| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 00:00 | |
| *** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:01 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 00:01 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:03 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 00:06 | |
| *** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting | 00:09 | |
| *** ncode has quit IRC | 00:12 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 00:13 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:16 | |
| *** gongys has quit IRC | 00:27 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 00:28 | |
| *** jaypipes-afk is now known as jaypipes | 00:38 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 00:42 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 00:42 | |
| *** matwood has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC | 00:47 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:51 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 00:52 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 00:53 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:04 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 01:11 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 01:11 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:15 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:20 | |
| *** jdurgin has quit IRC | 01:22 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 01:28 | |
| *** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:29 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:31 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 01:37 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 01:37 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 01:38 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:40 | |
| *** notmyname has quit IRC | 01:42 | |
| *** glenc has quit IRC | 01:44 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 01:53 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 01:54 | |
| *** krtaylor has quit IRC | 01:58 | |
| *** PotHix has quit IRC | 02:16 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 02:17 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC | 02:26 | |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 02:29 | |
| *** mdomsch has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:29 | |
| *** mdomsch_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:31 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 02:32 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 02:33 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:36 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 02:39 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:49 | |
| *** novas0x2a|lapto1 has quit IRC | 02:55 | |
| *** vish1 is now known as vishy | 03:04 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:05 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 03:07 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 03:09 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 03:37 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:47 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 04:01 | |
| *** dendrobates has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:01 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has quit IRC | 04:04 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 04:05 | |
| *** Mandell_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:11 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 04:11 | |
| *** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:19 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:20 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 04:21 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 04:28 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:30 | |
| *** notmyname has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:36 | |
| *** mdomsch_ has quit IRC | 04:41 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:44 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 04:46 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 04:56 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:56 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 05:03 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 05:04 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:04 | |
| *** cburgess has quit IRC | 05:05 | |
| *** cburgess has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:05 | |
| *** dabo has quit IRC | 05:05 | |
| *** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:05 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 05:08 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 05:08 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:08 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 05:10 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:12 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** dayou has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:36 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:43 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:48 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 05:54 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:05 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:06 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 06:10 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 06:20 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 06:38 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 06:51 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 07:03 | |
| *** Razique has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:15 | |
| *** chrisfer1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:17 | |
| *** chrisfer has quit IRC | 07:18 | |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:28 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 07:28 | |
| *** _0x44 has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:28 | |
| *** Mandell_ has quit IRC | 07:29 | |
| *** ghe has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:16 | |
| *** ghe is now known as Guest55774 | 08:17 | |
| *** Guest55774 is now known as GheRivero | 08:33 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 08:38 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:46 | |
| *** Razique has quit IRC | 08:47 | |
| *** Razique has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:50 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 08:55 | |
| *** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:08 | |
| *** myz has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:28 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 10:09 | |
| *** myz is now known as mynewnick | 10:55 | |
| *** mynewnick is now known as myz | 10:56 | |
| *** myz is now known as mynewnick | 10:56 | |
| *** mynewnick is now known as myz | 10:56 | |
| *** myz has quit IRC | 10:57 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 11:11 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:20 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:20 | |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:32 | |
| *** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:54 | |
| *** myz has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:11 | |
| myz | help | 12:11 |
|---|---|---|
| soren | myz: Wrong channel. | 12:11 |
| myz | soren: sorry meant to send '/help' to the client :) | 12:12 |
| *** myz has quit IRC | 12:18 | |
| *** myz has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:19 | |
| myz | I'd a couple of successful Nova installations before, but I came to a point where I want understand Nova configuration file │ apetrescu | 12:28 |
| myz | | 'nova.conf'; It has too many options and for multinode installtion you can't understand which option goes to which component │ Apolonio | 12:28 |
| myz | so, you will copy 'nova.conf' to all your nodes, but I think this is not the proper way for deployment | 12:29 |
| soren | myz: Wrong channel :) | 12:30 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:30 | |
| *** dhellmann_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:32 | |
| *** dhellmann_ has quit IRC | 12:32 | |
| myz | soren: sorry again it is just my new client :) | 12:34 |
| *** martianixor has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:34 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 12:36 | |
| *** martianixor has quit IRC | 12:39 | |
| *** martianixor has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:40 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:41 | |
| *** myz has quit IRC | 12:42 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 12:42 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:44 | |
| *** myz has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:45 | |
| *** martianixor has quit IRC | 12:45 | |
| *** martianixor has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:45 | |
| myz | anyone with experience in installing multinode openstack Nova? | 12:50 |
| zul | still wrong channel | 12:51 |
| myz | zul: why?? still wrong channel?? | 12:52 |
| zul | myz: this isnt a support channel you want #openstack | 12:53 |
| myz | sorry guys I know i made headache for you | 12:53 |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 13:04 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 13:11 | |
| *** glenc has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:14 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 13:26 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:32 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 13:34 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 13:37 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:39 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:42 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:42 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:47 | |
| *** primeministerp has quit IRC | 13:50 | |
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:51 | |
| *** nikhil has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:52 | |
| *** joesavak has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:54 | |
| *** dayou has quit IRC | 13:55 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:05 | |
| *** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:05 | |
| *** nikhil has quit IRC | 14:08 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 14:09 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:09 | |
| *** morellon has left #openstack-meeting | 14:13 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:19 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:20 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:21 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:21 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:22 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 14:22 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:22 | |
| *** sandywalsh_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:26 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 14:26 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 14:27 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:28 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 14:30 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 14:43 | |
