19:01:45 #startmeeting infra 19:01:46 Meeting started Tue Jul 16 19:01:45 2013 UTC. The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:47 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:01:50 The meeting name has been set to 'infra' 19:01:52 o/ 19:01:54 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting 19:01:59 there's the agenda 19:02:13 pabelanger, russellb: around? 19:02:28 jeblair, 0/ 19:02:30 hi 19:02:36 #topic Asterisk server (jeblair, pabelanger, russelb) 19:02:38 o/ 19:03:04 ooh asterisk. 19:03:14 yeah, so, happy to hack out some configs ... could probably use some help getting the server basic setup done though 19:03:19 o/ 19:03:28 so it sounds like we have a plan... i mostly wanted us to get together in real time and make sure we're on the same page.. 19:03:30 basically given a workspace for us to hack out configs 19:03:35 sure 19:04:06 I already have a base set of configs we could start with, I use them for all my installation 19:04:12 good rounded defaults 19:04:23 k 19:04:36 russellb: so we have a base class in puppet for servers, so most of the generic running a server overhead is taken care of 19:04:36 leif and I came up with them 19:04:55 jeblair: ok, so the "adding a new server" docs cover it? 19:04:56 so we mainly just need a skeleton for the server (pbx.openstack.org? something else?) and fire up a centos6 machine called that 19:05:10 o/ 19:05:15 pbx.openstack.org sounds good 19:05:20 and probably some DNS SRV records 19:05:29 but we can add that later ... 19:05:36 russellb: yeah, and maybe use pleia2's cgit change as an example 19:05:44 russellb: it's the first centos server we have 19:05:48 ok cool 19:05:49 pleia2: is that in review? 19:05:58 yep https://review.openstack.org/36709 19:05:59 jeblair: russellb pleia2 it is in review 19:06:04 #link https://review.openstack.org/36709 19:06:07 Is this just for conferencing or are we actually provisioning extensions? 19:06:29 so even just getting a change in that sets up that server and otherwise doesn't do anything is something we can work with 19:06:39 once that's merged, we can actually spin it up, and then iterate on it 19:06:59 jeblair: that sounds good 19:07:06 pabelanger: my impression is just a conferencing server, right jeblair ? 19:07:15 pabelanger, russellb: feel free to also propose a change that adds your ssh keys to that server; as i expect you're going to want root on it to debug, etc 19:07:17 so, public conferencing access, and a SIP provider for inbound access 19:07:23 (though we're going to want all the actual config in puppet) 19:07:26 yeah, will probably need root. 19:07:33 well, ability to debug 19:07:49 russellb: yes, just a conf server 19:07:53 ok cool 19:08:00 so very little in terms of accounts ... just the provider setup 19:08:10 that lightens up the config quite a bit 19:08:24 russellb: if you need any help (not that there is a lack of it) I'd be happy to dust off my old asterisk knowledge. 19:08:39 if we decide we want to make use of other features later, we can light those up when the time comes 19:08:49 Ya, all of the configuration of asterisk is puppet, is going to be tricky. But we can figure something out 19:08:50 morganfainberg: cool thing about how infra works is that anyone can contribute, just like you contribute to code :-) 19:09:09 i was hoping we could make it simple, as in, please install these files 19:09:13 russellb: nod. 19:09:14 with a bit of the template magic for secret bits 19:09:29 russellb: yeah, i think that will work 19:09:35 k 19:09:47 time for me to figure out how to not be a puppet noob :-) 19:09:49 we can also subscribe asterisk to those files so that when they are changed, we run /etc/init.d/asterisk reload automatically 19:10:15 jeblair, we can actually reload specific modules, it works better 19:10:19 less downtime :) 19:10:19 fwiw, "please install these files with a bit of the template magic for secret bits" is more or less a description of most of the servers we've puppeted 19:10:37 ++ 19:10:41 fungi: cool, will look at others then 19:11:01 pabelanger: i'd imagine so (as long as there's a way to run that from the shell) 19:11:13 There is 19:12:09 ok, so, first step, get skeleton server up that does nothing, i can take a stab at that 19:12:25 #action jeblair look into signing up the foundation with a voip provider 19:12:34 and then will work on getting it so it installs the asterisk package 19:12:44 and then pabelanger and I can work together on the asterisk config 19:12:44 #action russelb get skeleton asterisk puppet config 19:12:56 #action pabelanger work with russelb on asterisk config 19:13:09 pabelanger: sound good? 19:13:24 yar 19:13:43 awesome; anything else on this topic? 