14:00:06 <devkulkarni1> #startmeeting Solum Team Meeting
14:00:07 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Aug  3 14:00:06 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is devkulkarni1. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:08 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:12 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'solum_team_meeting'
14:01:52 <zhurong> 0/
14:01:56 <devkulkarni1> hi zhurong
14:02:05 <zhurong> hi devkulkarni1
14:02:12 <devkulkarni1> lets wait to see if anyone else joins us
14:02:31 <zhurong> devkulkarni1 sure
14:08:07 <devkulkarni1> looks like pt_15 is not around today
14:08:37 <zhurong> yep, maybe busy with something
14:09:14 <devkulkarni1> zhurong: I saw you have reviewed the app create patch
14:09:16 <devkulkarni1> cool
14:09:35 <devkulkarni1> I know that pt_15 wanted to sync up with you about it
14:09:46 <devkulkarni1> were you two able to touch base on it?
14:11:31 <zhurong> devkulkarni1 create need your more help about the create field
14:12:01 <zhurong> you need pay more attention to this
14:12:24 <devkulkarni1> I see.. ok I will ping pt_15 about it
14:13:14 <devkulkarni1> there was one more patch that is missing imo.. it is to deploy the created application..
14:13:28 <devkulkarni1> it corresponds to the 'solum app deploy <app-name>' command
14:14:21 <pt_15> hi everyone
14:14:24 <devkulkarni1> once that is there, all the app patches should be good
14:14:27 <pt_15> sorry I'm late
14:14:27 <devkulkarni1> hi pt_15
14:14:35 <devkulkarni1> no worries
14:14:44 <devkulkarni1> zhurong and I were just discussing about your patches
14:15:05 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: looks like app create is blocked on my input?
14:15:08 <devkulkarni1> lets discuss
14:15:15 <pt_15> yeah, I actually had a question regarding that
14:16:20 <pt_15> the thing is that since there are multiple ways to actually create the app like app file, or actually giving details as it is
14:16:41 <pt_15> what exactly should be done regarding having required and not-required fields
14:16:49 <devkulkarni1> I see
14:17:30 <pt_15> and even when app file is given, other details can still be given right?
14:18:25 <zhurong> pt_15 just use the select for the create app way, select app file, chose the file, select details, show the app create detail field
14:19:58 <devkulkarni1> to begin with, we can concentrate on following fields to take input directly from the user in one tab: name, languagepack, version, github url of app, run_cmd, test_cmd (this is optional, but we should show it in the ui).. in a sub-tab we can add an option to select an app file
14:20:42 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: however, will the fields be required then?
14:22:03 <devkulkarni1> in the tab from which you are taking per-field input, the required fields are: name, languagepack, version, github url, run_cmd. in the tab from which you will take the app file as input, the only required field will be app file location
14:22:28 <devkulkarni1> does that make sense?
14:22:29 <pt_15> oh ok, cool
14:22:42 <pt_15> zhurong: is there a way of making tabs in the form ui?
14:23:17 <devkulkarni1> tab or something else..
14:23:34 <devkulkarni1> basically, we should have two different ways to provide inputs
14:23:47 <devkulkarni1> one which allows us to specify the required fields
14:23:58 <pt_15> zhurong: regarding the options you mentioned to select the method of input
14:24:00 <devkulkarni1> another which allows us to specify app file
14:24:27 <devkulkarni1> is something of this possible within horizon framework?
14:24:28 <pt_15> how does that work? again, is there a way provided by horizon to do this?
14:25:31 <zhurong> pt_15 just use select choice
14:26:30 <zhurong> two ways, select one of them, only show this way's fields
14:27:37 <pt_15> zhurong: oh ok, is there any docs for horizon where I can take reference for this from?
14:28:09 <zhurong> I find a example for you pt_15
14:28:31 <pt_15> zhurong: oh cool, thanks a lot! :D
14:28:36 <devkulkarni1> +1
14:28:54 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: any other patch needs clarifications?
14:29:02 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: also I had a question regarding lp create
14:29:11 <devkulkarni1> sure
14:29:17 <pt_15> actually regarding where description for lp comes from?
14:29:32 <pt_15> since it is never explicitly given when creating an lp
14:29:45 <zhurong> pt_15 see the upload image form, there can select image url and image file
14:31:32 <pt_15> zhurong: oh ok, I'll take a look at that :)
14:32:48 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: good question.. in the cli there used to be a flag that could be supplied with lp create to set description.. but I don't recall if we have used it much.. so don't know if it still works.. for now, I suggest you create a bug for future reference to set the description when creating a lp through ui
14:34:16 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: does that make sense?
14:34:45 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: yeah, I'll do that :)
14:35:25 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: I wanted to discuss about one more patch, which is currently missing
14:35:45 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: sure
14:36:01 <devkulkarni1> it is to deploy an app .. it corresponds to 'solum app deploy <app-name>' command
14:37:01 <devkulkarni1> from the cli, this call makes a POST request to workflows resource which is under app .. /apps/<app-id>/workflows
14:37:19 <pt_15> i actually have submitted a patch for that (although it requires a bit ok work): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/345180/
14:37:53 <devkulkarni1> ah I see.. this is from the set which you had submitted earlier
14:38:41 <devkulkarni1> ok good.. so the patch is there.. now you probably need to test it in your setup
14:39:15 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: yeah, I have tested it, but it requires a bit of work currently
14:39:54 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: sure.. just wanted to bring it up so that we don't forget. good that you already have the patch
14:40:19 <devkulkarni1> btw, is lp create patch blocked only blocked on the description field issue that we discussed earlier?
