16:04:33 #startmeeting Mistral 16:04:34 Meeting started Mon Jul 11 16:04:33 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rakhmerov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:04:35 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:04:38 The meeting name has been set to 'mistral' 16:04:41 hi 16:04:43 o/ 16:04:56 o/ 16:05:04 o/ 16:05:09 hi 16:05:19 ok, let's start 16:05:23 o/ 16:05:57 #topic Current status (progress, issues, roadblocks, further plans) 16:06:46 my status: worked on KeyCloak authentication (done), finished some work on error handling (done), started working on Actions API 16:06:56 please write a couple of words about your status 16:07:17 My status: Finished work on alternative RPC layer, waiting for review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340450/ 16:07:18 my status : Currently busy with some other stuff. Can not get much time. So I have just reviewed some patches. 16:07:49 ddeja: great work ) 16:07:59 I'll review it tomorrow first thing 16:08:09 still internal stuff :( 16:08:18 Hey 16:08:23 rakhmerov: thanks :) Still I have testing to do 16:08:29 hparekh_: ok, if you want some Mistral work please talk to me 16:08:36 ok 16:08:40 d0ugal: hi ) 16:08:49 d0ugal: any updates? 16:08:58 we're telling our statuses 16:09:27 rakhmerov: yeah, ok sure I will ping you 16:09:33 I've mostly been busy with other work but I did try to work on https://bugs.launchpad.net/mistral/+bug/1597640 16:09:33 Launchpad bug 1597640 in Mistral "with-items does not process ad-hoc action default values" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Dougal Matthews (d0ugal) 16:09:36 until I got stuck :) 16:10:10 d0ugal: ok, I'll try to help you 16:10:20 np 16:10:34 I've been busy with other work, but started looking at how to implement custom-actions-api 16:11:05 rbrady: I started doing some work on it 16:11:06 rakhmerov: Thanks. I am travelling a bit this week and at EuroPython next week so it probably wont be done for n-2 unless somebody else wants to try 16:11:15 I want to discuss it in the next topic 16:11:34 d0ugal: we'll see, ok. Thanks for letting us know 16:11:49 so, there's basically one important topic from my side that I'd like to discuss 16:12:04 #topic Custom Actions API 16:12:43 I started working on it, as of now I created a separate repo and am sketching up python packages and modules that we'll need to implement 16:13:02 it is not shared yet, I need to add it as a new project 16:13:27 after I share it, you can take part of this work 16:13:35 so, question 16:13:39 rakhmerov: ack 16:13:39 Neat, would be very cool to see how much you have done 16:13:51 not really much :) 16:14:02 aww, I hoped it would be finished ;) 16:14:10 just a template of the project with packages and modules according to the spec 16:14:15 :)) 16:14:31 so question: Name of the subproject with Actions API? 16:14:53 initially I thought mistral-common, but it was refused during spec discussion 16:15:04 and somebody just proposed mistral-actions-api 16:15:15 which is ok to me, it's pretty precise etc. 16:15:17 but.. 16:15:17 I guess it's ok 16:15:20 So, just to be clear, this is a Python library that will be used be projects that have custom Mistral actions. 16:15:22 but :) 16:15:36 I think -api is redundant. mistral-actions? 16:15:38 d0ugal: yes, exactly right 16:15:42 but! 16:15:56 we now got one more similar thing that should be also taken care of 16:16:05 rakhmerov: mistral-actions-lib ? 16:16:05 pluggable YAQL functions 16:16:30 so, now we can plug in new YAQL functions in a similar way 16:16:41 mistral-lib? 16:16:47 and they need to have sort of API as well, stable, documented etc. 16:16:56 d0ugal: yes, this is what I would like to propose 16:16:59 mistral-lib 16:17:06 +1 for mistral-lib 16:17:10 mistral-oslo? :D 16:17:16 (joking) 16:17:19 meaning that it's going to be a storage for shared routines 16:17:27 That matches openstackclient: https://github.com/openstack/osc-lib 16:17:28 +1 for mistral-lib 16:17:37 ddeja: well, it'd be too tough :)) 16:17:40 yes 16:17:50 there's also neutron-lib for example 16:17:51 etc. 16:17:57 Yup 16:18:01 I was just finding that one :) 16:18:12 so if no objections, I'll create a new repo tomorrow and make it live in CI etc. 16:18:28 objects, comments? 16:18:32 mistral-lib sounds good +1 16:18:33 objections.. 16:18:36 +1 from me 16:18:39 +1 16:18:52 ok, deal 16:19:13 second question: OK to use mistral-extra to store OpenStack actions? What changes do we need in its structure? 16:19:41 I think it is okay, but I don't think the name is very clear. 