14:01:10 #startmeeting watcher 14:01:11 Meeting started Wed Mar 30 14:01:10 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is acabot. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:14 The meeting name has been set to 'watcher' 14:01:17 hello 14:01:23 hi 14:01:25 hello 14:01:35 #endmeeting\o 14:01:35 o/ 14:01:36 #info agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Watcher_Meeting_Agenda#03.2F30.2F2016 14:01:40 doh! 14:01:48 o/ 14:01:48 \o 14:01:48 hi 14:01:56 edleafe : nice try;-) 14:01:58 (*_*) 14:02:05 acabot: heh 14:02:15 acabot: can you give me access to the slides? 14:02:25 email is sleipnir012@gmail.com 14:02:56 hi 14:03:03 Hi 14:03:13 sorry just refresh the agenda 14:03:19 and the link should work now 14:03:35 #topic Announcements 14:04:18 #info contributing page https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Watcher/Contributing#Blueprints has been updated to reflect discussions of past meetings about bugs and BPs states 14:05:01 #info a final version of slides for the OpenStack summit is available at https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pGaimFOkpZ66bWH8wWkc5eZLvxFovUj2V3YfZsQMKHE/edit?usp=sharing 14:05:30 +1 14:05:58 as the summit schedule is now available, we can start defining meeting times for Watcher 14:06:26 we will be 4 people from bcom, dtardivel, vincentmahe, xavier & acabot 14:06:50 intel will be sballe, tkaczynski and nishi 14:07:00 who will be there from IBM ? 14:07:07 gzhai2: are you coming too? 14:07:25 sballe_: No :( 14:07:34 I asked for you to attend so I was hoping you could 14:08:04 tpeoples: will you be at the summit ? 14:08:06 budget... 14:08:14 hmmm 14:08:15 acabot: jwcroppe, me, i'm guessing edleafe? plus some other people from my team since we're based in austin 14:08:30 tpeoples: ok ;-) 14:08:40 I'll be making the long journey from San Antonio... 14:08:49 ok 14:08:51 lol 14:09:07 can we start freezing timeframes for meeting or its too early ? 14:09:09 my family will be going ot San Antonio sightseeing while I am at OpenStack 14:09:22 acabot: sure. 14:09:38 +1 14:09:40 zte will be me 14:09:50 acabot: I won;t be there Fri due to a personal commitement 14:09:53 I had a discussion with hvprash from walmart to set up a meeting on tuesday afternoon 14:10:08 jinquan: great to have you there 14:10:16 acabot: Tues afternoon +1 14:10:38 acabot: do we know when the brown bag is? 14:10:39 My main concern is to learn : ) 14:10:46 I think we can set a meeting 2 to 6pm tuesday 14:11:02 +1 14:11:33 and then plan other meetings on wednesday and thursday 14:11:52 so no Watcher meeting on monday 14:12:10 I'll be buried in the nova design summit meetings, but will try to make some Watcher sessions 14:12:36 #info Watcher team will met at the summit on Tuesday 2-6pm in the developer lounge 14:12:50 any other announcement ? 14:13:23 #topic Review Action Items 14:13:48 #info "Achieved goal should be returned by each strategy" has been merged 14:13:57 thx for the quick review 14:14:14 acabot: when to merge its code? 14:14:22 gzhai2: the specs 14:14:39 gzhai2: im speaking about the specs now 14:14:50 sorry. 14:15:09 we need reviews on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286153/ & https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289880/ 14:15:25 alexstav : thx for adding comments to your last PS 14:16:02 tkaczynski : as jed56 did a lot of reviews on the scoring module, we will now review it with dtardivel 14:16:20 +1 14:16:33 acabot: thanks! 14:16:41 #action dtardivel review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289880/ 14:16:47 #action acabot review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289880/ 14:16:51 acabot: for the specs that are being pushed to N, shall we abandon from the mitaka directory and add them to the newton dir? 14:17:05 tpeoples +1 14:17:19 tpeoples : yes we will have to do that but next week as we are still on the mitaka cycle 14:17:21 tpeoples: generally yes - just re-propose for Newton 14:17:39 tpeoples: I would ask you to do it next week 14:17:55 k. my point being i know my BP won't make M so... ok. 14:17:58 tkaczynski i will a review the last patchset but for me it was good 14:18:01 :) 14:18:07 good job 14:18:37 who wants to review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286153/ ? 