18:02:46 <bh526r> #startmeeting gluon
18:02:47 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Jul 20 18:02:46 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is bh526r. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:02:49 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:02:51 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'gluon'
18:03:03 <bh526r> Hello guys
18:03:08 <krenczewski> Hello
18:03:11 <pcarver> hello
18:03:12 <Jeffreyc42> Hi
18:03:41 <bh526r> Hi Kamil, Paul and Jeff
18:03:50 <bh526r> #agenda Roll Call and Introduction
18:04:06 <bh526r> #topic Roll Call and Introduction
18:04:23 <georgk> #info Georg Kunz
18:04:24 <bh526r> Please #info your name
18:04:31 <bh526r> #info Bin Hu
18:04:32 <Jeffreyc42> #info Jeff Collins
18:04:33 <krenczewski> #info Kamil Renczewski
18:04:42 <pcarver> #info Paul Carver
18:05:21 <bh526r> Tom is on vacation this week. Not sure Ian, Vince and Kamal
18:05:28 <bh526r> #topic Admin Update
18:05:49 <bh526r> #info No update of admin matters
18:06:18 <bh526r> Ian joined
18:06:24 <bh526r> great
18:06:31 <bh526r> #topic Review of Repository Structure
18:06:36 <bh526r> Hi Ian
18:07:00 <bh526r> #info Today we primarily focus on reviewing 2 patches
18:07:15 <bh526r> #info one is the patch of proposing repo structure
18:07:33 <bh526r> #info the other one is the patch of architecture description
18:07:55 <bh526r> #info here is the patch of repo structure:
18:08:10 <bh526r> #info https://review.openstack.org/#/c/342448/
18:09:28 <bh526r> #info There are a few comments, primiarily on the specific description of the functional description of each component of the repo proposal
18:10:40 <georgk> #info my comments are mainly brain dumps of architectural things I wanted to capture somewhere
18:10:57 <bh526r> #info there is only one comment from Kamal, suggesting to change the name of "gluon-core" to "gluon-lib"
18:10:59 <georgk> that was before the architecture doc was pushed by Jeff
18:11:34 <bh526r> #info Georg: that was before the architecture doc was pushed by Jeff
18:11:58 <bh526r> #info thank you Georg
18:12:09 <georgk> #info I can move my comments to the right place (maybe the architecture doc) later
18:12:30 <bh526r> #info sure, that's better. Thank you Georg
18:13:00 <bh526r> #info and I also think, the architecture description may need to reflect the new repo strucuture of architectural components
18:13:47 <bh526r> #info so regarding the comment of changing the name of "gluon-core" to "gluon-lib", is there any other opinion?
18:15:00 <bh526r> #info if there is no other opinion on the name change of "gluon-core" to "gluon-lib"
18:15:43 <bh526r> #info I would suggest that the group present on the meeting today agreed to this proposal.
18:16:01 <georgk> #info +1
18:16:09 <krenczewski> #agreed
18:16:33 <Jeffreyc42> #info +1
18:16:51 <bh526r> #info In respect of original authoer Tom, we would wait for Tom's back from vacation so that he will upload patch 2 for this new name
18:17:07 <bh526r> #info "gluon-lib"
18:17:50 <bh526r> #info then the gluon-core can +2 and merge it
18:18:41 <bh526r> #topic Review of Architecture Document
18:18:55 <bh526r> #info https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344283/
18:19:14 <bh526r> #info now is the real thing: architecture description
18:20:00 <bh526r> #info Kamal posted 4 comments, 2 editorial and 2 needs clarification
18:20:04 <bh526r> #info plus Georg's comments
18:20:45 <bh526r> #info and the necessary re-consideration given the new repo strucuture, and related description of components within the repo
18:20:52 <Jeffreyc42> For Kamal's comments 1 and 3 are given
18:21:05 <Jeffreyc42> we already discussed this second one
18:21:21 <bh526r> #info Jeff: For Kamal's comments 1 and 3 are given
18:21:32 <bh526r> #info Jeff: we already discussed this second one
18:21:51 <Jeffreyc42> #info and for 4 i think it would be a good idea to add a section on why etcd and not rabbit
18:22:09 <bh526r> #info that's right, it will be very helpful
18:22:51 <bh526r> #info and Georg's original comment on repo patch, but actually applicable to architectural description
18:23:26 <georgk> #info regarding my comments: they are targeting potential improvements
18:23:45 <georgk> #info shall we put them in a dedicated section in this document or create a separate one
18:24:27 <bh526r> #info yes, improvements - but also a starting point of our formal architectural design so that we know what needs improved for future work
18:24:31 <georgk> #info I wanted to collect current shortcoming of the architecture and collect them in some place so that we can discuss those
18:25:03 <Jeffreyc42> #info We mention a few places in the arch doc for improvements already.
18:25:24 <Jeffreyc42> #info I think either pull this out to its own section or just add it to the respective sections.
18:25:44 <Jeffreyc42> kk
18:25:55 <bh526r> #info I suggest that let us work on the arch doc as the opportunity of long term design instead of just documenting what is currently we have
18:26:34 <Jeffreyc42> #info the arch document was put together to help people learn how its currently built
18:26:48 <Jeffreyc42> #info Along the way though we added future changes
18:27:20 <Jeffreyc42> #info - So I would suggest using the arch doc for how its currently built and maybe either add a new "future" section or put this in its own rst
18:27:43 <bh526r> #info I suggest to put this in its own rst
18:27:57 <Jeffreyc42> #info +1
18:28:08 <Jeffreyc42> #info new doc for future/changes
18:28:11 <georgk> #info fine this that
18:28:22 <pcarver> I think it would make sense to document the architecture as it's currently built first. Then add revisions as separate Gerrit changes to the same document.