19:13:51 * mordred thinks everyone doing this is neat 19:14:04 not from me ... just need to suck it up and allocate the time to work on it 19:14:22 yes, pabelanger and russellb, thanks to both of you! 19:14:35 sure, feels good to make use of knowledge from a past life 19:14:36 russellb: you don't have anything else going on this week do you? ;) 19:14:40 Ya, I can wipe up something for puppet pretty quick 19:14:41 jeblair: nothing really 19:14:49 pabelanger: cool 19:15:21 ttx: are you around? 19:16:11 #topic Eavesdrop (mordred) 19:16:25 we need to log more channels and stuff, I think 19:16:29 certainly -infra 19:16:32 possibly more 19:16:44 i think i agree about infra 19:16:50 no opposition from me 19:16:54 +1 19:16:58 (partially because -infra might be the most active channel in the project and people are always wanting to look stuff up) 19:17:11 question is - should we log the other channels? 19:17:23 the old argument was that it was a focused channel for a small group... 168 people in it now, so it's time 19:17:28 is there any reason not to offer and let the channel members decide? 19:17:30 and/or - should we just log every channel that gerrit reports to? 19:18:12 dhellmann: the only reason i can think of is to manage expectations (so people are not surprised that nova is logged but glance is not) 19:18:21 jeblair: good point 19:18:24 I tend to be pro-log everywhere (would be nice to see in #tripleo too) 19:18:41 other than that, i don't really care, and it does seem like something that individual groups should decide 19:18:41 and/or - should we inject irc logs into logstash with a special tag to make for easy searching 19:18:55 hehe 19:19:02 as it stands, we get enough people who are surprised that #openstack and #-dev are logged but #-infra is not, so there is principle of least surprise in our case anyay 19:19:09 yah 19:19:09 jeblair: my only concern is turning on logging without people knowing could raise privacy hackles 19:19:21 mordred: I don't think so. google can index that stuff for us and logstash is a busy busy cluster 19:19:24 dhellmann: +1, it should be communicated 19:19:27 add me to the list of people that didn't know -dev was logged :-) 19:19:31 we could mitigate that by ensuring that the bot controls the topic, and that the topic has a prominent eavesdrop link. 19:19:36 I think we can make it opt-in ... if a group decides they want their channel logged, we add it to the list 19:19:46 jeblair: wfm 19:19:53 jeblair: hrm. that's a nice idea. isn't eavesdrop meetbot anyway? 19:19:57 yes 19:20:12 if we're really worried, we can also have chanserv or even meetbot itself warn people via /msg when they join 19:20:22 though the latter is a bit more obnoxious 19:20:26 i'd really like to have bot-controlled access list before we do things to lots of channels 19:20:40 fungi: a /msg feels like overkill, but I do like the idea of setting the topic 19:20:44 I'm not TOO worried about privacy. it's IRC. there is no real privacy 19:20:44 freenode's guidelines suggest that /topic is sufficient 19:20:45 if anyone wants to write an irc script, that would be really helpful. :) 19:21:24 and yeah, if it's not an invite-only channel, there's nothing stopping someone at random from logging channel activity and publishing it wherever they like anyway 19:21:58 "someone at random" feels different than "the openstack project" 19:22:02 mordred: so maybe if you want to increase logging, mention something in the team meeting and encourage other teams to opt-in? 19:22:13 so I'm not too worried about it either, it just seems "polite" to let people know about the change 19:22:16 I don't expect objections 19:22:32 k 19:22:52 * mordred only actively cares about -infra ... thinks that the other channels should have the service available 19:23:05 unless we wanted to go pervasive and asbolute everywhere that we know about 19:23:24 jeblair: around now 19:23:25 I like opt in 19:23:31 wfm; sounds like our involvement at this point will just be to make sure that if we enable eavesdrop for a channel, we set the topic appropriately 19:23:57 anything beyond logging -infra or other channels where the regulars collectively request it be done should probably be discussed much more widely (ml et cetera) 19:24:39 yep; we should also probably announce the infra-logging to the ml too. 19:24:45 ++ 19:24:55 I can do that once we approve the change 19:25:22 ttx: would you like to talk about storyboard? 