14:19:35 jed56 thanks :) 14:19:46 acabot: I can have a look. 14:20:13 acabot: I think we need now core reviewer on this patchset 14:20:17 #info https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283449/ was locked due to licensing issues, but finally its ok so can we merge it ? 14:20:30 acabot: yes 14:20:40 #action gzhai2 review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286153/ 14:21:22 acabot: spoke with joe, he was fine with it after i explained it to him, but he must not have had time to remove his -1 14:21:24 sballe_ : could you please have a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283449/ ? I think its important 14:21:37 i can review something if you like 14:22:08 #action seanmurphy review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283449/ thx sean ;-) 14:22:13 np 14:22:16 by eow? 14:22:39 acabot before to merge 283449 we should take some comments into account ( global_score = (nb_empty_nodes/nb_migrations*100) => need to handle the case when this is 0.) 14:22:54 edleafe: can we have specs merged in MItaka but implement in Newton ? 14:23:30 Generally, you re-propose specs that didn't get implemented in a given cycle 14:23:44 It's usually automatic approval 14:23:56 seanmurphy : ok so before our next meeting would be fine 14:23:58 But sometimes project priorities can change between cycles 14:24:17 acabot: ack - will do before next meeting 14:24:23 The re-approval just helps assure that the old spec is still where you want to go 14:24:39 edleafe: ok thx 14:25:00 tpeoples: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287019/ when do you plan to make additions ? 14:25:46 acabot: it's been on my list just haven't gotten to it yet. i'll put up a non-WIP by tomorrow 14:26:19 #action tpeoples set a non-WIP work on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287019/ 14:26:29 moving to watcher code 14:26:51 the strategy from seanmurphy's team has been merged 14:26:58 congrats to the team 14:27:02 cool - thanks! 14:27:05 +1 14:27:53 #info vincentfrancoise has added a lot of code on the BP "The achieved goal should be returned by each strategy" 14:28:03 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/watcher+branch:master+topic:bp/get-goal-from-strategy 14:28:07 we need to take stock and see how and where we can continue to contribute further 14:28:14 you will hear more from us! 14:28:28 seanmurphy : I hope so ! 14:28:31 acabot: do we plan to merge it in M? 14:28:48 gzhai2 : actually it is my plan 14:29:06 but do you think the team will be able to review all the code by friday ? 14:29:15 gzhai2: we need reviewers :) 14:29:30 Sure. I can try and review this patch series. 14:30:00 if we want to have this BP implemented in M (it would be a great improvement), we need reviewers in the next 2 days ! 14:30:04 FYI, I still have 2 changeset to finish and push: 1 for strategies API and the other one for the doc update 14:30:26 i'll review 14:30:29 who will be able to review this code by EOW ? 14:30:38 which will make a total of 8 changesets 14:30:49 #action gzhai2 review https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/watcher+branch:master+topic:bp/get-goal-from-strategy asap 14:30:59 #action tpeoples review https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/watcher+branch:master+topic:bp/get-goal-from-strategy asap 14:31:15 #action dtardivel review https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/watcher+branch:master+topic:bp/get-goal-from-strategy asap 14:32:13 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/297556/ also needs reviews but as it is nested with the current work from vincentfrancoise, I think we will move it to N 14:33:07 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292188/ need a new PS as there is a merge conflict and additional reviews 14:33:38 i'll ask junjie 14:33:55 But still need another round review after it. 14:34:00 #action junjie submit a new PS for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292188/ 14:34:13 gzhai2: yes 14:35:00 on watcher client, there are 2 reviews open linked to "The achieved goal should be returned by each strategy" & "Enable strategy parameters " 14:35:19 so we already discussed them previously 14:35:24 i will review after junjie submit a new PS for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292188/ 14:35:49 #action jinquan review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292188/ 14:36:19 #info Watcher-dashboard will be impacted by The achieved goal should be returned by each strategy implementation in Watcher, we need a contributor to work on it 14:36:58 if we merge this BP in M, we need to fix watcher-dashboard before the summit 14:37:17 anyone who wants to work on it ? 