16:19:44 it's a little bit early to work on it may be but we could do some preparations here as well 16:19:59 d0ugal: yeah, but it already exists 16:20:06 Indeed, that is why it is okay :-D 16:20:12 and it's supposed to have various kinds of Mistral additions 16:20:15 :) 16:20:22 d0ugal: but I share your concern 16:20:28 that's why I'm discussing it 16:20:50 I guess it is OK. But it have to be stated somewhere in docs that openstack action are stored there 16:21:04 yes, absolutely agree 16:21:05 rakhmerov: I would prefer a more descriptive name like mistral-openstack-actions because "extra" could mean anything 16:21:16 and also there should be mechanism to install just some of them, for exmaple, only nova related actions 16:21:16 Yeah, if it is documented well enough it will be fine 16:21:25 then it would really be mistral 'extras' 16:21:48 ddeja: yeah, I thought about a script similar to how we used to install modules from oslo-incubator 16:21:57 yes 16:22:14 because of that, I'm working on these two patches: 16:22:16 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340346/ 16:22:22 mistral-extra is easy because it is there, we can always rename it later if we really want :) 16:22:31 and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340334/ 16:22:39 but they are not finished yet 16:22:50 cool 16:22:53 the second one is about restructuring the repo itself 16:23:23 the first one removes python jobs from CI (it's very rough yet, I'll have to learn more about it) 16:23:31 so 16:24:04 if you are all ok to use this repo (given that we'll adjust docs well etc.) I'd like to ask you to review these patches and provide your early comments 16:24:22 after this is done, somebody will be able to take over OpenStack actions 16:24:29 not necessarily just one person 16:24:46 * ddeja have saved patches for tommorow reviews 16:25:20 +1 sounds good to me 16:25:23 rakhmerov: no one else will push code at that time, right? 16:25:32 d0ugal: btw, I'm totally ok to create a new repo if we make sure that this idea with mistral-extra doesn't work well for some reason 16:25:46 rakhmerov: +1 16:25:59 +1 16:26:08 mgershenzon: yeah, these are just initial steps, I want to make sure that the ball is rolling 16:26:12 rakhmerov: Do you think it will ever be used for anything else? A generic name could be useful 16:26:16 and everything is set up for parallel work 16:26:30 rakhmerov: but if it will only ever be used for openstack actions, then why not use a more specific name? 16:26:56 d0ugal: I'm not a fan of too precise name for the repo because I imagine that we'll want to create some other actions 16:27:07 like AWS actions or something like that 16:27:13 right 16:27:16 there maybe many types of those actions 16:27:18 mistral-actions maybe? 16:27:31 and it seems like it's a not a good option to create a repo every time 16:27:54 I agree, that was just an example of something with more meaning than "extras" 16:28:00 d0ugal: yeah, I'd prefer mistral-actions over mistral-openstack-actions 16:28:07 yes 16:28:19 but I am totally fine with mistral-extras. 16:28:35 For me it will always be hidden behind packaging and I wont notice most of the time :) 16:28:38 do we have to remove the python jobs from CI? 16:28:52 and btw, after we'll decouple them and move into a separate repo it'll be an easy thing to move them anywhere else, if needed 16:28:53 mgershenzon: I think this does that: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340346/ 16:29:04 d0ugal: yes, right 16:29:48 d0ugal: thanks 16:29:56 rakhmerov: but if you ask me to bikeshed, I can bikeshed :-D 16:30:23 :) 16:30:28 I think everyone is generally okay with mistral-extras, so I'd stick with that for now. 16:30:41 yes, let's do this 16:30:59 if you're ok then let's move to the next topic 16:31:03 +1 16:31:19 ok, thanks 16:31:34 well, I actually don't have anything else from my side 16:31:44 that's all I wanted to bring up 16:32:00 any specific things from you guys? 16:32:20 Nothing from me. 16:32:39 #topic Open Discussion 16:33:03 ok, if there's nothing else then I'd suggest we save time and end the meeting 16:33:04 :) 16:33:18 I would like to ask for reviews :) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340450/ 16:33:31 ddeja: I'll do it 16:33:49 anything else? 16:33:55 counting to 10 and close the meeting 16:33:57 1 16:33:57 2 16:33:57 I know, but if someone else have time I'll apriciate :) 16:33:58 3 16:33:58 Nothing from me 16:34:01 4 16:34:04 5 16:34:04 no 16:34:04 6 16:34:07 7 16:34:09 8 16:34:11 9 16:34:13 10 16:34:15 thanks! 16:34:17 :) 16:34:20 Thanks rakhmerov 16:34:21 bye and have a good week 16:34:26 thanks 16:34:26 #endmeeting