14:40:41 <caowei> I'm late
14:40:49 <devkulkarni1> hi caowei
14:40:54 <devkulkarni1> nice to see you
14:40:56 <caowei> hi
14:41:02 <devkulkarni1> we have pt_15 and zhurong with us as well
14:41:02 <caowei> me too
14:41:17 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: yeah, so I'll fix that today, it'll be top priority, so we can get that merged asap :)
14:41:23 <pt_15> hi caowei :)
14:41:32 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: +1
14:41:50 <caowei> hi
14:42:04 <devkulkarni1> pt_15: ping me once the patch is ready
14:42:14 <caowei> hi pt_15
14:42:28 <pt_15> devkulkarni1: sure, I will :)
14:43:05 <caowei> pt_15: I saw your working, that's great
14:43:28 <pt_15> thank you caowei :)
14:44:45 <devkulkarni1> caowei: did you see my comment on your latest patch? also, your earlier patch has got -1 from Jenkins, which probably you have already noticed
14:46:18 <devkulkarni1> hi shivaSR
14:46:29 <devkulkarni1> we have zhurong, caowei, and pt_15 as well
14:46:44 <zhurong> hi shivaSR
14:46:47 <shivaSR> Hi Dev, Hello to everyone else as well.
14:47:35 <devkulkarni1> shivaSR: welcome.. do you want to quickly update others about your use-case and interest in solum
14:48:12 <shivaSR> Sure, So I am adding support to solum to deploy applications in unikernels. Specifically the rumprun unikernel
14:48:29 <shivaSR> At this point my implementation is as follows:
14:49:13 <shivaSR> I build a base image using default solum code (a lp rather)
14:49:32 <pt_15> hi shivaSR :)
14:49:50 <shivaSR> In the language pack I have the tools required to compile application code into the rumprun unikernel via a compile.sh script
14:49:57 <shivaSR> hi pt_15 ;0
14:50:00 <shivaSR> ;)
14:50:37 <shivaSR> then I modified the default build-app script in solum to extract the unikernel executable and upload it to glance.
14:51:02 <caowei> devkulkarni1: please help to look https://bugs.launchpad.net/solum/+bug/1609334
14:51:02 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1609334 in Solum "deployer LOG_DIR Initialization" [Undecided,New] - Assigned to caowei (caowei-e)
14:51:07 <shivaSR> The id of the uploaded image is returned to solum for it to handle deployment of the application on nova as implemented by you guys
14:51:52 <shivaSR> However, as devkulkarni and I were discussing yesterday it appears that heat does not yet have support for glance V2 so this breaks my process since I need properties only included in glance v2.
14:51:54 <devkulkarni1> shivaSR: did you run into any hurdles with build-app in these steps? or was it alright
14:52:12 <devkulkarni1> caowei: ack. will take a look
14:52:20 <shivaSR> dev, it was pretty straight forward actually
14:52:37 <devkulkarni1> shivaSR: nice.. glad to hear that
14:52:44 <devkulkarni1> shivaSR: about the heat issue..
14:53:05 <devkulkarni1> I was going to suggest to check with the heat team if it is indeed the case that heat is not yet supporting glance v2
14:53:43 <devkulkarni1> most likely they might be supporting it and there might be some modification/tweak that we need to make in the HOT
14:54:11 <shivaSR> Yea, this morning I was reading up on it. It appears that heat in fact does not support the v2. I messaged the heat guys to find out the exact details.
14:55:08 <devkulkarni1> oh okay.. hmm is that a blocker for you? does your workflow in nova need the kernel-id?
14:55:58 <shivaSR> yes it is. I may try to figure out a way to modify the code as a temporary workaround. to get the solum side of things working. But as it is heat needs to be updated.
14:56:25 <devkulkarni1> good morning vijendar
14:56:33 <vijendar> devkulkarni1: hi
14:56:46 <devkulkarni1> shivaSR: how about a workaround in nova so that you don't need to have kernel-id?
14:57:02 <devkulkarni1> vijendar: we have shivaSR, pt_15, zhurong and caowei with us
14:57:18 <vijendar> Hi all!
14:58:00 <shivaSR> yes, thats where I intend to add the workaround. However, kernel-id seems to be standard way to tell nova which glance image is the kernel for a particular image.
14:58:15 <devkulkarni1> ah I see
14:58:42 <devkulkarni1> solum workaround will be to not use glance version 1, which should be straight forward
14:58:54 <devkulkarni1> so looks like heat is a blocker for your currently
14:59:06 <shivaSR> yup.
14:59:12 <devkulkarni1> you might have to add support for glance v2 in heat (at least in your setup)
14:59:36 <devkulkarni1> alright.. we are almost at the end of our meeting time.. we can continue the discussion in solum channel
14:59:43 <devkulkarni1> thanks all for joining today
14:59:47 <devkulkarni1> see you next week
14:59:50 <devkulkarni1> #endmeeting