19:00:37 <catherineD> #startmeeting refstack
19:00:40 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Mar 14 19:00:37 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is catherineD. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:00:41 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
19:00:44 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'refstack'
19:01:50 <pvaneck> o/
19:01:57 <mguiney> hello all!
19:02:04 <catherineD> hello
19:02:16 <catherineD> #link meeting agenda and notes,  https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/refstack-meeting-17-03-14
19:03:01 <catherineD> Let's start
19:03:30 <catherineD> how about we start with the second topic in the agenda
19:03:36 <catherineD> #topic Update existing certified data with the verified flag
19:03:51 <catherineD> mguiney: any update?
19:04:20 <mguiney> yes! I have been doing a bit more rigorous testing, and it is looking good thus far.
19:04:54 <catherineD> great .. is it time to push a patch for us to test too?
19:05:16 <mguiney> I should be able to push a patch within a day or so, I want to try a few more edge cases
19:05:53 <mguiney> but as I said, I plan on hopefull pushing that very shortly
19:06:08 <catherineD> mguiney: np take your time ...
19:06:21 <sslypushenko_> o/
19:06:32 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: hello ..
19:06:52 <catherineD> agenda https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/refstack-meeting-17-03-14
19:06:53 <mguiney> out of curiosity, which would be the preferred directory to push this in/from?
19:07:03 <luzC> o/
19:07:41 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: luzC: we are on the second topic  ... will got back to topic 1 after this
19:08:15 <catherineD> mguiney: I think the tools directory should be a good place ..
19:08:23 <mguiney> excellent. can do
19:08:36 <catherineD> thx
19:08:51 <catherineD> anything else on this topic?
19:09:39 <mguiney> chris has had me working on a secondary version of this script that uses a database to store results, but that, i think, is a farther out goal/objective
19:10:36 <mguiney> so other than that, no more updates that i am aware of
19:11:31 <catherineD> mguiney: yea let's complete this  first ...  Thanks for teltting us know we can talk about Chris's request (I believe is to store the subunit data) later
19:11:43 <catherineD> moving on ..
19:11:46 <mguiney> yes, of course
19:11:57 <catherineD> #topic Displaying RefStack documentation
19:12:48 <mguiney> I pushed a new version of the spec, hopefully this one works a little better than the last
19:12:54 <catherineD> mguiney: thx for update the patch ...https://review.openstack.org/#/c/437175/
19:14:21 <catherineD> luzC: had put a comment on the alternative section ... I think it would be nice to add these on the spec
19:14:33 <sslypushenko_> I just wonder why we can't host docs on docs.openstack.org ?
19:14:45 <sslypushenko_> like all other projects do
19:15:10 <mguiney> I believe that I did add that to patch set 5
19:15:28 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: yea that is the question we want to discuss here too ...
19:15:38 <sslypushenko_> yeap... but it is in alternatives
19:16:18 <sslypushenko_> in my point on view it should be the main option
19:16:20 <catherineD> mguiney: yes you did ... sorry I missed that
19:16:31 <mguiney> no sweat!
19:17:38 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: yea .. what would be reason why we want  to host our doc on the RefStack website?
19:18:12 <catherineD> One of the reason comes to my mind is ... the duration of doc refreshing ...
19:18:23 <sslypushenko_> catherineD I have the same in my mind
19:18:56 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  refreshing is not really a problem
19:18:57 <catherineD> if we host the doc on our site , we can refresh the doc on our own schedule ...
19:19:27 <catherineD> other than that I could not think of other reason why we should host on our site
19:19:29 <sslypushenko_> I'd say that maintaining can take a bit more efforts
19:20:04 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: exactly, that is my concern .. especially we are creating one-off tools ourself
19:20:09 <sslypushenko_> but docs.openstack.org is much appropriate hosting for docs
19:20:48 <sslypushenko_> I mean technical side of issue
19:21:12 <luzC> sslypushenko_ I agree I think we should use docs.openstack.org, of course we need to investigate further about where refstack fit in their model (since it is not a service) and what are the requirements of docs teams, not sure if a liaison is required
19:21:17 <catherineD> yea I keep thinking of that myself ... how about pvaneck: luzC: mguiney:  ...what is your thoughts about hosting on the doc site or RefStack site?
19:21:20 <mguiney> would it make sense to maybe link them, at the bottom of the canon openstack docs site, to a more dynamic site we maintain ourselves?
19:21:41 <mguiney> basically just the one that currently exists
19:21:54 <hogepodge> o/
19:22:25 <mguiney> that way there would be a way to access docs that might be slightly more up to date, but you could also access the base version where you can find the rest of the docs?
19:22:34 <mguiney> \o
19:22:35 <catherineD> Hi hogepodge:  we are discussing whether RefStack doc should be hosted on the doc or RefStack sites
19:22:43 <hogepodge> Sorry for coming into this late
19:22:54 <hogepodge> I think having docs directly on refstack is a good user experience.
19:23:00 <catherineD> hogepodge: agenda https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/refstack-meeting-17-03-14
19:23:06 * mguiney nods
19:23:14 <mguiney> that is a good point, as well
19:23:15 <hogepodge> I also think that publishing in docs.openstack is also standard, so do both?
19:23:35 <sslypushenko_> hogepodge:  hi!
19:23:42 <hogepodge> I want to have a good experience for vendors testing, because documentation on how to do things is the biggest stumbling block for them.
