16:00:12 <markvoelker> #startmeeting interopwg
16:00:13 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Apr 19 16:00:12 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is markvoelker. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:15 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:17 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'interopwg'
16:00:23 <markvoelker> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreRoble.20 Today's agenda
16:00:45 <markvoelker> Hi folks, who's around today?
16:01:10 <mguiney> hello!
16:01:35 * markvoelker notes that eglute is away today and hogepodge is traveling
16:02:14 <markvoelker> Hmm...actually we may have rather a lot of folks away today from the looks of it
16:02:57 <mguiney> ahhhh for dockercon, yes?
16:03:12 <markvoelker> Yep, and a few folks on unrelated trips too
16:03:19 <markvoelker> I think we may actually be short of quorum today
16:03:42 * mguiney nods
16:03:53 <markvoelker> mguiney: while I have you here, how's the Glance stuff going?  I saw Brian's question on the review and will answer shortly
16:04:02 <markvoelker> I'm still picking through the scoring myself, but I'll get that done too. =)
16:04:29 <zhipeng_> o/
16:04:40 <zhipeng_> sorry for missing two previous comments
16:04:45 <zhipeng_> meetings...
16:05:12 <markvoelker> zhipeng_: believe me, I can sympathize
16:05:15 <catherineD> o/
16:05:17 <markvoelker> =)
16:05:25 <zhipeng_> :)
16:05:27 <mguiney> the Glance stuff is going failry well, i removed the capability that was not delivered in ocata
16:05:28 <Rockyg> o/
16:05:39 <mguiney> o/
16:05:43 <mguiney> hello all!
16:06:35 <hogepodge> o/
16:06:53 <zhipeng_> markvoelker do you guys still need the input from Nova ? I know I'm behind schedule on this
16:06:59 <Rockyg> markvoelker, did you see the tc logs from yesterday?  Glance may be in trouble
16:06:59 <hogepodge> I'm at a booth at Docker Con in Austin, so my reactions may be slow if I'm pulled away.
16:07:12 <markvoelker> Ok, looks like we have enough folks here to be useful after all. =)
16:07:13 <hogepodge> zhipeng_: I sent a patch up for Nova
16:07:20 <Rockyg> hogepodge, the booth bunny!
16:07:38 <zhipeng_> hogepodge will check it out ! :)
16:07:54 <zhipeng_> So let me provide the feedback anyways
16:08:01 <markvoelker> Ok, let's just walk through the agenda then.
16:08:06 <markvoelker> #topic 2017.08
16:08:29 <markvoelker> We have a number of patches up and a few outstanding.  It's that time again where we really need to start finishing these up.
16:08:55 <markvoelker> (I for one am behind due to a bout with viruses this past week)
16:09:45 <markvoelker> So let's take a quick walk through the projects here and just do a quick check to see if there are specific points folks want to discuss now
16:10:14 <markvoelker> first up, Nova
16:10:38 <markvoelker> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456753/ Nova scoring patch
16:11:09 <zhipeng_> For Nova
16:11:12 <markvoelker> Hmm, feels like we discussed suspend/resume at some point in the past....
16:11:16 <zhipeng_> again sorry for the late feedback
16:11:25 <hogepodge> nova still needs a bit of work, but sean has signed off on Cinder so we should be looking at touchup reviews.
16:11:26 <zhipeng_> yes especially on that
16:11:33 <markvoelker> Oh, right...we did last time. =p  I see now.
16:11:44 <zhipeng_> Matt told me that suspend/resume should not be a priority
16:11:50 <zhipeng_> in his opinion
16:12:05 <zhipeng_> because not all in-tree drivers support it
16:12:19 <zhipeng_> he commented last time when shemail added it in 2017.01
16:12:20 <hogepodge> yeah, that's right. can make a note of it.
