02:00:50 #startmeeting nimble 02:00:51 Meeting started Thu Nov 24 02:00:50 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is zhenguo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 02:00:52 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 02:00:54 The meeting name has been set to 'nimble' 02:00:59 o/ 02:01:14 o/ 02:01:48 shaohe_feng, yuntongjin: are you around? 02:02:24 o/ 02:02:42 hi 02:02:44 o/ 02:02:49 the agenda: 02:02:58 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nimble#Agenda_for_next_meeting 02:03:10 ok, let's jump in 02:03:18 #topic announcements and reminders 02:03:38 Our initial tempest patch has been merged yesterday 02:03:55 and the infras dsvm gate has been seup as well 02:04:14 thanks liusheng 02:04:48 but seems there are something wrong with the devstack setup there according to the logs of my test patch 02:05:04 #link http://logs.openstack.org/20/401820/1/check/gate-nimble-dsvm-tempest-plugin/4464112/logs/ 02:05:22 so currently our gate is broken :( 02:05:28 zhenguo: hi 02:05:33 zhenguo: :( 02:05:35 shaohe_feng: o/ 02:06:37 liusheng: we don't need the devstack gate hook anymore right? 02:07:06 o/ 02:07:11 zhenguo: I don't think it need, I have referenced other project's 02:07:16 RuiChen: hi 02:07:27 sorry, i'm late 02:07:34 RuiChen: np 02:07:42 so we start? 02:07:55 RuiChen: sure, haha 02:08:11 liusheng: yes, so we can cleanup that hook script 02:08:14 please go ahead :-) 02:08:36 zhenguo: which one ? 02:08:50 zhenguo: oh I see 02:08:50 nimble/devstack/gate/ 02:09:15 liusheng: but without that, we can't control which services are enabled 02:09:38 liusheng: I read the currently dsvm logs, seems it setup all services 02:10:12 zhenguo: I will check 02:10:21 liusheng: ok thanks 02:10:44 and we still need to add more tests including UT and functional 02:10:51 especially for api and engine 02:11:27 who are still working on tests now? 02:12:06 we could have a wiki/list to track test-case task 02:12:51 or have a blueprint to track 02:12:59 yuntongjin: seems like there will be many test cases 02:13:12 yuntong: I'm afraid it's hard to list all :( 02:13:32 can list by resource like instance/type.... 02:14:02 yuntongjin: yes, we already list by place them into different dir now 02:14:33 k, that works 02:14:35 zhenguo: about the tempest, I think it is easy to add tests for instance_type, but for instance, I am not sure... 02:14:59 liusheng: yes, recently I merged the refactor patch 02:15:11 liusheng: It will affect all instances related tests 02:15:20 zhenguo: e.g. if we add test for instance creation, it is ok to create an instance from nimble-api to ironic ? 02:15:28 zhenguo: Ok 02:16:02 liusheng: I think it's ok, because our current devstack setup can support that 02:16:21 zhenguo: ok, let's try :) 02:16:32 liusheng: you can just add tests for creating with the parameters we create in devstack by default 02:16:55 zhenguo: ok, thanks 02:17:26 ok, so next, seems like we still lack the basic abilities of powering instance in our CLI 02:18:10 RuiChen, shihanzhang: do we have a plan for that ? 02:18:57 i will do it next week 02:19:12 shihanzhang: ok, many thanks :) 02:19:30 the contribution report: 02:19:39 #link http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/nimble/90 02:20:19 thanks all for that :P 02:20:56 not much of announcement, anyone else have a thing here? 02:21:32 ok 02:21:41 #topic Ocata feature priorities 02:21:54 #link https://trello.com/b/FBsIvUTp/ironic-nimble-plan 02:22:04 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nimble 02:22:15 really so many things to do 02:22:55 but seems we only have about 3 developers full time dedicated to nimble now, which is less than we startup :( 02:23:25 zhenguo: :( 02:24:02 zhenguo: attract new comers in Bug Smash :) 02:24:19 liusheng: I hope so, hah 02:24:55 or maybe we can add some simple bug on launchpad to attract new developers? 02:25:37 but we are not a offical project, seems nobody want to join to a new startup project :( 02:26:16 zhenguo: new startup project can make them easy to become core members, hah 02:26:28 liusheng: hah, that' true 02:27:16 maybe we can announce a new core member in mailing list, that seems the best way to attract new developers, lol 02:28:21 zhenguo: which day we want to announce our project to public ? 02:28:35 liusheng: I would to do that by this week 02:28:46 do you still have any concerns about that 02:28:49 ？ 02:30:02 zhenguo: no, it is cool, I will check the tempest job and fix it today 02:30:17 liusheng: thanks a lot? 02:30:37 shaohe_feng: do you still have some concerns? 