| *** krtaylor has quit IRC | 14:44 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 14:45 | |
| *** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:48 | |
| *** sandywalsh_ has quit IRC | 14:53 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:55 | |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:04 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:08 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:14 | |
| *** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:19 | |
| *** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:24 | |
| *** edygarcia has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:25 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:29 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:30 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 15:30 | |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:32 | |
| *** martianixor has quit IRC | 15:36 | |
| *** DuncanT has quit IRC | 15:37 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:38 | |
| *** DuncanT has quit IRC | 15:40 | |
| *** ravi has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:43 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:43 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:44 | |
| *** ravi has quit IRC | 15:46 | |
| *** ravi has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:46 | |
| *** ravi_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:52 | |
| *** lzyeval has quit IRC | 15:52 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:53 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:54 | |
| *** ravi has quit IRC | 15:54 | |
| *** krtaylor has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:59 | |
| *** blamar_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:01 | |
| *** mnewby_ has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** myz has quit IRC | 16:02 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| *** blamar_ is now known as blamar | 16:05 | |
| *** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:06 | |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:09 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:13 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 16:14 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 16:16 | |
| *** sleepsonzzz is now known as sleepsonthefloor | 16:16 | |
| *** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:16 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 16:17 | |
| *** lzyeval has quit IRC | 16:32 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:35 | |
| *** Razique has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| *** dhellmann has quit IRC | 16:46 | |
| *** oubiwann has quit IRC | 16:48 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 16:48 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:55 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 16:59 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:01 | |
| *** PotHix has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:14 | |
| *** ncode has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:15 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 17:28 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:29 | |
| *** bencherian has quit IRC | 17:30 | |
| *** bencherian_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:30 | |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 17:31 | |
| *** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:41 | |
| *** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:43 | |
| *** krtaylor has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** marek_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:55 | |
| * heckj pokes his head in the meeting room | 17:55 | |
| *** kevin-lewis-9 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:56 | |
| *** bencherian_ has quit IRC | 17:59 | |
| chmouel | heckj: it's ok since http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/this-meeting-is-over.jpg | 18:01 |
| heckj | heh | 18:01 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| *** arunkant has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| heckj | who's here for keystone? | 18:01 |
| heckj | o/ | 18:01 |
| chmouel | o/ | 18:01 |
| rafaduran | o/ | 18:01 |
| *** liemmn has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| heckj | #startmeeting | 18:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 12 18:02:13 2012 UTC. The chair is heckj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:02 |
| heckj | Howdy all! | 18:02 |
| liemmn | o/ | 18:02 |
| heckj | Sorry for missing the last meeting - thank you Dolph for coordinating it! | 18:02 |
| heckj | I've got some specific pieces to go over for the API review, but first I figured I'd hit any hot topics | 18:03 |
| heckj | #topic New Issues? | 18:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "New Issues?" | 18:03 | |
| heckj | Any production issues? | 18:04 |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| liemmn | Not really new issue; but, I asked on the list if we can include an RBAC example for how to isolate users that are created in one domain from being modifiable by a domain admin in another domain... I think it is doable. | 18:05 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:05 | |
| heckj | liemmn: agreed. I think I'm going to create a blueprint to do some of this, because we're not tracking it otherwise | 18:06 |
| *** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:06 | |
| liemmn | heckj, sounds good... If you want, you can assign it to me, and I will take a stab at it... | 18:06 |
| heckj | liemmn: thanks, will do | 18:07 |
| liemmn | gracias | 18:07 |
| heckj | #action heckj to create blueprint to track doc updates on how to deploy - policy.json, suggested role names, etc | 18:08 |
| dolphm_ | o/ | 18:08 |
| heckj | anything else in new topics? | 18:08 |
| heckj | termie: you around? | 18:09 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 18:09 | |
| heckj | heading to V3 API feedback & questions | 18:09 |
| heckj | #topic V3 API feedback | 18:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "V3 API feedback" | 18:09 | |
| heckj | #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s9C4EMxIZ55kZr62CKEC9ip7He_Q4_g1KRfSk9hY-Sg/edit# | 18:10 |
| liemmn | Is there going to be a draft#2, or is that it? | 18:10 |
| heckj | I sent an email out sunday with open questions and general notes from the feedback. | 18:11 |
| dolphm_ | yeah the date wasn't updated either :P | 18:11 |
| liemmn | ahh... gotcha ;) | 18:11 |
| heckj | liemmn: I aimed at creating another draft, but focused on small questions this past weekend from the coffee shop | 18:11 |
| heckj | I have a list of questions I thought I'd bring up here - most related to Andy's feedback, but some others as well. | 18:12 |
| heckj | gyee: you around? | 18:12 |
| gyee | o/ | 18:12 |
| heckj | gyee: you asked about adding a status field into the token attributes - could you illuminate a bit more what's going on there? I made a suggestion in feedback, but I'm not clear on what multifactor auth needs | 18:13 |
| gyee | I am connecting from a coffee shop this time too :) | 18:13 |
| gyee | MFA | 18:13 |
| *** lcheng has quit IRC | 18:13 | |
| gyee | like half-token | 18:13 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: i think a token just needs to be able to say "I exist, but I'm not valid, yet" | 18:13 |
| gyee | status = 'incomplete' or something | 18:13 |
| heckj | gyee: I got that bit. I guess here's the question - right now a token is expected to be fully there if it's there | 18:15 |
| *** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:15 | |
| heckj | so if we add a partial field, do we want to specify some specific values there so we can update auth_token to know how to validate a partial token correctly? | 18:15 |
| gyee | yes, hopefully the auth modules will update token status accordingly | 18:16 |
| dolphm_ | could we accomplish this with status codes? (http 206 partial content) | 18:16 |
| heckj | gyee: since you know a touch more about multifactor, could you suggest possible values there? (and lets limit in in the spec) | 18:16 |
| gyee | right now, its going to be 'enabled' or 'incomplete' | 18:17 |
| dolphm_ | (i think 206 is totally wrong, btw) | 18:17 |
| gyee | case-insensitive :) | 18:18 |
| heckj | dolphm_: switching topics - the /versions thing. I'm afraid I never quite groked the original setup, so I wasn't clear on how to assert what capabilities the backends provide. How can we do that reasonably with the /versions API setup? | 18:19 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: not sure what you're asking for? a use case for /versions? | 18:19 |
| heckj | dolphm_: sorry - what more definition should we add to a V3 draft 2 to be explicit about backends? resource attributes, etc? I don't have a sense of what gets returned when you do a GET /versions now... | 18:20 |
| termie | i am here now, ping pong game was won | 18:21 |
| heckj | yeah!!! | 18:21 |
| heckj | termie, dolphm_, et al - I'm intentionally flattening the endpoints (or suggesting it). Bad idea? | 18:22 |
| dolphm_ | well, i actually don't know what /versions is ... i assume you mean / (the multiple choice response, containing links to available api versions) or /v#/extensions ? | 18:22 |
| heckj | it related to some of termie's comments about mapping policy to endpoints as well... | 18:23 |
| heckj | dolphm_: yeah - that's driven by the VersionController in keystone today | 18:23 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 18:23 | |
| dolphm_ | heckj: and you're proposing to move it to /v3/versions? | 18:23 |
| termie | lulz | 18:24 |
| dolphm_ | (if so, that seems to defeat the point?) | 18:24 |
| termie | nobody uses it to begin with | 18:24 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:24 | |
| dolphm_ | termie: that's because we only have 1 version in openstack | 18:24 |
| termie | nope, it is because people only write code that talks to one version | 18:24 |
| heckj | dolphm_: I don't know what to do with / that whole version, extension thing - I never understood it, so I'm looking for what we *should* do with it in V3 API | 18:24 |
| termie | rmeove | 18:24 |
| gyee | or run two instances of keystone! :) | 18:25 |
| termie | gyee: not a solution | 18:25 |
| termie | gyee: but i like the joke | 18:25 |
| *** marek_ has quit IRC | 18:25 | |
| termie | the point is, if you are using v1 api or whatever, you give htem the endpoint that starts with /v1 and they do what they expect to be in v1 | 18:26 |
| dolphm_ | ideally you wouldn't have to specify versions in the catalog, it'd just be http://identity:5000/ | 18:27 |
| dolphm_ | and the client would take that, discover what versions are supported by the endpoint, compromise on compatiblity/stability, and talk to that api endpoint | 18:27 |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:27 | |
| termie | no chance that any developer would ever write code to discover versions and do compat | 18:27 |
| gyee | I do if I am writing a 3rd client | 18:28 |
| liemmn | dolphm: +1 | 18:28 |
| termie | gyee: no you don't | 18:28 |
| termie | gyee: a website gives you an endpoint for the version you want to use | 18:28 |
