08:03:23 #startmeeting tacker 08:03:24 Meeting started Tue Jul 21 08:03:23 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is yasufum. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 08:03:25 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 08:03:27 The meeting name has been set to 'tacker' 08:04:00 Is there any topic for the meeting today? 08:04:34 I have topics about my 2 Spec status and TST meeting. 08:06:34 I have two topics, but priority is not so high. So, please start from takahashi-tsc. 08:06:45 #topic etsi-nfv-tst 08:07:34 Sure, as I said last meeting, I'd like to request input parameter coverage of test code to TST members. 08:07:42 https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tacker-meeting 08:08:11 See L252- 08:08:58 My request is test all patterns which is clearly specified in SOL docs like L253-264. 08:10:57 If definition is not clear, we should propose how to define all test. My proposal is we do 2 tests, testing with input which include all attributes is set, and testing input which is only include minimum necessary attributes. 08:11:36 L256-271 08:11:52 So I'd like to know tacker members' comment about it. 08:13:00 Ah... I forget to write URL of SOL003 and SOL013. I write it. 08:14:12 Let me confirm what the main topic is 08:14:58 As shown from L106, we have the request to show a clear coverage of TST 08:15:30 and we have three main check points; Response code, HTTP response header, and Input parameter 08:16:04 Right. 08:16:04 We are discussing how the "Input parameter" should be defined in tests 08:16:13 Yes, right. 08:16:43 Then, takahashi-tsc is proposing "testing with input which include all attributes is set, and testing input which is only include minimum necessary attributes" 08:16:54 right? 08:17:23 Yes, but this is just *my* proposal, all combination pattern may be large size and I do not know it is meaningful. 08:17:47 So I'd like to know comment about it. 08:18:21 Exactly, I agree to have a clear approach to define it not to have too many conbinations. 08:18:57 I agree with takahashi-tsc's idea. That can be the minimum set to test. 08:21:46 Are there any comment? or if you have some comments, please write in etherpad 08:22:34 Comment by end of this week can be included in TST meeting proposal. 08:22:48 Your proposal means, in other word, define mandatory and optional clearly, right? 08:22:59 about input params 08:23:24 not params, but attributes 08:24:47 Yes, in addition, I want to clarify mandatory and optional attributes in test codes. 08:25:12 I understand. 08:25:58 What do you think to update our test code in addition to propose it to TST if neccesary? 08:26:45 Is it not required currently? 08:27:50 Do you mean update for Tacker teams? i.e. How to manage our internal test code update? 08:29:12 Yes. I think current tacker’s test codes are not perfect, and required some updates from your point of view of the suggestion. 08:29:39 possibly, I mean. 08:31:21 Understood, I think we need some update. But such update should be defined clearly. 1 example is "test list" in my Robot Framework sepc, which select only test for Tacker support API. 08:32:03 I'd like to continue to discuss it. We make clear documentation about how to use TST code, including update. 08:32:27 OK, thanks 08:34:57 Is there any comment, or can we go to the next topic? 08:36:12 Can I go next topic? it is just about spec status. 08:36:12 Hi I am late. I had a seminar today. 08:36:29 hi 08:36:34 hi 08:36:49 #topic spec-status 08:37:18 takahashi-tsc: please share your status about specs 08:37:23 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/740896/ 08:37:55 Spec about customize LCM workflow is completed, I'm glad if you review it. 08:38:21 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/732367/ 08:38:40 Thank you for comment about Robot Framework use spec. 08:39:34 yoshito-ito Sorry but I want to confirm. Last comment means that you think spec is needed to be updated? 08:40:23 I did not find the first one. I would like to check it. 08:41:19 I will. 08:43:12 It seems enough for this topic, so go to the next topic. 08:43:55 #topic tacker-studio 08:45:08 I have started review remained patches. This is one of them. 08:45:16 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/547018/ 08:45:38 takahashi-tsc: I'll update my comment on the patch 08:45:52 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/732367/ 08:46:05 sorry pls move to the next topic 08:46:18 OK. no problem. 08:46:25 Thanks 08:47:03 I will review it to:) 08:47:05 too. 08:47:37 I understand that dharmendra agreed to merge it, but there is no update because Trinh seems left from tacker dev. 08:48:01 yes. right 08:48:07 As current status, we have no one has responsibility for that. 08:48:11 no one handle that thing. 08:48:20 right.. 08:48:24 he left. 08:48:37 I have wondered that we should continue to develop this feature, or drop it. 08:49:05 if no one want to handle it, we should remove it. 08:49:30 Let's check it it necessary or not. 08:49:31 +1 08:49:58 Let's discuss it next week and vote it. 08:50:04 :) 08:50:23 Sure. 08:50:46 Thanks. I think it is wounderful if this feature is implemented in tacker. 08:51:03 Please continue to discuss. 08:51:36 I have one more topic about doc update. 08:51:45 # topic doc-update 08:51:51 #topic doc-update 08:51:56 thanks yasfum:) 08:52:41 As we agreed in the previous PTG, I have started to revise docs. 08:53:43 good:D 08:53:58 And I find that our doc is described based on Ubuntu, but not care about redhat distro, such as fedora or centos. 08:54:10 So I think we need to support them. 08:54:26 But I am not sure how we start to do. 08:54:44 Do you have any comment? 08:55:30 support means both "Tacker can run on redhat distro" and "docs show how to run Tacker on redhat distro"? 08:56:21 And is there any issues about ”Tacker can run...”? 08:56:23 yes. I mean the lackness of manuals for installation and how to use 08:56:37 and so one 08:57:17 I think we can update or add new installation guide for redhat distro 08:57:29 or do we have any other docs to be updated? 08:58:53 I think covering installation and configuration is enogh basically. 08:59:14 Usage is almost the same among them. 09:01:05 Do you anyone raise a hand for the task kindly? 09:01:55 Or I would like to register it to blueprint as a next TODO, now… 09:03:01 Will it be a task till V release? 09:03:24 I am not sure, but sooner is better. 09:03:42 Oops, it is the end of the time. Please continue to discuss in the next meeting. thanks. 09:03:50 I have few general queries, first would like to know whether we backport documentation bugs in tacker, as I could see Bug #1887151 persist in Ussuri release docs. 09:03:51 bug 1887151 in tacker "Incorrect document link in Tacker Manual Installation " [Low,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1887151 - Assigned to Manpreet Kaur (manpreetk) 09:04:20 Second in the current release could we fix documentation bug detected in the older release? 09:04:26 Please comment.. 09:05:48 manpreet: Thanks for your suggestions. I understand these problems, and would like to go forward. 09:06:52 I would like to make it clear how we do backporting. 09:07:51 Could we continue to discuss for making an agreement in the next meeting, or tacker IRC? 09:09:07 Thank you, yes we could discuss in next meeting. 09:09:28 Last I would like to share my interest in networking-sfc on going participation. 09:10:31 Thank you thats all from my side. 09:10:51 Thanks 09:12:12 Thank you for joining, bye 09:12:18 Thanks 09:12:25 thank you. bye 09:12:33 #endmeeting tacker