22:03:06 <gabrielhurley> #startmeeting horizon
22:03:07 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jan 22 22:03:06 2013 UTC.  The chair is gabrielhurley. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:03:08 <cody-somerville> \o/
22:03:09 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:03:11 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'horizon'
22:03:14 <sdake> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_monkey_IQ
22:03:18 <gabrielhurley> Hi folks! :-)
22:03:34 <gabrielhurley> comments about monkeys aside...
22:04:06 <gabrielhurley> #topic General Status
22:04:20 <kspear> howdy
22:04:37 <gabrielhurley> kspear: hi
22:04:48 <gabrielhurley> We've got tons of activity in the bugfix/review arena lately. That's awesome. I'm happy to see people engaged.
22:05:15 <gabrielhurley> Good discussion on tickets/reviews, too. I like that we're interacting more to come to better final products.
22:05:21 <gabrielhurley> so keep all that up!
22:05:30 <gabrielhurley> #topic bugs and blueprints
22:06:01 <gabrielhurley> We had something like a dozen bugs fixed in the past week, which I've now gotten all correctly assigned to the G3 milestone so it reflects all the work y'all are doing.
22:06:34 <gabrielhurley> There was one bug report which concerned me...
22:06:41 <gabrielhurley> https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1100444
22:06:42 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1100444 in horizon "Edit Flavor Window Displays Details of Deleted Flavors" [High,Confirmed]
22:07:04 <gabrielhurley> Sounds like it's probably just a matter of fixing our API call, but editing the wrong flavor is definitely a high priority to fix.
22:08:02 <gabrielhurley> Otherwise the fixes outweighed the new reports by far.
22:08:27 <gabrielhurley> People are picking things off the list too, so I'm not worried at the moment.
22:08:43 <gabrielhurley> As for blueprints, it's still early in the cycle, but does anybody have updates they'd like to give/
22:08:45 <gabrielhurley> ?
22:09:02 <kspear> i've updated my image organisation blueprint
22:09:04 <kspear> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/organised-images-display
22:09:07 <kspear> feedback welcome
22:09:19 <gabrielhurley> sweet. I'll take a look today./
22:09:39 <jpich> Nice
22:09:48 <cody-somerville> David pinged me last week and I've started this week helping him with the file-upload-redux related blueprints - specifically on the django side of things. I have some questions re: implementation if there's time in the meeting.
22:09:56 <gabrielhurley> oooh, I like the mockup
22:10:10 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: sure. we'll do that at the end
22:10:23 <cody-somerville> kspear: nice!
22:10:36 <kspear> thanks
22:10:47 <gabrielhurley> I know all the quantum blueprints are on track, so I'm not worried there.
22:11:10 <gabrielhurley> jpich, vkmc, mrunge: any updates you'd like to share or shall I ask again next week?
22:11:35 <cody-somerville> I noticed that the admin user does not have access to the quantum related views.
22:11:35 <jpich> I will start on the blueprint next week, so no update so far
22:11:37 <cody-somerville> Is that intentional?
22:11:54 <vkmc> Currently doing some research about the bp, nothing relevant yet, I feel I'd have something more concrete next week
22:12:13 <vkmc> I have concerns about some bugs I'm working on
22:12:25 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: I believe the goal is to expand some of those capabilities in G3, though it's still a work in progress. They've got a huge amount of feature-work to get in and can only do so much per cycle.
22:12:56 <gabrielhurley> vkmc: no problem. I'm gonna open things up for general questions in a minute if you want to ask about specific issues.
22:13:01 <cody-somerville> gabrielhurley: It's just weird that you can't really access the work that is done because they require additional permissions that the admin user by default in devstack does not have.
22:13:07 <vkmc> gabrielhurley, Sure
22:13:28 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: oh, I didn't realize that... could you file that as a bug against horizon + quantum + devstack?
22:13:45 <gabrielhurley> it's probably a devstack fix, but we should all track it
22:13:55 <cody-somerville> Sure thing.
22:14:05 * gabrielhurley admits he doesn't generally have quantum set up in devstack and doesn't notice these things immediately.
22:14:29 <jpich> I can see the networks and subnets panels in my devstack, didn't realise there was more
22:14:51 <cody-somerville> maybe it only grants the permissions if quantum is setup to automatically have the views hidden
22:14:59 <cody-somerville> jpich: I can't see the networks and subnets panels in my devstack
22:15:14 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: are you sure quantum is in your keystone service catalog?
22:15:20 <gabrielhurley> that's what triggers hiding/showing them
22:15:22 <cody-somerville> and manually accessing the urls gives me a permission denied error
22:15:33 <gabrielhurley> horizon looks for a service called "network"
22:15:41 <cody-somerville> gabrielhurley: I'll have to take a look.
22:15:43 <gabrielhurley> if that's not present you'll get the behavior you describe
22:15:45 <jpich> I did have to add this to my settings - http://wiki.openstack.org/Horizon#Quantum_Configuration_.28optional.29 - perhaps devstack should add it if quantum is enabled
22:16:33 <gabrielhurley> jpich: that... just shouldn't be true. but yeah, we need a ticket to track this.
