17:00:44 #startmeeting murano 17:00:44 Meeting started Tue Feb 9 17:00:44 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sergmelikyan. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:46 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:50 The meeting name has been set to 'murano' 17:01:02 o/ 17:01:11 o/ 17:01:42 \o/ 17:01:49 o/ 17:01:50 o/ 17:01:52 it's always confusing how to great folks properly on meetings like this :) 17:03:04 \0/ 17:05:16 o/ 17:05:22 o/ 17:05:59 #topic Action Items 17:06:28 \_(%)_/ 17:06:38 #1 sergmelikyan ask community about the potential interest for having a midcycle meetup? 17:07:08 Still in progress because I need to confirm first if Mirantis will be able to host this midcycle meetup 17:07:23 #action sergmelikyan ask community about the potential interest for having a midcycle meetup? 17:07:31 #2 ask kolla folks about murano-glare situation 17:07:34 kzaitsev_mb: ^ 17:07:49 oh boy =) 17:07:58 I forgot about kolla thing completely 17:08:11 thought I only had an AI about GSOC ) 17:08:33 let's please keep it on the list? 17:09:18 sure 17:09:30 #action kzaitsev_mb ask kolla folks about murano-glare plugin situation 17:09:31 #action kzaitsev_mb ask kolla folks about murano-glare situation 17:09:36 hah ) 17:09:44 #undo 17:09:45 Removing item from minutes: 17:09:57 #3 check with GSOC folks if murano need some official registration for GSOC 17:09:57 I won'd undo mine ) 17:10:05 hopefully ) 17:10:06 yep, we need to put something 17:10:11 or cycle will go on and on :) 17:10:31 on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GSoC2016 17:10:35 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GSoC2016 17:11:03 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Internship_ideas 17:11:08 and probably here =) 17:11:31 nice! 17:11:38 kzaitsev_mb: way to go :) 17:11:55 Those pages are going to be used as a place Google folks would look at 17:12:15 when determining whether to accept OpenStack to GSOC this year 17:12:37 I've pinged vkmc — we'll cleanup the Internship Ideas page later this week ) 17:12:51 I've had a couple of ideas of what we can put there 17:13:12 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano-2016-gsoc-ideas 17:13:42 I'm liking 'Murano package validation tool' and 'Searchlight Integration' the most to be honest =) 17:13:50 Nice, slagun I guess this is where you can put all your beautiful ideas about improvements ) 17:13:59 although yaql.js also looks nice ) 17:14:12 I'll keep you folks updated on the situation around GSOC ) 17:14:20 kzaitsev_mb: I like idea of having validation during package import more that package validation tool by itself :) 17:14:33 +many for yaql.js 17:15:27 implementing yaql.js is too complex I guess for Google Summer of Code event kind of stuff 17:15:30 slagun: I'll ping you personally for more ideas to put there =) 17:16:58 let's move on :) 17:17:13 #topic Bashate/shellcheck job for murano-apps(freerunner) 17:17:21 Hey :) 17:17:35 So, I would like explain for a little. 17:17:54 In our murano-apps repo we have a lot of bash scripts. 17:18:26 In ever app we have at least one *sh file 17:18:44 I generally like the idea of having shellcheck jobs there. We would brobably need to disable a couple of rules along the way, but generally — I think it's good 17:19:13 I've seen my share of bad shell code there, that shellcheck would weed out 17:19:23 kzaitsev_mb: I don't think this is worse it, given that we actually don't really have complex scripts 17:19:40 kzaitsev_mb: tho agree about bad code 17:19:43 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/add-shellcheck-jobs 17:19:56 I've filed it a while ago =)) 17:20:07 Wow 17:20:47 Sooo, maybe it's a good time to implement a job for murano-apps?) 17:21:14 freerunner: when I filed the bp — I didn't know how to add a new job =) 17:21:33 and it turned out — there were no ready templates for shellcheck 17:21:41 have the situation changed? =) 17:21:53 I think I even recieved some positive support on the ML =) 17:22:29 from infra folks. 17:22:35 kzaitsev_mb: Khm. Doesn't know about situation with templates.. 17:22:52 so. are there any objections to this idea? =) 17:23:16 My point is that it may be too complex to be worth spending time on that 17:23:59 I like the idea, maybe let's check how complex would be to implement it now? 17:24:11 freerunner: what do you think? 17:24:43 sergmelikyan: Ok, I will research it ;) 17:25:12 #action freerunner will check how complex is to add bashate job on murano-apps 17:25:33 #topic Should we declare a Spec Freeze for Mitaka? 17:26:20 that one is... 17:26:24 complex =) 17:26:41 yep :) 17:27:13 well, we want to follow major guideliness - so we must declare Spec Freeze 17:27:31 A lot of projects have spec freeze date.. 17:27:39 in other hand we don't have much spec in this cycle 17:27:59 Nikolay_St: depending on why - I am not a big fun for following guidelines for guidelines 17:28:45 I'd say that I'm ok with not declaring it 17:28:50 sergmelikyan: me neither 17:28:57 since we 1) didn't declare it in advance 17:29:14 2) as long as we're following the FF after m-3 17:29:25 I do not really feel the need to do it 17:29:57 kzaitsev_mb: +100500 17:32:13 no objections? 17:32:17 Since there are no strong points in favor of declaring — I'd say we should not declate Spec Freeze 17:32:20 nope 17:32:22 #topic Open Discussion 17:32:30 Oh 17:32:34 We can declare spec freeze and immediately open specs for Newton. It is also okay to implement Newton specs in Mitaka 17:32:51 slagun: we can already open specs for newton =) 17:33:25 I've thought of doing so last week 17:33:41 (when I was tinkering with glance's spec repo) 17:33:54 I have something to discuss 17:34:00 this patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/272308/ 17:34:56 I forgot to reach Alexey and ask him why didn't he upload this app to master branch 17:35:38 Nikolay_St: This patch should be a cherry-pick.. 17:35:44 We shouldn't put apps into murano-apps that aren't going to be supported 17:37:05 well, I can easily imagine situation in which app developer will upload app for specific release 17:37:27 slagun: so, it's better not to have an app at all than have it in stable branch? 17:38:15 Nikolay_St: yes, because anything in that repo is on us 17:38:33 Nikolay_St: I don't have a problem with backporting new apps to previous releases, but I don't really like idea of having app per specific release 17:40:16 Nikolay_St: Alexey don't want to propose this app to master? 17:40:21 slagun: ok, really don't have enough might to argue about specific case 17:40:46 sergmelikyan: as I write above I forgot to contact him about it today 17:41:05 I don't like the idea to have apps that nobody is going to support. And if the author do want to support it then have up to data version is master is a first requirement 17:42:57 Today we are really negative ;0 17:44:16 It has to be something with weather =) 17:44:34 :D 17:44:51 slagun: I heard you 17:45:03 I guess we should place this argument somewhere 17:45:55 Nikolay_St: into the review ;) 17:46:10 you'll have a link to logs after the meeting ;) 17:47:00 so you can officially -1 it and give link to this conversation as reason =) 17:47:31 kzaitsev_mb: I mean 'for future use' 17:48:13 so, that's all from my side 17:49:59 I'm planning on working on some sort of document(wiki or docs), that would summarise how we work with backports in murano and in murano-apps =) would remember to include this one there. 17:50:31 kzaitsev_mb: Maybe we can include it into contributing guide? 17:50:50 freerunner: probably =) 17:51:25 Nice :) 17:51:26 won't happen this/next week. but hope to have it before Mitaka anyway. 17:53:06 :D 17:59:35 #endmeeting