| termie | gyee: not an api | 18:28 |
| dolphm_ | termie: certainly not if the server doesn't provide the necessary info to write an intelligent client | 18:28 |
| termie | dolphm_: there are no intelligent clients | 18:28 |
| dolphm_ | termie: i'm not saying there are | 18:29 |
| liemmn | There are no intelligent clients out there because in general, APIs suck.... but, with better adoption of concepts like HATEOAS, it will make it easier to write one. | 18:30 |
| termie | dolphm_: i'm saying there never will be because it isn't worth the effort, y'all act as if the rest of the world is somehow better at this than we are, they aren't they are just as lazy | 18:30 |
| termie | liemmn: pipe dream | 18:30 |
| heckj | Okay - I think we're at a dead end on that point. Won't hurt to add, but there's little confidence (from Andy) that it would ever be actually useful. | 18:31 |
| heckj | termie - switching back to feedback on service & endpoints: what do you think about modeling endpoints as a single layer instead of modelling service and endpoint separately and linking them? | 18:31 |
| dolphm_ | leave it in the api but don't implement it? | 18:31 |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 18:31 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| termie | heckj: i think the service as a first class citizen allows us to do things that reference services | 18:32 |
| dolphm_ | termie: what's the value of referencing a service without an endpoint? | 18:32 |
| *** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| termie | heckj: as in,right now we create users for a service and make them an admin for operations under that service | 18:32 |
| termie | s/user for a service/the service itself (actual service not in keystone) uses a user to do its operations | 18:33 |
| heckj | termie: so you'd prefer to stay with service and endpoint as separate REST resources? | 18:33 |
| termie | so if we want to allow that user to have control only over things for a service, it is helpful to keep it as a first-class citizen | 18:33 |
| dolphm_ | termie: so you want to preserve services + endpoints on the management api, which i think we're all fine with ... what about the public api (catalog)? | 18:34 |
| termie | heckj: yes, i'm not happy with how they are exactly used right now (it wasn't previously clear their connection with generating the catalog) | 18:34 |
| termie | heckj: but i think the concepts are now ingrained in the system | 18:34 |
| heckj | termie: gotcha. In the next draft I'll revert back to separate service+endpoint. | 18:34 |
| termie | dolphm_: what about what part of the public api / catalog ? | 18:35 |
| termie | you mean how they are represented in teh catalog? | 18:35 |
| heckj | termie: I'll also link suggest a link on policy to service instead of endpoint | 18:35 |
| dolphm_ | termie: right | 18:35 |
| dolphm_ | termie: what do you want the catalog to look like | 18:35 |
| termie | dolphm_: i already wrote the catalog how i wanted it to look and then wrote a translation to the format defined tby the api | 18:36 |
| termie | dolphm_: off hand i think it was service -> region -> endpoint or something of that nature | 18:36 |
| termie | i don't think flattening helps us too much | 18:36 |
| *** lzyeval has quit IRC | 18:36 | |
| termie | i am being dragged away from the computer at this point | 18:37 |
| heckj | termie: do you want to change the V3 API to present it in your prefered format? I don't recall what you wanted there, but happy to | 18:37 |
| heckj | damn | 18:37 |
| dolphm_ | region -> service_type -> {adminUrl, internalUrl, name, publicUrl} | 18:37 |
| heckj | I'll follow up with termie in email | 18:37 |
| heckj | (and on mailing list) | 18:37 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: see get_catalog() in keystone.catalog.core | 18:37 |
| heckj | #action heckj follow up on service catalog and CRUD API for service and endpoints | 18:37 |
| heckj | liemmn, dolphm_: for credentials - should those be linked to tenant, or is there a use case to have them be specific to just a user? | 18:38 |
| dolphm_ | no preference from me | 18:38 |
| heckj | I was thinking of EC2 credentials, which I thought was linked to tenant - but I think one of you two brough up that it should be optional. | 18:39 |
| gyee | user access key auth? | 18:39 |
| dolphm_ | not me | 18:39 |
| liemmn | I think optional | 18:39 |
| liemmn | allows for other credential type that do not need to be scoped to tenant | 18:39 |
| heckj | I could see that for general credentials, but wasn't sure how to deal with the EC2 case (create EC2 creds) if the tenant wasn't provided. Today EC2 creds infer a tenant automatically | 18:39 |
| heckj | liemmn: So for the impl of EC2 creds, throw a failure when creating when not linking to a tenant? | 18:40 |
| liemmn | we can infer with the default tenant id thingy from the user, if a tenant is not specified. | 18:40 |
| gyee | wait, didn't someone suggested user passwords management using credential APIs | 18:40 |
| dolphm_ | gyee: o/ | 18:41 |
| heckj | liemmn: we're definitely heading towards a "default tenant" concept on the user based on the feedback I've been seeing. | 18:41 |
| gyee | dolphm_ so in that case, cred is linked to user not tenant right? | 18:41 |
| dolphm_ | gyee: for that case, yes | 18:42 |
| heckj | gyee: creds have always been linked to use - the question is do we also link them explicitly to tenant. | 18:42 |
| gyee | heckj, i c | 18:42 |
| heckj | I'm wanting to be as explicit about links as possible through the APIs to avoid some of the pain we hit with the earlier v1 and v2 api impls. | 18:42 |
| heckj | theoretically, we could have the keystone service also store/serve SSH keys for use in images when they're created as well (i.e. look towards moving keypairs into keystone from currently in nova) | 18:43 |
| heckj | that's a use case for something that wouldn't be linked to tenant, but would be for user | 18:44 |
| gyee | make sense | 18:44 |
| *** devananda has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:45 | |
| heckj | Ok - I'll go with optional in the next draft. | 18:45 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: a tenant reference IS required for ec2 credentials, correct? | 18:45 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:45 | |
| heckj | I'm aiming to make a new draft (#2) this weekend and get it published. | 18:46 |
| heckj | dolphm_: yes | 18:46 |
| heckj | #topic open discussion | 18:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 18:46 | |
| heckj | What do you all think about the feedback mechanism (google docs) for the API? I think it's been reasonably good - not sure of anything better out there, but would love to have alternate suggestions for the future | 18:47 |
| dolphm_ | i like it | 18:47 |
| gyee | etherpad? | 18:47 |
| liemmn | +1 | 18:47 |
| dolphm_ | -1 for etherpad in this case :( | 18:47 |
| liemmn | +1 (for googledocs) | 18:47 |
| heckj | gyee: I specifically didn't want etherpad because it was too easy for everything to change the content we're discussing | 18:47 |
| dolphm_ | i like the limited control over the doc, and discussion notifications | 18:47 |
| heckj | I love etherpad for immediate collaboration, but Q&A over time has (to be) been immensely painful | 18:48 |
| dolphm_ | and etherpad might complement google docs fairly well | 18:48 |
| dolphm_ | or wiki | 18:48 |
| gyee | hard to follow google doc sometime, I had to go back to emails | 18:48 |
| gyee | especially if there are so many comments | 18:48 |
| gyee | but no big deal | 18:49 |
| *** Shrews has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:49 | |
| heckj | gyee: I found the same, which is why I got aggressive about resolving some of the comments. | 18:49 |
| dolphm_ | i do think we need to resolve comments more frequently | 18:49 |
| gyee | +1 | 18:49 |
| heckj | dolphm_: my bad on some of that - was very distracted last week and didn't get a chance to read much until this past weekend | 18:49 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: speaking of which, i think i just accidentally resolved a discussion lol | 18:49 |
| heckj | heh | 18:50 |
| heckj | time check: 10 minutes left - any other topics? | 18:50 |
| gyee | is the keystone RBAC impl be similar to Nova | 18:50 |
| heckj | gyee: yes, identical in fact. It's not that way now, but that would be my choice. Same policy engine code that it's nova, glance, (soon quantum), etc. | 18:51 |
| gyee | gotcha | 18:51 |
| heckj | gyee: right now there's a binary "is_admin" check getting used. Needs to get updated | 18:51 |
| dolphm_ | CRUD on /policy vs /actions ... we're leaning on /policy blobs, correct? | 18:51 |
| gyee | I was mocking with that code for the domain stuff | 18:51 |
| gyee | had to fix a few bugs | 18:52 |
| gyee | for example, is_admin:1 doesn't work | 18:52 |
| heckj | dolphm_: I'm not leaning on anything there as yet, I just don't have a good sense of what will make the most sense near and longer term. Looking for a way to make a reasonable decision. | 18:52 |
| gyee | backend is returning is_admin:True | 18:52 |
| *** vincentricci has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:53 | |
| heckj | gyee: the policy engine bits and decorators are in several places in nova & glance - though we might consolidate that into openstack-common and then use it in keystone as well. | 18:53 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: i still don't have a solution/understanding for matching the current feature set of rules | 18:53 |
| heckj | (or put it in keystone and then use in nova, glance, etc) | 18:53 |
| gyee | heckj, agreed | 18:53 |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 18:53 | |
| *** vincentricci has left #openstack-meeting | 18:53 | |
| gyee | dolphm_, it would be nice if RBAC and do object matching | 18:54 |
| heckj | dolphm_: I'm being dense, didn't grok your last sentence. What don't you have a solution for? | 18:54 |
| gyee | like serialize the object, then string comparison | 18:54 |
| heckj | dolphm_: nm, just got it | 18:54 |
| *** ecarlin has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:54 | |
| *** ecarlin has quit IRC | 18:55 | |
| *** ecarlin has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:56 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:56 | |
| heckj | anything else? | 18:57 |
| dolphm_ | gyee: not sure if i follow your last two comments | 18:57 |
| heckj | #action heckj to publish draft2 of V3 API this weekend | 18:57 |
| gyee | is_admin:1 != is_admin:True | 18:57 |
| dolphm_ | YAY | 18:57 |
| gyee | if we serialize it and compare apple to apple | 18:57 |
| dolphm_ | if ... then what? | 18:58 |
| gyee | then is_admin:1 == is_admin:True | 18:58 |
| dolphm_ | what's is_admin? | 18:58 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 18:58 | |
| gyee | a string | 18:58 |
| gyee | in RBAC | 18:59 |
| dolphm_ | what kind of string | 18:59 |
| dolphm_ | a role name? | 18:59 |
| dolphm_ | admin? | 18:59 |
| gyee | keystone middleware sets it I think | 18:59 |
| gyee | when it sees that ADMIN token | 18:59 |
| dolphm_ | we don't have rbac today | 18:59 |
| dolphm_ | oh that's in the wsgi env? | 19:00 |