14:37:56 always hard to find someone who wants to work on horizon :-D 14:38:09 #topic Blueprint/Bug Review and Discussion 14:38:31 #info RC-Final target 5 BPs & 9 bugs and is due on April 1st https://launchpad.net/watcher/+milestone/mitaka-rc-final 14:39:36 after our discussion today, we can keep https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/get-goal-from-strategy & https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/basic-cloud-consolidation-integration 14:39:51 jinquan : what about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/select-destinations-filter ? 14:39:54 acabot: scoring module BP is not targeted? 14:40:18 tkaczynski : we moved it to N last week 14:40:22 i am start coding from 29.march 14:40:53 tkaczynski : did I made a mistake ? 14:41:03 acabot: I thought that we want to get BP now and implementation in N 14:41:19 i think it need take a few days for me 14:41:39 tkaczynski : yes sorry, what I'm focusing right now is what we have implemented in M 14:41:49 acabot: from my perspective it doesn't really matter. but I'd like to close working on the BP and start implementing it 14:42:12 so as long as the BP will get merged soon, I'm good 14:42:23 jinquan : ok so I suppose you wont be able to deliver it before April 1st right ? 14:43:16 acabot, yes :( 14:43:34 gzhai2: ok to move https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/optimization-threshold to N ? 14:43:52 sballe_: do you think we need to have scoring module BP for Mitaka? 14:44:20 acabot: ok. But I want a try as this patch is not so big:) 14:44:44 acabot: but it depends on progress of vincent's patch series. 14:45:19 gzhai2 : the problem I see is that we will merge vincentfrancoise code on Friday and you wont have time to integrate it before we freeze the rc-final 14:45:37 acabot: ok. 14:45:42 move to N 14:45:45 #action acabot move 3 BPs from Mitaka RC-final to Newton-1 14:45:56 sorry about that gzhai2 14:46:09 #topic Open Discussion 14:46:41 Should we split in different repos the framework code and the available strategies ? 14:47:29 as we start to have more and more strategies available on watcher, it would be nice to separate reviews from Watcher framework and strategies 14:47:54 currently it's ok i think. 14:48:07 what do you think about having a dedicated repo for strategies implementation ? 14:48:18 Who'll maintain the new strategy repo? 14:48:37 it will be one more repo with client and dashboard 14:49:12 i'm not sure we'll get much benefit from that. i'd rather keep them together tbh, at least for the time being if nothing other than for simplicity 14:49:28 the idea is mostly to separate concerns, reviewing strategies is very different tha watcher framework 14:50:26 the main idea is to have the "core" strategies and the others and to facilitate the "incubation" 14:50:32 How deep you separate them? A total new project with client/dashboard/API? 14:50:34 acabot tpeoples: I think having a separate repo for strategies will dogfood the strategy pluggability 14:50:50 acabot: Could we maintain only a list of available strategy into a new Watcher wiki section. Each strategy implementation will have its dedicated GIT repo, outside Watcher one. 14:51:15 maybe is to early ? 14:51:18 we need a simple way to add strategies to watcher as plug-ins, including goals and everything 14:51:19 to me this looks too decoupled 14:51:35 it would be nice to have core reviewers for strategies (not the same as the framework core) 14:51:40 i think it is better to keep the together for now 14:51:42 i agree with seanmurphy. maybe we can plan to discuss this at the summit? 14:51:53 tpeoples : +1 14:51:58 +1 14:52:05 i think the strategy code would soon become orphaned 14:52:12 its probably to early now, I will add it to the agenda for the summit 14:52:38 seanmurphy : its a big risk 14:53:08 +1 14:53:09 any other open discussion for today ? 14:53:52 acabot: if we create a new repo, who will maintain it later ? not the core team ... 14:54:49 dtardivel : I think we need to define a specific core team for maintaining strategies 14:55:09 dtardivel : so we need more people involved ;-) 14:56:59 acabot i agree 14:57:17 ok so thank you everyone 14:57:23 have a good day/night 14:57:27 bye 14:57:32 thank you acabot 14:57:32 bye 14:57:40 #endmeeting