16:00:06 #startmeeting Mistral 16:00:07 Meeting started Mon Mar 31 16:00:06 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rakhmerov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:08 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:10 The meeting name has been set to 'mistral' 16:00:16 hey! 16:00:19 hello everyone 16:00:20 hi 16:00:28 hello 16:02:11 ok, let's begin 16:03:17 hi everyone! 16:03:46 hi 16:03:58 guys, does anyone have a link to the previous meeting minutes? 16:04:14 o/ 16:04:16 I missed it so I don't know if you captured any AI 16:04:17 hi Renat, yet and it's all posted on mistral wiki 16:04:23 http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/mistral/2014/mistral.2014-03-24-16.03.html 16:04:25 :) 16:04:26 ok 16:04:42 o/ 16:04:49 http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/mistral/2014/mistral.2014-03-24-16.03.html 16:04:57 . 16:04:58 http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/mistral/2014/mistral.2014-03-24-16.03.log.html 16:05:03 hi Dmitri 16:05:04 ok 16:05:08 so 16:05:14 sorry I'm late but good to have you back! 16:05:23 #topic Review Action Items 16:05:27 thanks ) 16:05:40 1. (all) review and discuss Kirill's stub on MistralTaskflow prototype https://github.com/enykeev/mistral/pull/1 16:05:49 what's on this one? 16:06:16 dzimine, I saw an email from you today about that but didn't review fully review it yet 16:06:31 it it pretty big :) 16:06:40 may be you guys had a chance to look at it 16:06:43 ok 16:06:54 I did review it in details, and discussed briefly with Kirill, 16:06:55 so this one is in progress I would say, right? 16:07:00 ok, 16:07:09 what's the brief feedback? 16:07:10 i've also taken a look 16:07:14 ok 16:07:24 the next step on this is to summarize the learnings (Kirill had started) and define next steps if any. 16:07:32 it's pretty important thing for us, I would encourage everyone to look at it 16:07:42 I see 16:07:55 +1, and ask Kirill questions (right in the pull request) 16:08:32 I would sum it up as: 1) TaskFlow can be used 16:08:41 really? :) 16:08:46 2) there are few things to make it work inside web servcie 16:09:03 and 3) quite a few features to add to it as a library. 16:09:42 what about that passive model that we have now? 16:09:53 is it possible to do using taskflow now? 16:10:13 passive is one of the things to ask and change. 16:10:21 ok 16:10:29 does Josh agree to do that? 16:10:53 or is it still the thing to discuss with him? 16:10:58 we didn't sum up the results yet (or Kirill might have overnight I haven't seen it) 16:11:35 ok 16:11:41 we began the discussion on the mailing list; now with the prototype we can have it more concrete. 16:11:52 awesome 16:12:00 so what's the plan? 16:12:26 no, there is quite a few things to add, but i want to hear your feedback first to make sure i didn't miss something important on our side 16:12:28 as far as I understand once Kirill finishes that up we need to start a ML discussion and get Josh included? Right 16:12:28 ? 16:13:12 re Taskflow? 0) collect your feedback 1) do the summary 2) open discussion on mailing list 3) potentially ask Joshua help with next steps. 16:13:20 enykeev, I agree, we first need to research what you did carefully, I'll be able to do that tomorrow, at least mostly 16:13:33 ok 16:14:13 so, let me keep this AI then 16:14:20 #action (all) review and discuss Kirill's stub on MistralTaskflow prototype https://github.com/enykeev/mistral/pull/1 16:14:46 2. (dzimine): plan to sum up the learning from the prototype for discussion on TaskFlow integration 16:14:53 For Taskflow, I suggest you to participate in cross-project sessions and discuss Mistral as a part of the whole OpenStack ecosystem. 16:14:58 I think this is pretty much the same 16:15:09 Such sessions will be a part of Atlanta summit. 16:15:34 Sure. I know that Solum might be interested in Mistral too. 16:15:37 gokrokve_, what exact project would you suggest? Except taskflow, of course 16:15:44 projects 16:16:04 Solum, Heat. They expressed their interest on last summit. 16:16:23 how about Climate and Fuel? 16:16:37 Sure. 16:16:46 Fuel action already has it on their Roadmap afaik 16:17:02 That is good. 16:17:45 ok, I know Dina was interested in it but she didn't express enough readiness to use it before it gets incubated ) 16:18:21 so, the 3rd AI 16:18:24 3. (tnurlygayanov) plan to write new tempest tests with execution of the real workflows 16:18:47 tnurlygayanov, did you have a chance to start this work? 16:19:25 however, it might have been challenging I know since not all the changes were merged in 16:20:17 ok, looks like he's not here 16:20:24 I'll keep this AI 16:20:30 #action (tnurlygayanov) plan to write new tempest tests with execution of the real workflows 16:20:46 #topic Current Status 16:21:11 guys, let's tell everyone's current status first 16:21:24 nmakhotkin? 16:22:01 I've finished work with trust 16:22:42 also today do some fix due to changing keystone client 16:23:01 ok 16:23:09 polished the prototype for the whole week, tried to summarize the learnings 16:23:44 ok 16:23:55 enykeev, just to clarify 16:24:11 does the codebase of the prototype correspond to the etherpad? 16:24:24 mistral-taskflo-prototype? 