51:22 <nikhil> I would like to work with the mentoring group to get people involved in this
21:51:23 <thingee> #endmeeting