18:28:33 <georgk> #agreed
18:28:46 <Jeffreyc42> #info I'll pull out the future stuff from the current arch doc and put it in a new one.  then others can add
18:28:51 <pcarver> It's ok to include TODOs or comments in the current document where something appears to be obviously deficient
18:29:01 <Jeffreyc42> ok
18:29:10 <pcarver> I'd view the architecture document as being a single document that evolves over time.
18:29:28 <Jeffreyc42> #info I'll go ahead and make the Kamal changes but will need help on the details of etcd vs rabbit
18:29:42 <bh526r> #info Yes, the new architecture document is a single document that will evolve over time
18:30:19 <bh526r> #info But the old one is a legacy stuff, we can keep it as documenting what we have before OpenStack
18:31:05 <Jeffreyc42> #info the current doc is the arch doc - Which I think should be maintained for how its built
18:31:09 <pcarver> But if the whole thing is in Git there's no need for old to be a separate document
18:31:14 <bh526r> #info then we take this as an opportunity of a fresh start in OpenStack
18:31:38 <Jeffreyc42> #info the new rst would be the "proposed improvements" or something like this
18:31:50 <bh526r> #info yes, we should maintain the old one as how it was built before OpenStack
18:32:04 <bh526r> #info the whole thing in Git now is not in OpenStack yet
18:32:12 <Jeffreyc42> #info - ok and that would maintain the name "Archectural Description"?
18:32:53 <Jeffreyc42> #info Everyone good with that strucutre then?
18:33:07 <bh526r> #info that is why we discussed the new repo structure, which will be supported by a fresh new architectural doc
18:34:15 <Jeffreyc42> #info I'm not following you.  You are saying you want to use the arch doc for the new propsed stuff/changes or how its currently built?
18:34:27 <bh526r> #info yes, I agree with (1) the old one maintained as a whole of describing how it was built before OpenStack (2) a new one starts the new design
18:34:42 <Jeffreyc42> #info ok, got it
18:34:46 <Jeffreyc42> #info thanks
18:34:56 <pcarver> What's the function of the old doc once it's out of date? Is it just for historical curiosity?
18:35:13 <bh526r> #info then we evolve the new one as we evolve in openstack
18:35:22 <Jeffreyc42> #info ok now I'm lost :)
18:35:44 <bh526r> #info yes, the old one as-is is for historical documentation
18:35:49 <Jeffreyc42> the current arch doc should be continuously updated for how gluon is currently built now and as it changes
18:36:01 <Jeffreyc42> #info the current arch doc should be continuously updated for how gluon is currently built now and as it changes
18:36:15 <pcarver> I'd prefer that there just be one architecture doc, with Gerrit acting as gatekeeper for changes over time and Git preserving the history of how the architecture changed over time.
18:36:23 <Jeffreyc42> #info the new doc is for ideas/purposals/changes as we discuss?
18:36:39 <bh526r> #info hold on, guy
18:36:49 <georgk> well, that was my initial thinking
18:36:59 <georgk> having an architecture doc
18:37:06 <georgk> and a place for improvements
18:37:13 <georgk> is that useful?
18:37:28 <bh526r> #info the situation is - we have old repo, which we need to document how it was built
18:37:40 <georgk> I also don´t fully see the benefit of having a historic version of the architecture doc
18:37:54 <georgk> :-)
18:38:01 <Jeffreyc42> #info the repo structure is not really for the arch doc
18:38:11 <Jeffreyc42> #info currently the arch doc has how its built and as i describe things I also call out room for some changes
18:38:23 <Jeffreyc42> #info I expect the arch doc to evolve as we change the code
18:38:32 <bh526r> #info now, we have new repo, and agreed new repo structure
18:38:40 <pcarver> I think Gerrit is the right place to discuss the changes as they are proposed. To bootstrap it we need the doc of what currently exists. Then we need to incrementally change that doc, with feedback via Gerrit reviews.
18:38:41 <Jeffreyc42> #info but that doesn't change the arch
18:39:09 <bh526r> #info we should take this opportunity to fresh start the architectural design
18:39:26 <Jeffreyc42> #info right - and we can do that and update the arch doc as we go
18:39:40 <pcarver> When you say "start fresh" are you talking about totally throwing away what exists and re-writing from scratch?
18:39:43 <Jeffreyc42> #info - how about we just keep the 1 arch doc and update it as we change things
18:39:48 <bh526r> #info and the old arch doc will describe how it was build before OpenStack
18:40:06 <Jeffreyc42> #info we are not changing / starting over though
18:40:15 <Jeffreyc42> #info we are just updating some pieces
18:40:17 <bh526r> #info like - here is the legacy. It's the end.
18:40:31 <Jeffreyc42> Is it possible to do a voice call? :)
18:40:40 <georgk> ;-)
18:40:48 <bh526r> #info new doc can start with the old content, with the clarifications based on comments from Kamal and Georg
18:41:05 <Jeffreyc42> #info - those changes are small though.  i can update those very quickly
18:41:25 <Jeffreyc42> #info we are not rebuilding gluon here.  As we make changes lets just update the arch doc
18:41:25 <bh526r> Good point. How this GTM: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/599078381 +1-773-945-1031x599078381#
18:41:29 <pcarver> If the new doc starts with the old content then it doesn't make sense for it to be a new doc. It should be a series of tracked changes to the doc.
18:41:38 <Jeffreyc42> cool
18:41:40 <Jeffreyc42> joining
19:02:10 <openstack> ShillaSaebi: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress.  Use #endmeeting first.
19:02:41 <Jeffreyc42> sorry
19:02:44 <Jeffreyc42> stopping it now
19:02:47 <bh526r> #endmeeting