16:24:46 mostly 16:24:51 Timur: we didn't get any response from you guys on ci-murano failures 16:25:01 I mean it would be cool to have a short list of bullet points with what it covers 16:25:07 it'd be easier to review 16:25:26 no transitions and workers 16:25:48 dzimine, yeah, sorry for that. I let Timur know about it, he was busy all day today 16:25:58 ok 16:26:25 dzimine, actually I confused it a little bit 16:26:31 Timur looked at it 16:27:03 the thing is that our scripts changed in the patch that Winson sent, that is a reason why CI fails 16:27:39 so I would suggest we review it first (with -1 from murano-ci) and the if it's ok we'll fix murano-ci accordingly 16:27:45 to get +1 from it 16:28:23 rakhmerov: (sorry for interruption) wouldn't it be awesome to run all the Mistral tests in devstack gate? 16:28:59 yes 16:29:02 it would :) 16:29:18 and you have it in your roadmap? :) 16:29:43 I believe Timur did already start looking at it 16:29:57 yes, it was a part of our plan 16:30:25 rakhmerov: we have basic devstack scripts and tempest tests for murano. we could help to drive the same for mistral 16:30:40 #action Timur, make sure to look at running Mistral tests in devstack gate 16:30:56 ruhe, perfect, thanks 16:31:03 we'll bug you then with that :) 16:31:42 #action review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/81941/ ignoring -1 from murano-ci, change it once we give +1 16:31:47 Timur and Sergey already added some basic Tempest tests for Murano, Timur is now working on more advanced ones 16:32:14 * ... for Mistral ... 16:32:40 ok, my status is really quick: I was absent for a week and a half, today I did a few reviews, had several discussions with team members and processed my inbox 16:33:28 is Winson here? 16:34:34 looks like he is not 16:34:56 I saw there's a patch on review from him 16:35:06 but didn't look at it yet 16:35:42 this patch is pretty interesting btw: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/81941/ 16:36:22 This is the one giving murano-cli -1. I looked at it, it's all right IMO. 16:36:30 ok 16:36:33 cool 16:37:00 so the next topic is 16:37:06 Nicolay was asking for suggestion on this https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83404/ 16:37:23 I looked but didn't have any good advice, Renat may be you can help there. 16:37:41 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83404/2/mistral/engine/data_flow.py 16:38:32 yeah, I'm not quite sure I understand the problem though 16:39:16 first, we resolve all data in service_spec and in task_spec 16:39:38 what do you mean by "resolve all data"? 16:39:50 but we need to ignore service.actions.action.output 16:40:02 and what method _modify_item() is generally for? 16:40:37 I mean replace expressions on real data from context 16:40:45 ok 16:41:35 modify_item just for replacing value-expression on the value-data 16:42:05 ok, I see now 16:42:56 so, correct me if I'm wrong, the problem is that we need to be able to validate those expressions but we can't do that until a corresponding action runs? 16:42:58 right? 16:43:37 yes :) 16:44:02 it feels like we may need to split this functionality 16:44:15 expression evaluation and expression validation 16:44:18 somehow 16:44:46 in this case we could do it easily 16:45:07 probably we should have another method validate in evaluator 16:45:52 #action Find a solution for the question asked in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83404/2/mistral/engine/data_flow.py 16:46:23 ok, let's think on that one offline 16:46:47 #topic PoC scope and readiness 16:47:25 I think we're pretty close (as usually :) ) 16:47:47 Manas was able to finish "repeat" property which is very very good 16:48:01 it was the main roadblock IMO 16:48:15 and Nikolay finished a few important things too 16:48:34 I recall Nicolay was planning to run POC flow against real OpenStack cluster and see how it goes. Did we try this? 16:48:37 trusts and various fixes in Data Flow 16:50:00 I saw a patch from Nikolay: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83737/ 16:50:17 it is said that it has been tested on a real OpenStack 16:50:22 I try to create VM and I did it! 16:50:31 it's pretty simple (just creates a VM) 16:50:33 yeah :) 16:51:01 we need to move on and add more complex scenario with repeater 16:51:34 I think we can finish it this week, it seems to be possible to me 16:52:17 so I would suggest the following plan 16:52:43 1. This week we actively work on getting PoC scenario work 16:53:02 2. Fix whatever prevents it from working correctly 16:53:49 3. At the next community meeting we discuss what we've done and make a conclusion if we're satisfied with it or not (and suggestions on how to improve it) 16:54:12 so next meeting could be completely devoted to PoC scenario 16:54:33 so the week is focus on the changes that makes the POC working end-to-end. OK. 16:54:40 yes 16:55:36 because I'm personally not sure if it's something that we could really make a show of :) 16:55:46 like you Dmitri said before 16:55:59 and we may find better ideas on how to improve it 16:56:20 ok 16:56:31 we have about 3 minutes left 16:56:40 is there anything else guys? 16:57:31 dzimine, I'll carefully review ML discussions with Joshua tomorrow (didn't finish it today) and join the conversation 16:58:14 looks like you've done a good job on summarizing these models and differences between them (lazy engine etc.) 16:59:07 ok, let's shut the meeting down then 16:59:17 thanks to everyone for joining 16:59:22 Thanks! 16:59:25 bye-bye 16:59:27 thank! 16:59:34 #endmeeting