19:23:54 <sslypushenko_> hogepodge:  I don't think that we really need to have both
19:23:55 <hogepodge> just my $0.02
19:24:17 <catherineD> hogepodge: we found that hosting on the RefStack site we will need additional code to because the html created by sphinx have a different look and feel
19:24:17 <hogepodge> I'd vote to get it on refstack.oo.org then
19:24:53 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  basically it is only half of the issue
19:25:13 <catherineD> that would end up with code development and maintenant of one-off code
19:25:14 <mguiney> another consideration to keep in mind re: having both is that we would have to make it very clear which of the two is considered the authoritative source
19:25:23 <sslypushenko_> refstack is not properly configured to serve static content
19:25:42 <mguiney> especially if one were updated more frequently than the other
19:27:01 <hogepodge> I guess the main thing is we get users to the right place, so in the end it's a matter of team preference to me
19:27:15 <hogepodge> As long as users are being taken care of
19:28:09 <catherineD> hogepodge: we can put a link on the RefStack site ask user to og to the doc site
19:28:18 <sslypushenko_> hogepodge:  BTW, what pros do you have for hosting docs directly on refstack.os.org, instead of having links to docs.openstack.org ?
19:28:25 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: true we do not serve static content
19:29:24 <sslypushenko_> I guess having docs on docs.openstack.org can bring users to refstack site
19:30:18 <sslypushenko_> which we will miss if docs serves by refstack directly
19:30:39 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: +1
19:31:21 * mguiney nods
19:32:02 <mguiney> do you think that the rate of docs update might be an issue, in that case?
19:33:05 <catherineD> Now that we are considering hosting RefStack doc at the doc site ... I can contact the doc team to learn more about refresh cycle
19:34:00 <catherineD> when I talked with Anne Gentle last time ... we were not thinking of hosting at the doc site
19:35:30 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  docs team has petty flexible refresh cycle
19:36:14 <catherineD> annegentl: ping
19:36:23 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: that is good to know ...
19:36:32 <sslypushenko_> I guess some parts of docs refreshes on each commit
19:36:49 <catherineD> How about let me contact the doc team and give an update next week?
19:37:15 <sslypushenko_> I guess it will good to have this discussion on docs mailing list
19:37:33 <luzC> catherineD +1
19:37:38 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: will do
19:37:42 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  +1
19:37:55 <catherineD> ok moving on ...
19:38:31 <catherineD> we already discuss topic 2 ... mguiney: will push a patch later ...
19:39:20 <catherineD> mguiney: do you have anything else to add or we can move on ..
19:39:49 <mguiney> nope! i'll get right on that
19:39:55 <catherineD> #topic RefStack webstite updated on schedule on Mar 10, 2017
19:40:00 <catherineD> mguiney: thx
19:40:32 <catherineD> we did the update to the site ... it is now having the RefStack mascot and the new OpenStack logo
19:40:55 <catherineD> #topic Pending reviews
19:41:09 <mguiney> \o/
19:41:15 <catherineD> #link     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443316/  (  Enable py35 functional test env )
19:41:33 <catherineD> luzC: sslypushenko_: thx for review the patch
19:41:58 <catherineD> pvaneck: I guess we need an other update ..
19:42:33 <pvaneck> sure
19:42:37 <catherineD> thx
19:42:44 <catherineD> #link     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/390881/  (  Change doc references from DefCore to Interop Working Group  )
19:43:05 <catherineD> luzC: we still waiting on Interop_WG for this one ?
19:43:09 <luzC> yes
19:43:27 <catherineD> #link     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/437175/ (   updated spec to reflect discussion from 2/28/17 refstack meeting  )
19:43:56 <catherineD> this is the doc spec ... let wait for next week after we discuss with the doc team
19:44:08 <luzC> catherineD +1
19:44:23 <catherineD> #link     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/430701/ (  Add scripts for running refstack-client in docker )
19:44:43 <sslypushenko_> I'll review Anne's comment
19:44:57 <sslypushenko_> and provide a new patch
19:45:12 <catherineD> sslypushenko_:  I still see some error when testing the latest version ...
19:45:20 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: thx
19:46:25 <catherineD> moving on ..
19:46:31 <catherineD> #topic Open discussion
19:47:08 <catherineD> anything else for  today ?
19:47:39 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  that error on script looks like docker setup issue
19:48:17 <sslypushenko_> I'll provide some details in comments to the patch
19:48:22 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: I thought the error is from the container ?
19:48:36 <catherineD> sslypushenko_: OK thx ... I will investigate some more ...
19:48:55 <catherineD> but seems like the container image is missing some update ...
19:49:11 <catherineD> but I will take a closer look
19:49:18 <sslypushenko_> yeap, but it looks like dns is not properly works in your docker container
19:49:34 <sslypushenko_> that is happens with docker some times =)
19:50:19 <catherineD> sslypushenko_:  thx for pointing to dns I will take a look
19:51:25 <catherineD> pls add  comments ... it may help to shorten my investigation time :-)
19:51:27 <sslypushenko_> catherineD:  np) I have faced with similar issues lots of time)
19:51:34 <sslypushenko_> sure will do)
19:51:48 <catherineD> any thing else for today?
19:52:42 <catherineD> if not , we can end a bit early today ...
19:53:35 <catherineD> thank you everyone ! bye !
19:53:47 <catherineD> #endmeeting