19:25:29 should we also mention in said mail that others are welcome to add their channel to logging too? 19:25:43 * mordred would like to talk with ttx about storyboard 19:25:47 jeblair: sure 19:25:48 pleia2: sure, with a link to mordred's change so they can do it themselves. :) 19:25:54 jeblair: great, will do 19:25:54 ++ 19:26:03 #topic Storyboard (ttx) 19:26:29 ttx: a) think we should pull it into openstack-infra/ b) I think we should stand one up and configure the server to update when we land commits 19:26:31 * jeblair thinks we should start using right now, nevermind that comments don't work yet :) 19:26:40 ttx: c) I think we should use it to track its own development 19:26:52 and as soon as it has enough features for ui/ux, we should let them use it 19:27:05 mordred: openstack-infra makes sense 19:27:06 what's storyboard? 19:27:12 oh. yeah 19:27:15 * jeblair will hack on it when it's in gerrit 19:27:17 let me summarize 19:27:19 ya I think most of us will need more background on the thing 19:27:19 ttx: perhaps you should give an intro 19:27:21 :) 19:27:30 i thought about suggesting the same thing before mordred mentioned it on the e-mail thread, but wasn't sure if it was in good enough shape to track itself yet. if it is, dogfooding it for its own development seems like an awesome idea 19:27:36 So I was a bit tired with the LP alternatives that mordred was floating in my direction 19:27:46 not mordred(s fault, they just suck 19:28:02 it's totally mordred's fault they suck 19:28:04 reed: https://github.com/ttx/storyboard 19:28:18 #link https://github.com/ttx/storyboard 19:28:29 tracking tasks across multiple projects requires a bit more than what your classic per-project solutions propose 19:28:48 so storyboard builds on the same principles as LP bugs, but applies them to blueprints (features) as well 19:29:04 I whipped up a POC on my free time in the last 2 weeks 19:29:31 Now the question is... what to do with it. Stop/continue/dive 19:29:35 * fungi has no idea where ttx gets free time 19:29:46 * mordred is strongly voting on dive 19:29:55 neat 19:30:05 I think "dive" may be a bit optimistic/premature 19:30:09 but 19:30:11 well, by dive I mean continue 19:30:14 dive dive dive 19:30:18 * reed bows at ttx 19:30:21 down periscope! 19:30:26 dam the torpedoes 19:30:35 but that's mostly due to what *I* can dedicate to it in the next month(s) 19:30:37 and by continue, I mean continue with the intent that we will make it work, rather than continuing to see if we think it's a good idea 19:30:56 +1 19:30:57 I've asked davidlenwell to start hacking on it 19:31:09 also, anteaya has been wanting to learn some things about django 19:31:15 demo at http://storyboard.thyone.net for the next hours 19:31:22 for those playing at home 19:31:24 and jeblair and I will probably pitch in once we land it in gerrit 19:31:33 basically, i know that if it satisfies ttx, it will statisfy everyone else. 19:31:37 with mordred's hand behind my back 19:31:47 i will pitch in 19:31:55 ttx, stories can also be blueprints? 19:31:57 bikeshed: a) we might want to keep calling features blueprints - all the business types aroud openstack seem to have picked up that word 19:31:57 The trick with spinning one up early is the pain with database schema transitions 19:32:11 reed: yes 19:32:13 and a django app means likely contributions from other openstack hackers 19:32:16 ttx: I hear django is good at those 19:32:31 any concerns about automatic deployment with django? 19:32:34 mordred: I must have been missing something then :) 19:32:39 mordred: businessspeak sounds like a themeable option 19:32:39 we have had problems with graphite and askbot 19:32:47 clarkb: we don't deploy askbot 19:32:51 fungi: well, I specifically meant for openstack process 19:32:56 technically it's based on django and bootstrap 19:32:58 clarkb: and we have had no problems with automatic graphite deployment 19:32:59 fungi: all of our language is around "blueprints" 19:33:00 jeblair: no, but deployment was one of the reasons for that :) 19:33:05 because I'm a lazy beast 19:33:10 also - more importantly - what do we want to call the hostname? 