16:12:25 <zhipeng_> but was ignored somehow
16:12:30 <markvoelker> Yeah, that showed up last time around too
16:12:34 <hogepodge> In that patch I also restored all of the previous scoring so it could be updated
16:12:37 <markvoelker> (see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385781/)
16:12:44 <zhipeng_> and flavor listing he does recommend :)
16:13:11 <zhipeng_> AZs he does not have a preference, and he suggest us to ask feedback from UC on that
16:13:14 <zhipeng_> if we got time
16:13:25 <hogepodge> can we make a note of these in the review again?
16:13:29 <zhipeng_> he thinks AZs are common practices
16:13:34 <zhipeng_> sure no problem
16:13:39 <zhipeng_> I will add in review
16:13:48 <hogepodge> zhipeng_: let me know if you want to take over on the patch
16:14:21 <zhipeng_> I think I could start with reviewing it since I'm still learning the process :)
16:14:27 <markvoelker> zhipeng_: I think I agree with listing AZ's.  My recollection is there's a fair amount of client/tool support for that too, but I'd have to go look.
16:14:43 <zhipeng_> markvoelker I agree
16:14:46 <hogepodge> yeah, he is annoyed that AZs are in cinder but not in nova
16:15:02 <hogepodge> (annoyed is the wrong word... surprised?)
16:15:14 <zhipeng_> the last suggestion I got from Matt is about the boot from volume
16:15:25 <zhipeng_> if we have tempest test cases for that
16:15:27 <zhipeng_> we could add it
16:16:16 <markvoelker> zhipeng_: worth a look, but we need to move quickly to investigate.  We're low on time.
16:16:45 <zhipeng_> I will take a quick study on that and provide a feedback in the code review
16:16:46 <markvoelker> I'd say if someone can tackle that this week, great, otherwise maybe just tack a note onto the scoring sheet so we can investigate next time
16:17:10 <zhipeng_> I will try to do it this week
16:17:24 <zhipeng_> on one more thing, microversions
16:17:34 <zhipeng_> i remember we discussed it about three weeks ago
16:17:43 <zhipeng_> but can't remember the conclusions ...
16:18:11 <zhipeng_> maybe we could investigate microversions next time ?
16:19:31 <Rockyg> ++
16:19:41 <markvoelker> zhipeng_: It's a broad topic, you'll have to remind of the context. =)  Was this about defining a minimum microversion (which we probably don't want and is sort of implicit by the supported releases anyway)?  Or about a feature exposed by a certain microvserion?  Or...?
16:20:39 <zhipeng_> le tme try to find the quote from Matt
16:21:35 <zhipeng_> Anything new in Nova is on a microversion > 2.1.
16:21:51 <zhipeng_> so i think it is about a minimum microversion
16:22:28 <markvoelker> Ok.  So each Guideline we publish contains a list of supported releases, and to be included a capability must be supported by all of them.
16:22:59 <markvoelker> That sort of implies that if a feature became available as a microversion in, say, Ocata, it's probably not a good candidate since the guideline covers earlier releases too
16:22:59 <Rockyg> I think shade only assumes 2.0 because....
16:23:16 <zhipeng_> okey understood :)
16:23:28 <zhipeng_> well that is all I got from NOva ptl
16:23:35 <zhipeng_> on defcore 2017.08
16:23:40 <markvoelker> Ok, anything else we need to talk about re: nova scoring?
16:23:51 <Rockyg> but at this point, supported versions have microversions
16:24:36 <Rockyg> but feature reflected in microversion might not be popular yet.
16:24:57 <markvoelker> Rockyg: sure, and shade is just one client to consider.
16:25:11 <markvoelker> Ok, let's move on to Cinder
16:25:46 <markvoelker> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456440/ Cinder scoring
16:25:49 <Rockyg> might need to make sure the minimum features of the release are reflected in user survey.  so we can ge that info
16:26:33 <markvoelker> I think the only real change here was moving upload to required from advisory
16:27:10 <markvoelker> And there were also some changes in individual scores due to v2 -> v3 transition
16:27:15 <catherineD> For interop, the important ishould be the core features regardless of microversion support
16:27:36 <markvoelker> Seems pretty straightfoward
16:27:49 <markvoelker> Anything to discuss here?