| gyee | I know, I was mocking with that code | 19:00 |
| heckj | I'm wrappin' this up - continue until Monty kicks you :-) | 19:00 |
| dolphm_ | heckj: /salute | 19:00 |
| gyee | I think so | 19:00 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 19:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 19:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 12 19:00:34 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-18.02.html | 19:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-18.02.txt | 19:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-18.02.log.html | 19:00 |
| liemmn | lunch time! | 19:00 |
| gyee | +1 | 19:00 |
| liemmn | see y'all | 19:00 |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| heckj | thanks y'all | 19:01 |
| dolphm_ | is_admin shouldn't exist with proper rbac, as there's no granularity in that statement | 19:01 |
| dolphm_ | or rather, in the claim being made | 19:01 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: CI time? | 19:01 |
| mtaylor | yup | 19:02 |
| mtaylor | #startmeeting | 19:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 12 19:02:17 2012 UTC. The chair is mtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 19:02 |
| mtaylor | anybody want to talk about CI? | 19:02 |
| clarkb | maybe | 19:02 |
| LinuxJedi | you mean that TV show about DNA that plays The Who in the intro? | 19:03 |
| mtaylor | yup | 19:04 |
| jeblair | Tonight on CI: OpenStack -- the brutal killing of an incubated project. | 19:04 |
| mtaylor | hahaha | 19:04 |
| LinuxJedi | lol! :) | 19:04 |
| mtaylor | first up - I'm deleting all of the melange jobs | 19:04 |
| mtaylor | anybody have any problems with that? | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | good. | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | next? | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | clarkb: anything fun to talk about? | 19:05 |
| clarkb | sure | 19:05 |
| clarkb | I think I am happy with the etherpad lite puppet module now. I need to make it puppet masterable then use the host LinuxJedi gave me | 19:05 |
| mtaylor | sweet | 19:06 |
| clarkb | so the testing of migrated the DBs should happen RSN | 19:06 |
| * LinuxJedi upgraded that to 12.04 for clarkb | 19:06 | |
| mtaylor | excellent | 19:06 |
| mtaylor | I'm excited about our new etherpad lite overlords | 19:06 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: you have SSH access to that now? | 19:06 |
| clarkb | LinuxJedi: in theory I do, I haven't tested it yet | 19:06 |
| clarkb | jeblair merged a puppet change that added my public key to the host | 19:06 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: ok, theory is good | 19:06 |
| *** nati_uen_ has quit IRC | 19:07 | |
| mtaylor | clarkb: so we might have migrated data to test next week some time? | 19:07 |
| mtaylor | or this week even (it's tuesday) | 19:07 |
| clarkb | mtaylor: hopefully by the end of this week | 19:07 |
| mtaylor | baller | 19:07 |
| clarkb | I will need to borrow LinuxJedi at some point as he has access to the old stuff | 19:07 |
| mtaylor | I betcha that can be arranged | 19:08 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: in theory... I tried to SSH into it the other day and failed, need to make sure I really do have access... | 19:08 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: speaking of machines and access ... it looks like there are still some things using the default tenant in my mordred@inaugust.com and/or my monty.taylor@hp.com accounts on hpcloud | 19:09 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: worst case I should have shell type access | 19:09 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: ^^ devstack is using one of them I think | 19:09 |
| clarkb | LinuxJedi: that should work | 19:09 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: don't think so. | 19:09 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: should only be your servers left there now | 19:09 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I removed all of Stackforge. | 19:09 |
| clarkb | I have also spent some time fixing bugs in the important changes and "status:reviewable" patch to gerrit now that it is live | 19:10 |
| clarkb | all UI related so nothing horribly broken, but trying to make it useful | 19:10 |
| clarkb | Shrews: were you still planning to update review-dev sometime soon? | 19:11 |
| mtaylor | all those and Shrews changes have been merged in now I think | 19:11 |
| Shrews | clarkb: just submitted the change :) | 19:11 |
| clarkb | woot | 19:11 |
| Shrews | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/8450/ | 19:11 |
| *** ecarlin has quit IRC | 19:11 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 19:11 | |
| clarkb | the other major time suck over the last week has been standardizing project in tree documentation | 19:11 |
| clarkb | the idea is that we can use a templated jenkins job to build in tree sphinx documentation then copy it to docs.openstack.org | 19:12 |
| mtaylor | yeah. that's all going to be great | 19:12 |
| clarkb | currently many projects build documentation in their own special ways so I have 8 changes in gerrit right now to make them the same (though similar is probably a better description) | 19:13 |
| jeblair | that makes me happy | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | yeah. _same_ is ... | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | ++ | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | I also like uploading them to docs.openstack.org - makes more sense than $project.openstack.org | 19:13 |
| mtaylor | also - I think that means that the wiki server will be down to only being a wiki server | 19:13 |
| clarkb | I have also updated jenkins jobs to do that, but haven't been able to test it much beyond spitting out XML and glancing at it | 19:14 |
| clarkb | so I may need to fire up a jenkins instance to test that | 19:14 |
| annegentle | Yay same. | 19:14 |
| mtaylor | I _was_ thinking we should wait until the docs changes land... | 19:14 |
| clarkb | mtaylor: yes we should | 19:14 |
| *** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:14 | |
| mtaylor | but then I realied, screw it - they're not related | 19:14 |
| annegentle | did we need to shop the idea with PTLs at all? | 19:14 |
| annegentle | or did you already? | 19:14 |
| mtaylor | it's not going to break any more than it already is | 19:14 |
| mtaylor | annegentle: nope | 19:15 |
| annegentle | mtaylor: good point, that | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | annegentle: we just submitted the changes | 19:15 |
| clarkb | I have seen any screaming. I think I got one "ok..." | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | nobody has complained yet - I don't think it's going to bug anyone | 19:15 |
| annegentle | mtaylor: ok, normal review process should be sufficient | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | yeah | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | heckj seemed bemued | 19:15 |
| mtaylor | bemused | 19:15 |
| clarkb | s/have/haven't | 19:15 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: ok, my todo this week. Find out who owns the etherpad server because it isn't on any of our cloud accounts either... | 19:15 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: who owned the old eavesdrop? | 19:16 |
| *** arunkant has quit IRC | 19:16 | |
| mtaylor | nobody | 19:16 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: o..k.. how did we get access to it? | 19:16 |
| clarkb | so in addition to finishing those things up I will also be attempting to fix the github pull request closing script | 19:16 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: ant or rick clark are the usual people to ping | 19:17 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: cool, SSH is on the same port so I'm assuming same ownership | 19:17 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: antonym | 19:17 |
| mtaylor | is the irc nick | 19:17 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: thanks | 19:17 |
| mtaylor | awesome. that's a bunch of good stuff | 19:17 |
| mtaylor | Shrews: updates on gerrit-y things? | 19:18 |
| Shrews | mtaylor: a bit | 19:18 |
| Shrews | fixed a WIP issue where it was possible to WIP a draft | 19:19 |
| Shrews | thus causing "real bad stuff" | 19:19 |
| Shrews | and... | 19:19 |
| Shrews | i have the python version of gerrit running | 19:19 |
| Shrews | well, "running" (with quotes) | 19:19 |
| mtaylor | hehe | 19:20 |
| * LinuxJedi assigns Shrews the task of re-writing it in Ruby | 19:20 | |
| *** ecarlin has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:20 | |
| clarkb | LinuxJedi: I think that propoganda got to you | 19:20 |
| * Shrews assigns a big knife to LinuxJedi's neck | 19:20 | |
| * jeblair assigns Shrews the task of re-writing it in go | 19:20 | |
| mtaylor | for the record - pygerrit uses protocol buffers and protobuf rpc | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | lol :) | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | woot! | 19:20 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: even more WTF? about ditching it then | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | right? | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | well- they do seem to have used that partially to talk back and forth between the portions written in java and the portions written in python | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | so "pygerrit" might be a bit of a misnomer | 19:21 |
| jeblair | ugh | 19:21 |
| mtaylor | it's a django app with the git repo stuff done in jgit | 19:22 |
| Shrews | it's pyjagerrit | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | hahaha | 19:22 |
| LinuxJedi | Shrews: bless you | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | ok. moving on ... | 19:22 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: did you do anything this last week? | 19:22 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: I got the puppet master up and running | 19:23 |
| mtaylor | ++ | 19:23 |
| LinuxJedi | we have eavesdrop, planet and paste running from it | 19:23 |
| LinuxJedi | and found an issue with file serving which I think we are ready for me to implement a solution for | 19:23 |
| *** matwood_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:23 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 19:23 | |
| LinuxJedi | and I did some minor things that I forgot about | 19:24 |
| *** matwood has quit IRC | 19:24 | |
| *** matwood_ is now known as matwood | 19:24 | |
| mtaylor | sweet | 19:24 |
| mtaylor | I'm excited about our new puppetmaster overlords | 19:25 |
| LinuxJedi | when complete we can call CI the muppet show | 19:25 |
| Shrews | how many overlords do we have now? | 19:25 |
| mtaylor | many many many | 19:25 |
| *** matwood has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| LinuxJedi | Shrews: we are slaves to the machines | 19:25 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: fun in the land of zuul and backups? | 19:26 |
| jeblair | well, that's the future. :) | 19:26 |
| *** donaldngo has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:26 | |
| jeblair | i've identified a couple of bugs in zuul, but by and large, it has mostly worked. | 19:26 |