02:31:46 yuntongjin, RuiChen: wdyt? 02:32:38 ok 02:32:53 next week I plan to finish az and quota, 02:33:21 and do you think which is the highest priority thing we need to do? 02:33:46 zhenguo: i think it's the announcement 02:34:07 yuntongjin: ok 02:34:47 come on, please say something here, @everyone 02:35:17 zhenguo: may we can share some docs about Nimble besides the Wiki, but I am not sure we have 02:35:18 i was think to add network device in nimble as new resource 02:35:38 zhenguo: when announcing the project 02:35:39 liusheng: we only have a dev-quickstart doc currently 02:36:07 yuntongjin: yes, I also want to add that 02:36:23 great, will file a BP for that 02:36:50 yuntongjin: ok, thanks, and maybe we need to add a specs, and discuss there, wdyt? 02:37:48 as we support to specify port type when requesting to create a new instance, but no way to scheduling a node with that type of network interfaces 02:38:29 do we have a BP for this task? 02:38:30 it's unaccepatable, and we also want to support portgroup in future, which also depends on the network resources 02:38:35 yuntongjin: no 02:39:04 yuntongjin: can you help to add a bp for that, or maybe also draft a specs :) 02:39:19 will do 02:39:32 yuntong: thanks very much! 02:39:49 ok, what's next 02:39:57 #topic open discussion 02:40:00 zhen 02:40:06 luyao: hi 02:40:36 luyao: I remember you have been investigating taskflow this week, right? 02:41:20 yes,I have something to do last week 02:41:56 luyao: how about that? could we introduce flow work in our create method 02:42:03 I want add rollback mechanism for creating intsance this week 02:42:16 luyao: awsome! 02:42:36 luyao: I have refactored some codes, please update you dev repo to see 02:42:38 I 'am not sure,I need trying :) 02:42:45 OK 02:42:58 luyao: ok, thanks 02:43:22 hi all, do you have other things want to discuss here? 02:43:58 luyao: add a BP for your task so that everyone can contribute 02:44:21 yuntongjin: oh yes, thanks for remindering that! 02:44:52 kevinz: are you around? 02:45:03 yuntongjin: OK 02:45:10 next step, after annoucement, let's keep focus on killer feature 02:45:20 yuntongjin: sure 02:45:48 yuntongjin: do you think it's easy for us to add instance transfer ability? 02:46:10 like ironic did? 02:46:14 zhenguo: Hi zhenguo I'm here just now :D 02:46:29 kevinz: oh, hah 02:46:42 yuntongjing: like cinder volume 02:46:54 k, i see 02:47:02 kevinz: do you have some suggestion for us, like do we need to add more docs? 02:47:09 transfer b/w tenenats? 02:47:16 yuntongjin: yes 02:48:00 kevinz: as we want to announce the project in mainling list this week, not sure if we are ready 02:48:01 try file a BP to discuss, i prefer it's a low P task 02:48:18 yuntongjin: yes 02:48:54 zhenguo: Wow cool, push nimble to big-tent? 02:49:25 kevinz: no, not ready for big-tent, just announce in the mailing list :P 02:49:32 should pay more focus on feature that related HW 02:49:54 yuntongjin: we are open source, lol 02:49:56 kevinz: that's the plan 02:50:40 HW = Hardware 8-) 02:51:04 yuntongjin: oh, sorry, I misunderstood, lol 02:51:19 yuntongjin: I think it means huawei, hah 02:51:31 my bat 02:51:44 my bad 02:51:55 yuntongjin: hah 02:52:48 oh, any other things want to discuss here? 02:53:12 not much from here 02:53:27 good luck to nimble :D 02:53:35 kevinz: thanks 02:54:11 do you think notifications should be a high priority thing for us now? 02:54:33 notifications of nimble, or leveraing ironic's notifications 02:55:03 i don't think so 02:55:04 zhenguo: I'm back 02:55:15 shaohe_feng: o/ 02:55:28 yuntongjin: ok, maybe later 02:55:30 focus on hardware feature 02:56:12 agree with yuntongjin, notification should not be high 02:56:48 RuiChen: do we have a priority list? 02:56:55 RuiChen, yuntongjin: ok, but we need to consider charging in future 02:57:20 shaohe_feng: not cureently 02:57:42 zhenguo: do we need spec for the BP? 02:58:02 shaohe_feng: for new bp, I think we can try to use specs 02:58:21 shaohe_feng: but for some thing easy to implement seems not needed 02:58:57 yes, and we can discuss details in the comments 02:59:39 yes, and we need to file bugs for patches 02:59:56 should follow the offical way 03:00:13 zhenguo agree, but we should give a exact describe in blueprint 03:00:56 RuiChen: seems not, just some summarize it's enough IMO 03:01:05 i means if we don't parpere a spec for BP 03:01:26 RuiChen: oh, yes, it's needed for those bps 03:01:37 oh, seems time's up 03:01:51 thanks everyone, we can continue to discuss in our channel 03:02:04 #endmeeting