19:33:28 clarkb: no, askbot was the reason for that 19:33:33 mordred, call it storyboard :) 19:33:35 I think if we're going to run something as important like this ourselves, we'll want a rock-solid story on deployment and upgrade 19:33:43 so stubbing our toes on that before it matters 19:33:47 I think is important 19:33:55 reed: storyboard.openstack.org ? 19:33:58 mordred: I think we need slightly more progress before spinning one up 19:34:09 not thrilled with hostnames that are the software name 19:34:12 ttx: ok. do you have a sense of how much progress? 19:34:13 mordred, why not? 19:34:26 mordred: see the alpha-1 milestone on the github issues 19:34:41 pleia2, the software in this case has a very distinctive and meaningful name 19:34:49 ttx: great. 19:35:19 mordred: something like 2/3 more weeks 19:35:25 reed: this is probably a bikeshed anyway :) 19:35:29 yeah 19:35:30 pleia2: you would prefer something like tasks.openstack.org then? 19:35:33 especially if after infra-ing it some people take pieces of it 19:35:38 fungi: yeah 19:35:41 bikeshed bikeshed bikeshed bikeshed 19:35:44 whee! bikeshed 19:35:47 :) 19:35:48 bikeshed.openstack.org 19:35:49 pink 19:35:51 zomg 19:35:58 jeblair has never been more correct 19:36:11 ah! make sure that pictures can be added in the tasks 19:36:12 nih.openstack.org ? 19:36:16 we should at least have that as a vhost 19:36:17 ttx: actually, you should consider renaming the project to bikeshed. :) 19:36:19 ttx: hah 19:36:30 or nih 19:36:37 I like storyboard :P 19:36:51 +1 19:36:55 it conjures up nice quiet images of story time 19:37:11 rather than the harsh reality of what it will eventually contain 19:37:17 it's about cutting a story into tasks after all. 19:37:30 I like storyboard too 19:37:41 but then the host can be named whatever, especially if temporary :) 19:37:52 action #mordred keep berating ttx until he agrees to start running storyboard in CD immediately 19:38:25 mordred already has a change in review to import it into gerrit 19:39:19 I couldn't resist playing with the demo and this is really awesome for just 2 weeks of free time work 19:39:24 +1 to continue 19:39:25 ttx: anyway, i love it and i'm very excited about it. thanks for hacking on it. :) 19:39:42 I'm also more than happy to see people that actually have some experience in Django move in 19:40:02 since this was also a way for me to play with Django+Bootstrap a bit 19:40:48 jeblair: eof 19:40:55 #topic Zuul upgrade (jeblair) 19:41:10 so i think the next change going into zuul warrants a note to the ML 19:41:29 definitely as I expect it to initially cause some confusion 19:41:35 we will start kicking changes out of the queue immediately if they can't merge with the changes ahead of them in the queue 19:41:50 this was something we decided to do at the H summit to improve throughput 19:42:20 that's just for the gate, right? 19:42:23 but it is potentially confusing to devs (and indeed may occasionally kick a change out that actually could have merged) 19:42:25 dhellmann: yep 19:42:51 the message it leaves in gerrit should be meaningful/useful to devs 19:42:59 is there a way to fix a change other than waiting for others to land and rebasing? 19:43:01 i think if it's couched that interdependent changes which need one another to merge in order on a particular project should be in gerrit as dependent changes, then it's not terribly confusing 19:43:18 dhellmann: you can rebase before it lands; zuul will tell you which changes are ahead in the queue 19:43:22 cool 19:43:28 +1 then :-) 19:43:43 main thing is - it should shorten, sometimes drastically, response time on changes 19:43:59 dhellmann: and if you base your change on them and reapprove, it'll merge; though it will require more reviews for your new patchset 19:44:25 jeblair: that seems logical 19:44:31 mordred: yes, and reduce our biggest cause of gate resets (discounting neutron for the moment) 19:44:51 so i can write up something to send out about it 19:45:02 when should we implement the change? tomorrow; friday? 19:45:11 ttx: ? 19:45:38 * mordred thinks it should go in now - but ttx seems to get unhappy with gate changes around milestones 19:45:42 Friday seems to be a good day for general gate affecting changes as test load is much lower on friday, but if we can get it in earlier before OSCON that will be helpful 19:46:05 mordred: if it can wait tomorrow I prefer 19:46:14 since today is gate rush day 19:46:23 (this might be semi selfish but I think I will be the only core not OSCONing so avoiding breakage is good) 19:46:32 oh, definitely not before tomorrow! 