| jeblair | what has failed should be easy to fix. | 19:27 |
| jeblair | i wrote gobs of docs for it | 19:27 |
| jeblair | http://ci.openstack.org/zuul/ | 19:27 |
| mtaylor | I actually just sent someone a link to that, actually | 19:27 |
| jeblair | based on clarkb's settings, so we should be able to switch that to use the new job template like the rest of the projects | 19:27 |
| mtaylor | oh - speaking of - I got a feedback on one of the lines in the docs: | 19:27 |
| LinuxJedi | jeblair: we should totally find a way to make CI docs home link to that | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: "Zuul queues those changes in the order they were approved, and notes that each subsequent change depends on the one ahead of it merging" | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: confused the reader and caused him to think it was talking about actual git-level dependent changes | 19:28 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: rather than the dependencies created by queue position | 19:29 |
| jeblair | i've been looking into server based and swift-based backups. i'm leaning toward server-based due to the complexity around key and account (ie, cloud account) credentials. | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | ++ server-based | 19:29 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: okay. i will take a look at that. i vomited out the docs in one long session and have hardly even read them. :) | 19:29 |
| jeblair | LinuxJedi: good idea | 19:29 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: :) | 19:30 |
| mtaylor | jeblair: I'm impressed that they exist | 19:30 |
| *** ncode has quit IRC | 19:30 | |
| jeblair | as far as the past -- i switched like all the jenkins slaves to precise | 19:30 |
| jeblair | (except we need to keep some oneiric around to run py26) | 19:30 |
| mtaylor | excited about that | 19:30 |
| LinuxJedi | ah, I was going to write a todo for me to do that in Stackforge | 19:31 |
| mtaylor | still haven't observed jclouds bursting yet | 19:31 |
| jeblair | and i've been working on figuring out why tempest isn't happy; it turns out at least one problem is that one of our devstack node providers is giving us corrupted images. no points for guessing which. | 19:31 |
| *** nina has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:31 | |
| mtaylor | ec2? | 19:31 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: maybe take some precise slaves offline? i did make 8 of them. | 19:31 |
| jeblair | mtaylor: close. | 19:32 |
| LinuxJedi | Azure? | 19:32 |
| *** nina has left #openstack-meeting | 19:32 | |
| jeblair | that's it in broad strokes. | 19:32 |
| * jeblair hands the speaking stone back to mtaylor | 19:33 | |
| mtaylor | jeblair: point. I'll do that | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | so- I've been poking at a bunch of random things | 19:33 |
| mtaylor | tox.ini alignment, got coverage jobs pretty much all green | 19:33 |
| * jeblair looks worried | 19:34 | |
| mtaylor | ttx and I are going to talk to the ppb next meeting about client lib release plan | 19:34 |
| clarkb | jeblair: cronspam? I wonder if it is related to pypi being slow | 19:34 |
| mtaylor | and I'm going to try to get an answer from them too on the global dep list versions that are in conflict | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | and I wrote a little code to do tag-based post-release versioning for client libs | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | and I tried not to break too many things | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | oh - didn't I do the new pypi mirror last week? | 19:35 |
| jeblair | yep | 19:35 |
| mtaylor | so, wrote a new pypi mirror from scratch :) | 19:36 |
| LinuxJedi | yay, fixing what the broken one did was fun :) | 19:36 |
| clarkb | decided the existing wheels were too square? | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | it grabs all of our projects, pip install downloads all of their depends (and depends of depends) to populate the PIP_DOWNLOAD_CACHE | 19:36 |
| mtaylor | and then turns the files in the pip download cache into a pypi style index | 19:36 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: the existing wheels broke all our jobs overnight ;) | 19:37 |
| heckj | o/ (mtaylor: bemused is a good word - fine by me, don't mind being consistent) | 19:37 |
| mtaylor | yay! | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | we'll consider that a binding opinion | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | I think that's about all I've got | 19:38 |
| mtaylor | anything from anybody else? | 19:38 |
| LinuxJedi | mtaylor: we will be able to do the meeting next week? | 19:39 |
| LinuxJedi | (we as in me and you) | 19:39 |
| mtaylor | LinuxJedi: good question | 19:39 |
| mtaylor | we'll try - but LinuxJedi and I might be offline during meeting time | 19:40 |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:40 | |
| mtaylor | even so - I'm sure that jeblair and clarkb and Shrews can soldier on without us :) | 19:40 |
| clarkb | but who will Shrews stab if you guys aren't here | 19:40 |
| Shrews | mtaylor: you're still here? heh | 19:40 |
| * Shrews eyes clarkb | 19:41 | |
| LinuxJedi | lol :) | 19:41 |
| jeblair | we will get so much done... and violence free. | 19:41 |
| jeblair | VIOLENCE FREE, SHREWS! | 19:41 |
| LinuxJedi | jeblair: nothing will break ;) | 19:41 |
| Shrews | pffft | 19:41 |
| jeblair | LinuxJedi: was that some kind of curse? thanks. :) | 19:41 |
| LinuxJedi | clarkb: my availability will be real patchy next week so make sure you get what you need out of me this one :) | 19:42 |
| clarkb | just access to the old etherpad db at some point this week | 19:42 |
| LinuxJedi | will aim for that at least | 19:42 |
| mtaylor | k. well, I think that's about it | 19:45 |
| *** jk0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:45 | |
| *** ecarlin has quit IRC | 19:45 | |
| mtaylor | unless anybody else has anything... | 19:47 |
| Shrews | mtaylor, jeblair: when can we upgrade gerrit? | 19:48 |
| jeblair | asap i think. if the change looks good on gerrit-dev, propose it for prod, and we can approve it when things seem quietish. | 19:49 |
| Shrews | k | 19:49 |
| mtaylor | work. k. thanks everybody | 19:50 |
| mtaylor | #endmeeting | 19:50 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 19:50 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 12 19:50:24 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:50 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-19.02.html | 19:50 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-19.02.txt | 19:50 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-19.02.log.html | 19:50 |
| *** Shrews has left #openstack-meeting | 19:52 | |
| *** jbryce has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:52 | |
| *** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:53 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:56 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 19:56 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:57 | |
| *** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:58 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 19:58 | |
| *** krtaylor has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| ttx | o/ | 20:00 |
| bcwaldon | hey hey | 20:00 |
| johnpur | o/ | 20:00 |
| mtaylor | o/ | 20:01 |
| jbryce | #startmeeting | 20:01 |
| danwent | o/ | 20:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 12 20:01:18 2012 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:01 |
| jbryce | 6 of us...one more around? | 20:01 |
| chmouel | notmyname is not able to attend today so I will be giving the swift update for him | 20:01 |
| bcwaldon | chmouel: wrong meeting! | 20:01 |
| jk0 | o/ | 20:02 |
| ttx | chmouel: one more hour to wait :P | 20:02 |
| jbryce | devcamcar, heckj, vishy: around at all? | 20:02 |
| chmouel | hey :) | 20:02 |
| bcwaldon | vishy and anotherjesse are out | 20:02 |
| *** edconzel has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| jbryce | well jk0 makes 7 so we can get started | 20:02 |
| mtaylor | don't count me ... | 20:03 |
| mtaylor | I'm not a member any more - i'm merely a petitioner today | 20:03 |
| jbryce | oops...habit | 20:03 |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:03 | |
| jbryce | pvo: ? | 20:03 |
| ttx | jaypipes is your man | 20:03 |
| jaypipes | hello. | 20:03 |
| jaypipes | sorry for being late. | 20:03 |
| jbryce | sweet | 20:03 |
| jbryce | #topic Library/Gating projects | 20:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Library/Gating projects" | 20:04 | |
| jbryce | http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/LibraryProjectDefinition | 20:04 |
| jbryce | ttx or mtaylor: want to intro this oen? | 20:04 |
| jbryce | one | 20:04 |
| ttx | I can intro and let mtaylor elaborate | 20:04 |
| mtaylor | yeah | 20:04 |
| mtaylor | or ttx can | 20:04 |
| heckj | o/ | 20:04 |
| ttx | I'll do the historic intro | 20:04 |
| ttx | For client library projects we've always been a bit in between states | 20:05 |
| ttx | when they got split out of their "parent" project we decided that they would retain core status... | 20:05 |
| ttx | ... by being considered another deliverable of the same project | 20:06 |
| ttx | so same PTL, but also same release date | 20:06 |
| ttx | and same project in Launchpad, so same bugtracker | 20:06 |
| ttx | This creates a number of problems, so now is probably the time to change | 20:06 |
| *** sparkycollier has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:06 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: go for it | 20:06 |
| mtaylor | so what we'd like to do, as I've written up above with a bunch of chatting with bcwaldon and ttx | 20:07 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 20:07 | |
| *** donaldngo has quit IRC | 20:07 | |
| mtaylor | is to divorce the release of the client libs from the normal release process a bit | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | and just release them whenever they need a release | 20:07 |
| mtaylor | in general, we seem to be in general agreement that any given version of a client lib should support both the current and the previous versions of the api | 20:08 |
| jaypipes | ++ | 20:08 |
| danwent | mtaylor: how far back? do we have a strategy for EOL-ing API versions? | 20:08 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:08 | |
| ttx | took us a while to come up with somethign that we would both agree with | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | danwent: well, at the moment as far back as essex, because diablo is problematic | 20:08 |
| mtaylor | but, I'd argue indefinitely, tbh | 20:08 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: 'essex' is not an api version | 20:08 |
| *** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:09 | |
| mtaylor | you can still use libmysqlclient to talk to v1.0 mysql if you can find a v1.0 mysql | 20:09 |
| *** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:09 | |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: sorry. v2 and on, since v1 didn't have a fully impl, right? | 20:09 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: are you talking about compute api? | 20:09 |
