15:00:49 #startmeeting oslo 15:00:49 Meeting started Mon Oct 29 15:00:49 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bnemec. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:50 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:53 The meeting name has been set to 'oslo' 15:01:07 courtesy ping for amotoki, amrith, ansmith, bnemec, dansmith, dhellmann, dims 15:01:07 courtesy ping for dougwig, e0ne, electrocucaracha, flaper87, garyk, gcb, haypo 15:01:07 courtesy ping for jd__, johnsom, jungleboyj, kgiusti, kragniz, lhx_, moguimar 15:01:07 courtesy ping for njohnston, raildo, redrobot, sileht, sreshetnyak, stephenfin, stevemar 15:01:08 courtesy ping for therve, thinrichs, toabctl, zhiyan, zxy, zzzeek 15:01:20 o/ 15:01:22 o/ Kind of here. 15:01:27 o/ 15:01:34 bnemec: Congrats on being an IBMer again. 15:01:44 :) 15:01:49 jungleboyj: Yeah... 15:03:20 o/ 15:03:21 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Oslo#Agenda_for_Next_Meeting 15:03:30 #topic Red flags for/from liaisons 15:04:00 Nothing from Cinder. 15:04:49 As I mentioned in my email I was travelling last week, but I don't recall hearing about any major issues. 15:06:12 #topic Releases 15:06:17 o/ 15:06:40 Releases happend last week as normal. Expect more of the same this week. 15:07:22 #topic Action items from last meeting 15:07:32 "bnemec to follow up on oslo.config lightning talk" 15:08:03 I did hear back from Kendall and the appropriate people are aware of our request. 15:08:33 I have another topic related to this for later, but this one is done. 15:08:42 "stephenfin to test removing everything except flake8 from pep8 venv for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/593566" 15:08:52 I believe he did this and commented on the review, so done. 15:09:11 And that was it. 15:09:31 #topic Project Update Video? 15:09:54 Since we didn't get an official project update slot, I was thinking maybe we could jump on a video chat and record our own. 15:10:22 We'd lose the in-person feedback, but at least the information would be out there. 15:11:18 There's quite a bit going on in Oslo right now that I think people would be interested in, so I'd like to have a bit more than an unrecorded lightning talk about it. 15:12:32 Worst case scenario would be that I just record a YouTube video of me yammering for 20 minutes, but ideally it would be good if the people who worked on stuff could talk about it. 15:13:21 o/ 15:14:05 So I just wanted to throw this out there and see if anyone else was interested. If so, please let me know ASAP. 15:14:05 ++ for letting folks talk about their work 15:14:31 I'd ideally like to get this done before Summit so we can socialize it there. 15:15:39 I will send an email to the list asking for topics too. 15:15:46 #action bnemec send email about project update video 15:16:39 #topic Weekly Spotlight? 15:17:09 On a sort of related note, I was thinking it might be good if we highlighted some Oslo bits in a weekly-ish blog or something. 15:17:24 One of the questions that came up in Vancouver was how to know what's available in Oslo. 15:17:33 I'm thinking this might go a long way toward addressing that. 15:17:39 I like that 15:17:58 dhellmann: You were doing something similar for Python, right? 15:18:11 you mean https://pymotw.com/3/? 15:18:23 Yeah 15:18:48 yeah, that's a lot of examples of using stdlib modules 15:19:05 it would be good to have examples of using oslo libs, if that's what you have in mind 15:19:37 Yeah, I was thinking pick a module, talk about what's available in it, show some examples of using it. 15:19:45 ++ 15:20:01 did you have a tool in mind? 15:20:17 No, I'm currently still in the idea stage with this. :-) 15:20:31 ok, well +1 to the idea 15:21:28 Okay, I will try to dig a little deeper if I get a chance. 15:21:35 dhellmann: What did you use for pymotw? 15:21:52 a combination of sphinx and wordpress 15:22:12 wordpress supports scheduling posts in advance, which let me write more than one at a time 15:22:27 the foundation has a wordpress blog already and we might be able to use that 15:23:15 if we add the tutorials to the relevant lib docs, then the blog post just needs to be an introduction with a link 15:23:19 Okay, I can look into that. 15:24:08 michael stills wrote some posts about using privsep that would be good to repurpose, and jaosorior has some recent ones on policy, too 15:24:18 Yeah, that's a good point. A lot of this probably belongs in the docs anyway. 15:24:43 docs for findability and blog for putting it out in front of folks 15:25:50 o/ 15:27:20 #action bnemec to investigate oslomotw 15:27:50 #topic Weekly Wayward Review 15:28:45 The flake8 one from last week is still out there, but hasn't gotten a response yet. 15:28:51 So we'll do the next one. 15:28:53 #link https://review.openstack.org/600266 15:29:34 lbragstad: ^ 15:30:01 * lbragstad lingers 15:30:02 Maybe it should be WIP'd pending the outcome of the Nova POC? 15:30:36 yeah... i saw jaypipes start a thread on that last week 15:31:01 sounds like he's getting close to starting on it? 15:31:31 lbragstad: So do we want to go ahead and merge the oslo.limit patches or wait for that? 15:32:11 i certainly don't want to cause interface churn even if it is marked as experimental 15:32:26 want me to see if i can get jay to weigh in on that approach? 15:32:41 before merging it? 15:32:53 Sure, that would be good. 15:33:04 ok - i'll see if i can get that done today or tomorrow 15:33:15 if i can't we can just merge it and follow up later 15:33:57 Okay, we can circle back next week and if there's been no change we can merge it (assuming another Oslo core is okay with it). 15:34:04 ++ sounds good 15:34:26 #action lbragstad to ping jaypipes about oslo.limit API 15:36:02 Since that doesn't remove any reviews from our queue, I will point out this relatively little one that's been pending for a while: 15:36:02 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/602185/ 15:36:46 It's just removing the doc references to the _LE, _LI, etc. translation functions. 15:38:19 bnemec : should that commit message say "should not be using the log-oriented marker functions"? 15:39:00 dhellmann: The negation is the No at the start of the sentence. 15:39:12 ah, I read that too quickly 15:39:34 lgtm, though I agree with stephenfin's nits 15:39:38 But it might read easier if it got moved to be "should not". 15:40:24 Yeah, I'm not sure how common _C and _P are, and I don't recall the purpose behind them so I kind of deferred all of that. 15:40:37 Maybe it would be a good topic for MOTW. :-) 15:40:41 I think _P was for plural and _C was for count 15:42:56 #topic Open discussion 15:43:08 Anything else before we close? 15:44:18 Welcome back dhellmann. Hope your PTO was relaxing. :-) 15:44:30 yes, very, thanks! 15:46:23 Okay, looks like that's it for this week. Thanks for joining! 15:46:25 #endmeeting