16:28:59 <markvoelker> Ok, moving on to Glance then
16:29:02 <hogepodge> not really, just comments on anything i missed so I can clean it up
16:29:16 <markvoelker> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/451167/ Glance scoring patch
16:29:36 <mguiney> i actually had one quick question about this
16:30:03 <markvoelker> mguiney: sure
16:30:41 <mguiney> ah, it looks like you already got around to answering it in the patch comments
16:31:09 <markvoelker> mguiney: =)  Yeah, dropped that in while we were waiting for quorum.
16:31:36 <mguiney> ok, cool! well that answers my question, I suppose
16:31:44 * markvoelker figures there's a RAFT joke about acknoledged writes in there somewhere, but avoids it
16:31:55 <mguiney> heh
16:32:01 <markvoelker> Ok, anything else on Glance folks?
16:32:18 <mguiney> well if that is something that does not require adjustment, I think the Glance scoring may be A-Ok
16:32:25 <mguiney> cool :)
16:32:32 <Rockyg> ++
16:33:34 <markvoelker> Allright then: neutron
16:34:04 <markvoelker> #link https://media.giphy.com/media/109LQSvunrcFNe/giphy.gif Neutron scoring
16:34:32 <markvoelker> Unfortuantely I caught a nasty bug this week and haven't been able to clear my backlog of half-finished stuff. =(
16:35:05 <hogepodge> :-(
16:35:32 <markvoelker> Fortunately https://media.giphy.com/media/1cv7Gwf0Utdeg/giphy.gif so should be able to do it shortly.  I have two patches started, one for mainline Neutron and one for LBaaS which will be a little more tricky.
16:35:48 <hogepodge> I wish I could help, but I'm tied up all this week with projects in Austin.
16:36:49 <markvoelker> hogepodge: Thanks.  It's been "one of those weeks".  Just glad I wasn't traveling when I caught it this time. =p
16:37:04 <markvoelker> Anyhow, I expect to finish that tomorrow
16:37:53 <Rockyg> get better!
16:38:24 <markvoelker> On to Swift
16:38:29 <markvoelker> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453453/ Swift scoring
16:38:57 <markvoelker> THis was a minor change in scoring with no new capabilities
16:39:42 <markvoelker> Pretty uncontentious I think. =)
16:40:02 <markvoelker> So unless there's something folks think was ommitted that needs to be there, let's skip on to Keystone
16:40:47 <markvoelker> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/456774/ Keystone scoring
16:41:13 <markvoelker> Again, a pretty light change here...just a scoring adjustment
16:41:54 <markvoelker> We did have a note about writing a test for standardization in catalog keys...hogepodge I think you were on that, but assuming it'll keep for next time?
16:42:12 <hogepodge> I need to write that test
16:42:21 <markvoelker> I may suggest luzc include a note about it in the sheet just to remind us.
16:42:32 <hogepodge> I have notes on it, and could possibly get something in next week
16:42:54 <hogepodge> we could add a placeholder for advisory, and then fill in for the next cycle on testing
16:43:10 <markvoelker> Ok, we're pretty low on time so if you can do it, great, if not we'll note it.
16:43:11 <hogepodge> let me see if I can knock it out on Monday or Tuesday
16:43:31 <Rockyg> that would be great
16:43:34 <markvoelker> 'k thanks
16:43:42 <markvoelker> Ok, anything else on scoring?
16:44:21 <markvoelker> #topic Name change
16:44:38 <markvoelker> I pinged infra about the unreviewed name change patch
16:44:56 <markvoelker> Basically they're aware of it and just waiting to round up a few other things for a maintenance window
16:45:12 <markvoelker> In short, sounds like there's nothing we need to do other than hurry up and wait. =)
16:45:23 <markvoelker> (which is good news)
16:45:56 <markvoelker> Once that's done I think we'll be mostly complete
16:46:13 <markvoelker> Anything else on the name change this week?