| danwent | mtaylor: but there's definitely a maintenance burden to supporting all API versions. | 20:09 |
| jaypipes | mtaylor: compute 1.1 api was renamed to 2 | 20:09 |
| mtaylor | danwent: that there is - so I'm purely talking about theory - I think we probably do want to think about an EOL policy for practicality sake | 20:10 |
| bcwaldon | hold on meow, mtaylor, do you have anything else to say w.r.t. explanation, or can we move forward with feedback? | 20:10 |
| danwent | I'd like to remove support for Quantum v1.x APIs fairly agressively… maybe even in Folsom. | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | but, the thing is - thinking about it from an end user's perspective, if they hear "my cloud provider is running openstack" - | 20:10 |
| danwent | bcwaldon: good point, i'll hold off :) | 20:10 |
| mtaylor | then it really should be enough for them to just grab the openstack library and be assured that they can talk to that cloud | 20:11 |
| ttx | the discussion on deprecation doesn't really affect the proposed plan anyway | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | without having to know whether or not the provider is running essex or garbanzo | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | it actually doesn't | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | well, it does a LITTLE | 20:11 |
| mtaylor | so- amongst the points are: | 20:11 |
| ttx | the question at hand is about the creation of new categories of projects to cover for a separate release scheme for client library projects | 20:12 |
| ttx | and additionally recognize gating projects as a category of openstack projects as well | 20:12 |
| mtaylor | indeed. sorry, I got caught up in technical details :) | 20:12 |
| danwent | ttx: ok, let's talk about that first, then we can circle back to backward compat questions. | 20:12 |
| ttx | separate from our strict definition of "core" | 20:12 |
| heckj | mtaylor, ttx: what are the problems this is triyng to solve? ttx referred to problems that have come up… | 20:12 |
| mtaylor | a couple - one of them is the branching problem | 20:12 |
| ttx | heckj: on my side, I'd say pressure to release cleint libraries at other moments that openstack core releases | 20:13 |
| ttx | than* | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | in that a stable/essex branch of python-*client doesn't make any sense from a release perspective for an end user | 20:13 |
| mtaylor | the other being what ttx just said | 20:13 |
| markmc | mtaylor, why not a stable/essex branch? it's what essex distros would ship | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | markmc: say you're a customer of rackspace or hp | 20:14 |
| ttx | additionally, sharing bugtracker is actaully a bit of pain that we'd remove :) | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | or ibm or at&t | 20:14 |
| pvo | jbryce: here now. | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | and you'd like to talk to instances in your cloud account | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | what version of the library should you install? | 20:14 |
| mtaylor | additionally, what if you have an account on rackspace AND hp AND at&t | 20:15 |
| heckj | mtaylor: I'm not getting the "a stable/essex branch of python-*client doesn't make any sense from a release perspective for an end user"… why doesn't it make sense? | 20:15 |
| ttx | for the late arrivals, we're discussing http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/LibraryProjectDefinition | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | and you would like to have a script which operates on all of those clouds | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | (such as the devstack gating scripts) | 20:15 |
| mtaylor | do you suggest that I should install two different versoins of python-*client to talk to the different clouds? | 20:15 |
| markmc | mtaylor, you might need to e.g. wait until Fedora 18 before being able to talk to a folsom based cloud provider | 20:15 |
| jaypipes | heckj: have you ever downloaded the "stable/whatever" version of libmysqlclient? :) | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | markmc: I'm installing from pypi | 20:16 |
| markmc | mtaylor, I'm giving the distro perspective | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | heckj: or have you downloaded the libmysqlclient0.15? | 20:16 |
| jbryce | heckj: i think because the clients are talking to APIs not a specific version of the implementation | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | markmc: I know | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | markmc: I'm giving the "end user wants to talk to service" perspective | 20:16 |
| mtaylor | which I battle with every day as a very large customer of both hp and rackspace clouds :) | 20:16 |
| markmc | mtaylor, right, but both might be an option - stable/essex branch and more regular releases from master | 20:16 |
| heckj | jaypipes, mtaylor: then it's the same issue that Thierry is asserting - we'd like to have client library release versioned independently of the core projects, and not assert dependence on client library to core version | 20:17 |
| mtaylor | heckj: yes | 20:17 |
| *** edconzel has quit IRC | 20:17 | |
| jaypipes | heckj: exactly. | 20:17 |
| jbryce | markmc: but it's not essex from a client perspective, it's api v X | 20:17 |
| jbryce | which may or may not be different in essex from diablo or folsom | 20:18 |
| jaypipes | heckj: and the clients would be named not stable/essex, but python-glanceclient-2.x.x | 20:18 |
| jaypipes | heckj: with the number representing the last version of the API they speak to. | 20:18 |
| ttx | fwiw I was defending the same view as markmc until recently, but the idea of versioning client libraries by API support... and have pure <= backward compat makes the need for stable/* go away... and not having them simplifies versioning wrt PyPI publishing a lot | 20:18 |
| jbryce | that's pretty appealing to me from a user perspective | 20:18 |
| *** torgomatic has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:19 | |
| johnpur | jbryce: agree | 20:19 |
| bcwaldon | I do want to bring up that it doesn't work 100% to version clients to match api versions directly | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | it means we'll need stronger back-compat testing than we have, but that's on our todo list | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: why not? | 20:19 |
| jaypipes | bcwaldon: just the major API version.. | 20:19 |
| heckj | I just updated http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/LibraryProjectDefinition to add the list of problems that we're solving with this proposal | 20:19 |
| mtaylor | yeah- just major version | 20:19 |
| bcwaldon | jaypipesThe versioning needs to belong to the library -- what if we need to rewrite a client lib without changing supported versions? | 20:19 |
| heckj | bcwaldon: +++ | 20:20 |
| jaypipes | bcwaldon: then the minor/revision numbers would change. | 20:20 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: so, I'd say that the Major of the client lib matches the major of the api | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | and what does it mean to release glanceclient v2, then add a bugfix for v1 support | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | jaypipes: that versioning is insane | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: no | 20:20 |
| markmc | I guess I mean "stable releases of the v2 glance client" | 20:20 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: I would argue that the major of the client lib is the contract assertion "I support X and earlier" | 20:20 |
| markmc | i.e. safe fixes to the v2 API support | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | but that version represents the librarary, not itscapabilities! | 20:20 |
| jaypipes | bcwaldon: you'd still increment the minor (or revision) number... it's a fix in the v1 area for the client that supports v2 | 20:21 |
| bcwaldon | what other projects do that? | 20:21 |
| markmc | adding v3 support does not qualify as a safe update to the v2 client | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: every C library that versions itself sensibly | 20:21 |
| jaypipes | bcwaldon: every C library I know. | 20:21 |
| heckj | I'm 100% with bcwaldon here - the versioning of the library needs to be independent of it's capabilities. The whole point is to break this away from dependence on core project releases. | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: standard libtool versioning | 20:21 |
| bcwaldon | I'm not a C developer, so I don't have that bias | 20:21 |
| bcwaldon | or experience, however you want to say it | 20:21 |
| mtaylor | no, the version of the library is only meaningful as an API contract assertation | 20:21 |
| jbryce | i think the version is actually very easy to understand and pretty consistent with most server/client libs that i've seen | 20:22 |
| bcwaldon | jbryce: example? | 20:22 |
| ttx | jbryce: ++ | 20:22 |
| jbryce | we've already talked about mysql | 20:22 |
| bcwaldon | I agree it's EXTREMELY obvious, but then we lose the versioning of the library itself | 20:22 |
| jbryce | postgres | 20:22 |
| jbryce | bcwaldon: how? | 20:22 |
| jbryce | bcwaldon: did you read the proposal? | 20:22 |
| bcwaldon | jbryce: ...yes | 20:22 |
| jbryce | bcwaldon: there is versioning of the library itself | 20:22 |
| jbryce | bcwaldon: all the other numbers | 20:22 |
| ttx | fwiw mtaylor proposed pure numbers as versions (1...2..3...) but I really thought that linking them to supported APi versions would make it a lot more meaningful | 20:23 |
| bcwaldon | so let me post this case to you | 20:23 |
| markmc | mtaylor, libtool versioning is independent of project release versioning | 20:23 |
| bcwaldon | if I want to completely rewrite my library, I'll probably increment the major version to indicate that | 20:23 |
| jaypipes | markmc: not project release. API version. | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | markmc: yes. that's what's great about it | 20:23 |
| bcwaldon | if I completely rewrite glanceclient, I can't tell anybody about it! | 20:23 |
| jbryce | bcwaldon: why? i don't have that bias...or experience | 20:23 |
| devcamcar | o/ | 20:23 |
| devcamcar | made it finally | 20:23 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: why would they care? | 20:24 |
| jbryce | mtaylor: ++ | 20:24 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: as a developer, I care a LOT | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: why would I, as a consumer of the library and its api, care if you rewrote it? | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: you shouldn't | 20:24 |
| jbryce | versions are useful for the meaning we put in them | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | either it works when you call its api or it doesn't | 20:24 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: do you care if you hav epython 2.6 vs 2.7? | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: I care if the api changed | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: I do not care if guido rewrite string.strip() | 20:24 |