19:46:53 clarkb: you should come anyway, it's portland. 19:47:27 there's no such thing as too much portland, right? 19:47:44 how about i send the email today and we make the change on friday 19:47:51 jeblair: wfm 19:47:55 sounds good 19:48:08 #action jeblair send email announcing zuul change on friday 19:48:15 #topic cgit server status (pleia2) 19:48:22 so, I have this change up: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/36709/ 19:48:30 we'll need dns and the centos server spun up 19:48:38 once this change is in, there are a few more steps: 19:48:53 git daemon set up (clarkb has a WIP change for this that can be modified for centos) 19:49:12 git syncing from gerrit server 19:49:28 jeepyb installed w/ script to create the gitrepos config file from the projects.yaml 19:50:07 I'd like to see this first change go in though so we can get the server going and fix up anything that needs fixing 19:50:12 ++ 19:50:21 ++ 19:50:22 reviewing it this afternoon 19:50:29 I will rereview it after lunch. definitely agree on the small chunks 19:50:29 thanks fungi 19:50:56 that's it :) 19:51:24 excellent progress! 19:52:43 apparently i thought it was ready 4 patchsets ago. :) 19:53:00 pleia2: thanks, and i think those next steps will be very managable. 19:53:09 agreed, we're pretty much there :) 19:53:48 #topic open discussion 19:53:57 are we having a meeting next week? 19:54:25 i finally got around to writing a post about the bootcamp for the openstack blog: http://www.openstack.org/blog/2013/07/infrastructure-bootcamp/ 19:54:31 I am happy to run it if people are interested in having a meeting 19:54:42 pleia2: that's your picture; i asked claire to update it with a proper caption; should be done soon 19:54:58 i will probably not be able to attend the meeting 19:55:07 jeblair: nice! thanks 19:55:35 question on publishing "incubated" docs 19:55:35 pleia2: thank you for taking pictures which i did not bother to do. :) 19:55:44 pleia2: why don't we say there will be a meeting in that if enough people show up I can run it 19:56:01 i too will be unlikely to make it to next week's meeting, i'm afraid 19:56:01 I will not be able to attend the meeting 19:56:11 jeblair: are you coming to oscon? 19:56:15 mordred: yes 19:56:22 cool 19:56:29 also, I'm flying out to Portland Friday afternoon because I'll be attending CLS over the weekend, so leaving here mid-day on Friday 19:56:33 sarob: what's your question? 19:56:37 maybe I should try and do a day trip to portland ... 19:56:45 yeah I'll propose we skip tc/release meetings next week 19:56:45 but I have spent far too much time in a car and in portland recently 19:56:48 training-manuals are being developed 19:56:58 unless someone really wants them 19:57:06 sarob: fixing the meeting time as we speak 19:57:16 during development we need various user groups and others to provide feedback on the content 19:57:17 clarkb: you should. also i'll be in seattle the week of the 19th if we want to get any local people together for in-person meeting/lunch/whatever 19:57:22 it's incubated content in the sense of "we're going to try to make training manuals piecemeal from the manuals" 19:57:28 submit bugs 19:57:31 (week of the 19th of august i mean) 19:57:36 and I wanted sarob to get help with builds 19:57:41 annegentle_:"right 19:57:44 it's not incubated as in incubated projects 19:57:57 * sarob hand quotes 19:58:01 you guys up for helping? I think we'd probably just publish to docs.openstack.org/training/ for starters 19:58:14 eventually we'd need to evaluate "real" training material distribution 19:58:27 that would be really helpful 19:58:52 annegentle_: this sounds like it's just another docbook? build/publish job, which are pretty straightforward...? 19:59:08 jeblair: yep, just I am swamped and asking for help 19:59:28 Security Guide has my head underwater 19:59:41 and I want sarob to learn 19:59:57 learn me oh jedi master 20:00:13 we are about to run out of time. sarob why don't you join us over in #openstack-infra and we can provide you with our documentation and answer questions on the process to add this stuff 20:00:14 annegentle_: we can certainly help sarob work through the process (we're swamped too, so be patient :) 20:00:19 jeblair: cool 20:00:28 clarkb: perfect 20:00:28 will do 20:00:31 thanks all! 20:00:33 thanks 20:00:36 thanks! 20:00:39 #endmeeting