16:46:59 <markvoelker> #topic Summit
16:47:21 <markvoelker> We have an etherpad to solicit topics here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/InteropWGBostonSummit
16:47:34 <markvoelker> PLease add yours.  I'll start dumping in a few things from backlog shortly
16:47:47 <hogepodge> There is a forum session for the program expansion too, so keep that in mind for topic planning
16:47:58 <markvoelker> ++
16:48:09 * markvoelker was just about to mention that
16:48:14 <Rockyg> cool.  I was gonna add that....
16:48:42 * markvoelker is glad to note that the telepathy thing appears to be working fine despite us being all over the map this week
16:48:57 <Rockyg> put in the place holder
16:49:21 <markvoelker> There are also some other interop-related sessions in this week's etherpad for your scheduling enjoyment
16:49:50 <markvoelker> Anything else on Summit?
16:50:50 <hogepodge> kind of related
16:50:57 <hogepodge> but also a different topic
16:50:59 <markvoelker> hogepodge: go for it
16:51:01 <hogepodge> v2.0 schema
16:51:15 <Rockyg> I'll get some slides together and we can talk about the scoring talk, markvoelker
16:51:23 <hogepodge> catherineD: was saying she needs something approximating a final version soon
16:51:48 <catherineD> hogepodge: thx for mentioning that
16:52:00 <markvoelker> hogepodge: Ok, has refstack looked into the existing patch?
16:52:09 <catherineD> we have a summit session tiltled " Does my app or tool work on OpenStack Cloud X? Use RefStack to find out ...  "
16:52:19 <catherineD> https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/global-search?t=refstack
16:52:50 <catherineD> that was target to discuss the work around vertical and program certification usong schema 2.0 and RefStack ...
16:53:05 <markvoelker> Basically I think the simplification I was investigating boils down to "we may be able to remove the components layer" but otherwise it's pretty similar
16:53:22 <catherineD> without schema 2.0 being merged this talk is not practical
16:53:44 <zhipeng_> and re schema 2.0, will Heat and Trove and others be one of the "addon" features for 2017.08 guideline ?
16:54:14 <catherineD> zhipeng_: to me that is the vertial thoughts with schema 2.0
16:54:34 <catherineD> markvoelker: hogepodge: am I close to correct to say so? :-)
16:55:18 <zhipeng_> catherineD yes it is, like do we have a timeline to look at for the vertical or the addons ?
16:55:30 <catherineD> an ther usage with schema 2.0 and RefStack is OPNFV
16:55:46 <markvoelker> Well, there have been a few discussions about those...Heat is viewed by many as a potential addition to the existing Powered program.  Trove was a candiate for add-on or a new component, but Tesora's acquisition kinda removed some of the impetus for that
16:56:07 <markvoelker> NFV is a target for a vertical program, yes
16:56:40 <markvoelker> Trove might yet be a good add-on candidate.  THe other was Designate IIRC.
16:56:47 <Rockyg> markvoelker, we should ask amrith about trove.  Hes talking about putting it in maintenance mode
16:57:04 <catherineD> The OPNFV certification team is thinking about working with us to reuse the tool-chain that we already have
16:57:22 * markvoelker issues 3-minute warning
16:57:50 <catherineD> when we submited  the session we were thiinking of these use case ... but I think we are ahead of our time with where we are now
16:57:59 <hogepodge> yes, add ons for things like heat ant trove and designate
16:58:08 <zhipeng_> so do we have a timeline for these things to happen ? :) Are we looking at 2017.08 or later ones ?
16:58:20 <catherineD> that is my question ...
16:58:34 <catherineD> not sure whether cancel the session is an option ..
16:58:42 <catherineD> I mean the speaker session
16:59:21 <Rockyg> catherineD, the foudation usually has alternative sessions for most tracks in case there's an issue with a chosen one
16:59:35 <markvoelker> Probably later ones at this point, but we had planned to put together at least a skeleton to show to the BoD
17:00:03 <markvoelker> Ok, looks like we're out of time--switch over to #openstack-interop?
17:00:12 <markvoelker> #endmeeting