| jaypipes | right. | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | as long as it behaves the same | 20:24 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: I think you should | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | bcwaldon: no | 20:24 |
| mtaylor | actually | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | that's why apis are awesome | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: maybe not *you*, but you should be able to | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | I don't have to know | 20:25 |
| ijw | What if you changed the Python side of the calling interface but it still works with over-the-wire API v2? | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | great point | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | ijw: I would argue that you can't do that | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: and thats where you lose me | 20:25 |
| markmc | of course you care if an implementation is a compatible rewrite of the same API | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | add a new interface | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: if you want to tie my hands, I guess you can | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: but I will disown you | 20:25 |
| markmc | we cared about ksl being a rewrite of the same API | 20:25 |
| jbryce | versioning schemes have whatever meaning we give to them | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | so, you might have 10000s of devs using your lib | 20:25 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: +1 million | 20:25 |
| mtaylor | do you want to make them rewrite all of their code just because you had a whim? | 20:26 |
| mtaylor | that's crazy | 20:26 |
| bcwaldon | jbryce: and I want to assign the most sane versioning | 20:26 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: I see your point. API-based versioning doesn't let you "show" that you made a major rewrite of the lib if it supports the same APIs | 20:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: yes | 20:26 |
| ttx | The proposed plan supposes a bit of stability in the client libs | 20:26 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: and major versions are supposed to indicate backwards incompatibile changes | 20:26 |
| bcwaldon | or at least allow it | 20:26 |
| markmc | minor versions indicate a large, potentially risky update | 20:27 |
| heckj | bcwaldon: I think the idea here (re-reading the proposal) is that the first number is intended to indicate the API compatibiity, the second, third, etc - are whatever the client wants to use for it's versioning | 20:27 |
| markmc | micro versions indicate a safe update | 20:27 |
| bcwaldon | heckj: I know what the proposal is | 20:27 |
| jbryce | heckj: exactly | 20:27 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: would a era.api.revision numbering work better for you ? | 20:27 |
| jbryce | again...the version means whatever we want it to mean | 20:27 |
| ttx | instead of api.revision ? | 20:27 |
| heckj | bcwaldon: so for example 2.5 getting a core API rewrite could go to 2.6? | 20:28 |
| heckj | ^^ that made no sense as a sentence | 20:28 |
| uvirtbot | heckj: Error: "^" is not a valid command. | 20:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I dont really want 'api version' in my versioning scheme | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | heckj: :) | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | ok. can I propose something then? | 20:28 |
| heckj | doing a rewrite of the client library but supporting the same API would do something like go from 2.5 to 2.6 | 20:28 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: I'd argue that's a bit developer-centric | 20:28 |
| bcwaldon | mtaylor: shoot | 20:28 |
| ijw | The significance of the code version number isn't so much a significance of the number of lines of code changed. It's more an indicator of what reported bugs apply to the version you're looking at. | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | can we table the exact versioning scheme discussion for later | 20:28 |
| mtaylor | and get through the "we should release these in this general manner" bit for now | 20:29 |
| ttx | yes, it's actually not the core of the proposal either ;) | 20:29 |
| jbryce | ttx: ++ personally i hope we have far more users than developers...otherwise we're all going to be in a tough place | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | and then we can circle back on what the major number should mean or not mean | 20:29 |
| jbryce | mtaylor: good idea | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | because I TOTALLY hear your point | 20:29 |
| bcwaldon | okie dokie | 20:29 |
| mtaylor | and I've got a slightly different one that I think we can sit down and work through so that we're both happy :) | 20:29 |
| ttx | the cenrtal part of the proposal is: | 20:29 |
| ttx | * Agree on a category of "openstack" project that is separate from core (which is the servers that get released every 6 months) | 20:30 |
| ttx | * Agree that those could be released separately | 20:30 |
| johnpur | I think that any developer will need to read the "doc" README etc. prior to using a particular library to see if his app will be compatible with the target system. To some extent the actual versioning numbers have little meaning to me as a dev, except as a starting point perhaps | 20:31 |
| ttx | Then the secodn part is the abandon of stable/* branches and pure backwards compat | 20:31 |
| ttx | Then versioning | 20:31 |
| ttx | Then deprecation of API | 20:31 |
| jbryce | ok | 20:31 |
| johnpur | ttx: agree | 20:31 |
| ttx | I think the versioning discussion is actually not that important once you agree on the "second part" | 20:31 |
| jbryce | is the vote bot running? | 20:31 |
| jaypipes | jbryce: should be. | 20:32 |
| ttx | it's more what is obvious by the version number and what is documented | 20:32 |
| Daviey | /win 286 | 20:32 |
| ttx | Does anyone have objections on the central part of the proposal | 20:32 |
| bcwaldon | negative | 20:32 |
| ttx | The idea that there are openstack projects that are not core projects. | 20:32 |
| jaypipes | no objections. | 20:32 |
| jbryce | not here | 20:32 |
| *** joesavak has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| ttx | Libraries and Gating projects | 20:32 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: thoughts? | 20:33 |
| jbryce | jaypipes: he's out today | 20:33 |
| ttx | that we stronglmy depend on to build core projects anyway | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | ah, k | 20:33 |
| ttx | jaypipes: I picked my day to present that ;) | 20:33 |
| jaypipes | heh | 20:33 |
| heckj | no objection | 20:33 |
| ttx | OK... second part then, the absence of need for stable/* branches and the idea that you should always be running the latest version of the client anyway | 20:34 |
| ttx | since that's what supports every non-completely-deprecated old version | 20:34 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: how reasonable is that for distros? | 20:34 |
| bcwaldon | always running the latest client, that is | 20:35 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: you have to take into account that there aren't so many fixes to client libs | 20:35 |
| heckj | for a distribution, you need a cut somewhere, and I want to be able to patch those specific pieces. Are you asserting all distributions should choose their own markers for that? | 20:35 |
| danwent | ttx: i mentioned this in an email to you all a while back. If in folsom I make big changes to the client, but someone discovers an important but small fix in what we release for essex, where do I commit that minor fix such that distros pick it up? | 20:35 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: you won't be releasing clients as 'folsom' or 'essex' | 20:35 |
| danwent | ttx: assumption is that current state of client lib is in churn. | 20:35 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: otherwise it's quite unacceptable, and they would be doing their stable/essex branches anyway... but if you consider that there aren't that many updates anyway... | 20:35 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: you'll bump the bugfix number and release again | 20:35 |
| annegentle | do we have any limiters on complaints about documentation for non-core projects? :) | 20:35 |
| heckj | danwent: ^ exactly. I think we need this. I don't care if we call it stable/*, but we should have a branch or at least tag when we make a release. Doing otherwise is irresponsible | 20:36 |
| danwent | bcwaldon: fair, substitute "previous release" for essex, and "next release" for folsom. | 20:36 |
| danwent | bcwaldon: so we as developers we essentially keep an internal notion of a stable branch? | 20:36 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: I would assume you could maintain the previous major release if you really wanted to and tag it | 20:36 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: with glanceclient, I would only tag master when I want to release | 20:37 |
| ttx | heckj: the trick is that there are going to be a flow of releases (uploads to Pypi) | 20:37 |
| ttx | heckj: no strong marker like "essex" | 20:37 |
| danwent | bcwaldon: that makes sense. I guess my point is that we'll effectively be having a "stable" branch. So I guess i'm missing why we said we're getting rid of stable branches. | 20:38 |
| heckj | ttx: I'm fine with a tag on each release then, and not a branch - but there needs to be a marker in our code control that indicates where that match is. I don't relish using git commitish | 20:38 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: how would we have 'stable' branches? | 20:38 |
| ttx | heckj: client libs are actually released by tagging, that's mtaylor's plan | 20:38 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: there would be a single branch: master | 20:39 |
| danwent | bcwaldon: if i have one branch where I make major changes targeted for the next "big" release of the client, and I also have the ability to keep patching the last big release with minor fixes, to me that seems like having a master branch and a stable branch. | 20:39 |
| *** kevin-lewis-9 has quit IRC | 20:39 | |
| ttx | we basically only maintain the master..; that doesn't prevent people from having branches... or caollaborating in backporting | 20:39 |
| danwent | b/c those "minor bug fixes" would accumulate | 20:39 |
| bcwaldon | danwent: I'm advocating for not keeping a 'previous relase' branch around | 20:39 |
| ttx | but the CI only tests a simple square matrix of combinations on every commit... not a cubic one | 20:40 |
| ttx | hmm, I mean, a set instead of a matrix :) | 20:40 |
| jaypipes | we're still talking about the client library projects ONLY here, right? | 20:41 |
| danwent | ttx: ok, i don't want to throw this discussion off track. my only point was that we may well be developing on train sequence of commits, while doing bugfix releases on another. | 20:41 |
| bcwaldon | I think we're wandering off into arbitrary-land here | 20:41 |