22:16:56 <gabrielhurley> I keep finding new places where Horizon settings are misdocumented
22:16:58 <gabrielhurley> ::sigh::
22:17:13 <gabrielhurley> I think we've moved into the next topic though
22:17:16 <gabrielhurley> #topic open discussion
22:17:29 <jpich> gabrielhurley: I probably added them at the same time I enabled quantum and didn't notice if they weren't needed. Ah well
22:17:43 <gabrielhurley> jpich: probably so
22:17:46 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: I'd check your service catalog in keystone first. that's the most likely culprit.
22:18:19 <gabrielhurley> so, cody-somerville I think you asked first about having Django questions. vkmc you can go next...
22:18:20 <jpich> gabrielhurley: Are those settings still needed for Folsom only?
22:18:21 <cody-somerville> Agreed. In any regard, I think it would be helpful if those views returned something other than 401 in this scenario to avoid confusion.
22:18:47 <gabrielhurley> jpich: they were true in... Diablo? Essex removed Quantum, and Folsom re-added it without all that extra settings nonsense.
22:19:01 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: yep
22:19:11 <cody-somerville> Ok. So image-upload spec specifically says this:
22:19:20 <cody-somerville> "Strong preference goes to a solution that does not involve proxying the file through the Horizon server (since allowing arbitrary upload of potentially very large files is dangerous)."
22:19:44 <jpich> gabrielhurley: Huh! I need to re-run a few tests on how I enabled the Quantum panels everywhere, thank you
22:20:29 <cody-somerville> From what I understand so far, davidlenwell's plan is for the file to be uploaded to the Horizon server and than sent to whereever. I'm wondering if we want this or if we should do something like jquery iframe transport plugin so that we upload the files directly to glance, swift, or whatever.
22:20:33 <cody-somerville> OR if we need to support both
22:20:35 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: that's still my preference. uploading a multi-GB image through apache/nginx/whatever, storing that in /tmp or some other upload directory, then sending that to Glance/Swift via another API call is really not happy.
22:20:57 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: the latter (transport directly to glance/swift) would be AMAZING
22:21:23 <gabrielhurley> 'cuz DOS'ing a dashboard install via filling up the disk is trivial if you allow GB-sized uploads
22:22:14 <notmyname> gabrielhurley: cody-somerville: swift supports that feature today (direct from browser upload)
22:22:29 <gabrielhurley> yeah, I know swift does, not sure about Glance (if it's not backed to swift)
22:23:00 <notmyname> sorry for the drive-by comment. I don't really know the context, except that "swift" was highlighted in my IRC client :-)
22:23:08 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: you might want to coordinate with notmyname and bcwaldon on what possibilities are available for direct transfers from the browser
22:23:23 <gabrielhurley> another idea off the top of my head: if direct upload to glance/swift isn't possible, I'd also wonder if we could do some sort of chunked/streaming transfer so that the data is proxied through Horizon but only in small segments.
22:23:33 <gabrielhurley> things to think about.
22:23:33 <cody-somerville> gabrielhurley: we can do that too
22:23:41 <cody-somerville> I just want to clarify what OUR requirements are
22:23:53 <gabrielhurley> cool. I think you've got it now.
22:24:21 <gabrielhurley> I've got a hard stop at 2:30 today (sorry), and I'd like to let vkmc ask her question.
22:24:31 <cody-somerville> If we can do the direct upload, that is indeed cool but I know that some installations of OpenStack don't have glance publicly available so do we need to support proxying too?
22:24:32 <gabrielhurley> anything we don't have time for, feel free to email me and I'll try to respond promptly
22:24:49 <davidlenwell> cody-somerville: I'm fine with your jquery iframe transport plugin idea for the most part
22:24:57 <cody-somerville> ie. which do we want to target for this milestone? I personally think proxying (especially if we store and than async upload) has a lot of risk
22:24:59 <gabrielhurley> cody-somerville: not a hard requirement. For Grizzly we can document what the requirements are for that feature to work
22:25:14 <gabrielhurley> if thta means a public glance endpoint that's fine
22:25:38 <vkmc> Thanks gabrielhurley, it's not too important, but I'd love to get some suggestions for this two bugs I'm working on https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1055217 and https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1100830
22:25:40 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1055217 in horizon "Instance deletion confirmation dialog should show instance name" [Wishlist,In progress]
22:26:23 <gabrielhurley> showing the instance name can probably be done by just looking at the "name" column for the row the action was triggered from.
22:26:52 <gabrielhurley> what's the question on the second one (visual heirarchy)?
22:27:03 <gabrielhurley> I thought that one was just about making the heading levels, etc. consistent.
22:27:40 <jpich> The questions is a comment on the review - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20226/
22:27:41 <vkmc> Yeah, I considered that, but the main problem with it is that not all the tables follow the same ordering
22:28:40 <vkmc> Here I uploaded possible solutions for both https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20234/ - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20226/
22:29:57 <gabrielhurley> gotcha. I'll have to take a look at the review.
22:30:09 <gabrielhurley> I have to run though. next meeting is calling (this one in person).
22:30:16 <gabrielhurley> I will look at those this afternoon though
22:30:20 <gabrielhurley> thanks everyone!
22:30:26 <vkmc> Thanks :)
22:30:29 <gabrielhurley> #endmeeting