| ttx | jaypipes: yes | 20:41 |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| bcwaldon | ttx: get us back on track! :) | 20:41 |
| ttx | struggling | 20:41 |
| ttx | mtaylor just shot himself | 20:41 |
| *** dolphm_ has quit IRC | 20:41 | |
| bcwaldon | we're obviously all in support of the overarching goal here | 20:41 |
| mtaylor | hehe | 20:41 |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: stil here ? Defend the absence of need for stable branches, that's your idea :) | 20:42 |
| mtaylor | ttx: yup | 20:42 |
| * markmc wonders whatever happened to the idea of proposals for the PPB being discussed on the mailing list first | 20:42 | |
| *** mnewby__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:43 | |
| mtaylor | it comes back down to user experience thing ... in what way do you release the old bugfixed client lib so that it's useful to the end user | 20:43 |
| danwent | sorry, is that a question to me? :) | 20:44 |
| danwent | mtaylor: i agree that's the question I'm getting at. | 20:44 |
| *** mnewby___ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:44 | |
| ttx | markmc: actually I don't think we'll close the proposal this week, it's more RFC at this stage | 20:45 |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 20:45 | |
| *** mnewby___ is now known as mnewby | 20:45 | |
| ttx | when we know how to write the final proposal, we'll push to list | 20:45 |
| markmc | ttx, cool, just think the various strands could be teased out more thoughtfully on list | 20:45 |
| ttx | markmc: in particular, got to know if the "cental part" is acceptable to a majority of PPB members or not | 20:46 |
| *** mnewby_ has quit IRC | 20:46 | |
| *** yaguang has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:46 | |
| ttx | central* | 20:46 |
| danwent | ttx: none of my concerns are around the central part. | 20:47 |
| *** mnewby__ has quit IRC | 20:47 | |
| ttx | So if I summarize... | 20:47 |
| jaypipes | yes please :) | 20:47 |
| ttx | We can elaborate a plan based on the central part, with the following remaining pain points: | 20:47 |
| ttx | - need for "official" stable branches | 20:48 |
| ttx | - API or major-rewrite-driven versioning scheme | 20:48 |
| ttx | - room for deprecating old APIs | 20:48 |
| ttx | any other pain point ? | 20:48 |
| danwent | ttx: captures my comments | 20:49 |
| johnpur | just a comment, as this is a "policy" decision... this needs to be globally applicable, not choose or not on a per project basis | 20:49 |
| heckj | ttx: matches to me | 20:50 |
| ttx | johnpur: that would apply to the new "Library" category of openstack projects. | 20:50 |
| ttx | but yes, for all of them. | 20:50 |
| johnpur | right | 20:50 |
| *** joearnold has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:50 | |
| ttx | In particular, it should probably include openstack-common once it is released as a separate lib | 20:51 |
| ttx | mtaylor: so that sums up the pain points you need to discuss on and off the ML this week | 20:52 |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 20:52 | |
| ttx | mtaylor: ideally we'll have a final proposal based on that feedback for next week ? | 20:53 |
| ttx | Corollary: devstack becomes a gating project, so it is no longer "not an official OpenStack project" as the website claims | 20:54 |
| jbryce | all right...anything else for this week on this one? | 20:55 |
| *** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:57 | |
| mtaylor | ttx: yes. by next week we will have that | 20:57 |
| ttx | jbryce: looks like we're done for this week | 20:57 |
| jbryce | thanks guys | 20:57 |
| jbryce | #endmeeting | 20:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 20:58 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 12 20:58:00 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:58 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-20.01.html | 20:58 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-20.01.txt | 20:58 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-20.01.log.html | 20:58 |
| *** jk0 has left #openstack-meeting | 20:58 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 20:58 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:59 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| *** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| ttx | o/ | 21:02 |
| danwent | o/ | 21:02 |
| ttx | heckj, bcwaldon, vishy, devcamcar, danwent: still around ? | 21:02 |
| devcamcar | o/ | 21:02 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: yes | 21:02 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: no vishy | 21:02 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: and no, I am not his replacement | 21:02 |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:03 | |
| heckj | o/ | 21:03 |
| chmouel | ttx: i'll be replacing for notmyname today | 21:03 |
| jgriffith | o/ | 21:03 |
| ttx | chmouel: awesome | 21:03 |
| ttx | arh | 21:03 |
| ttx | (about vishy) | 21:03 |
| ttx | #startmeeting | 21:03 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Jun 12 21:03:43 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:03 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: fire him! | 21:03 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:03 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: can't, he is my boss. | 21:03 |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 21:03 | |
| ttx | Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting | 21:04 |
| ttx | #info 3 weeks left until the milestone-proposed cut for Folsom-2 (July 3) | 21:04 |
| ttx | #topic Actions from previous meeting | 21:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting" | 21:04 | |
| ttx | * ttx to point Swift distro packagers to required config changes in Swift 1.5.0: DONE | 21:04 |
| ttx | For completeness: see https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg12754.html | 21:04 |
| ttx | * bcwaldon to set assignees for glance-client-parity and streaming-server specs: DONE | 21:04 |
| ttx | * jog0 to update status for general-host-aggregates bp: DONE | 21:05 |
| ttx | * ttx to fix jgriffith access to bp updating: DONE | 21:05 |
| ttx | * lzyeval to update status of ec2-id-compatibilty bp: DONE | 21:05 |
| ttx | * vishy to contact assignees for config-drive-v2, delete-in-any-state and user-configurable-rbac and confirm F3 targeting | 21:05 |
| ttx | looks DONE now | 21:05 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone statu | 21:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone statu" | 21:05 | |
| ttx | s | 21:05 |
| ttx | :) | 21:05 |
| ttx | heckj: o/ | 21:05 |
| * heckj waves | 21:05 | |
| ttx | welcome back :) | 21:06 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-2 | 21:06 |
| ttx | Got a few questions for you | 21:06 |
| heckj | shoot | 21:06 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/stop-ids-in-uris (Guang Yee) | 21:06 |
| ttx | How is that going ? termie said last week he didn't understand why that was needed, or "essential"... | 21:06 |
| termie | ttx: the best description i have run into was that people are worried about token ids leaking in logs | 21:07 |
| heckj | That blueprint will be dealt with in the V3 API, shouldn't be listed as essential. Certainly won't be done by this milestone at the rate we're going. | 21:07 |
| heckj | termie: correct | 21:07 |
| ttx | heckj: downgrade to "High" ? | 21:07 |
| heckj | ttx: done | 21:07 |
| ttx | cool | 21:07 |
| termie | while i feel like that is probably nice to think about, i also don't think our tokens are long-lived enough for that to matter much | 21:07 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/implement-v3-core-api (heckj) | 21:08 |
| ttx | how is it going so far ? | 21:08 |
| ttx | ...and how likely is it to be completed within the next 3 weeks ? | 21:08 |
| heckj | ^ still working through draft updates, so no initial work has started here. Given the timing, I suspect it's not going to be done this milestone, and we'll need to delay it | 21:08 |
| uvirtbot | heckj: Error: "still" is not a valid command. | 21:08 |
| heckj | will retarget the BP | 21:08 |
| bcwaldon | uvirtbot: thanks for the update | 21:08 |
| uvirtbot | bcwaldon: Error: "thanks" is not a valid command. | 21:08 |
| heckj | one of these days I'm going to have figure out what that thing does | 21:09 |
| *** nati_uen_ has quit IRC | 21:09 | |
| bcwaldon | heckj: it's a bender | 21:09 |
| markwash | insert girder? | 21:09 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:09 | |
| bcwaldon | 31 degrees, 32 degrees | 21:09 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/keystone-ipv6-support (ayoung) | 21:10 |
| ttx | Not started either ? Any chance /that one/ will be in F2 ? | 21:10 |
| ayoung | ttx, my vote is no | 21:10 |
| heckj | ttx: no progress as yet, expected as documentation on a deployment option in documentation. Quite possibly. | 21:10 |
| heckj | Or not, if ayoung says... | 21:10 |
| ttx | heh | 21:10 |
| ayoung | ttx, IPv6 support is not there yet in upstream Eventlet. I suggest that if someone wants it, they use HTTPD for the near term | 21:11 |
| heckj | will retarget that too | 21:11 |
| ttx | note that you're preparing yourself a large F3 plate, which is not really the best idea in the world :) | 21:11 |
| heckj | didn't say I'd retarget that to F3 | 21:11 |
| ttx | ayoung: if the implementation of that bp depends on ipv6 support in eventlet... sounds a bit far away to me | 21:11 |
| *** jbryce has quit IRC | 21:11 | |
| ttx | heckj: ack | 21:11 |
| heckj | removed from any milestones or series for now | 21:12 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/rbac-keystone (dolphm) | 21:12 |
| ttx | Slow progress, does that mean it might miss F2 too ? | 21:12 |
| ttx | ..or that there are still 3 weeks left after all ? | 21:13 |
| heckj | That will likely split per this mornings keystone meeting | 21:13 |
| ttx | cool. Split is good, couldn't actually figure what work was involved in this one | 21:13 |
| ttx | heckj: anything else ? | 21:13 |
| heckj | The implementation of an API supporting RBAC will be tied to V3 API, but we'll also be documenting and setting some defaults, suggested values for policy.json and implementing a policy engine in keystone itself | 21:13 |
| ttx | so APIv3 is the big blocker IIUC | 21:14 |
| heckj | Quite a bit of the desired feature work is dependent on it | 21:14 |
| ttx | heckj: any other comment ? | 21:14 |
| heckj | nope | 21:15 |
| ttx | Anyone else, questions about Keystone ? | 21:15 |
| ayoung | ttx, BTW, that blueprint should really be for IPv6 support across all Openstack projects that are based on Eventlet | 21:15 |
| ttx | ayoung: should probably be filed as separate blueprints... since there is no need to roll it all out at the exact same moment | 21:16 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:16 | |
| * chmouel waves | 21:16 | |
| ttx | chmouel: yo | 21:16 |
| ttx | I just had a question about the python-swiftclient split, how far is it from completion ? | 21:16 |
| chmouel | it's done since bcwaldon merged the review on glance | 21:17 |
| *** devananda has left #openstack-meeting | 21:17 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 21:17 | |
| chmouel | there seem to be some problem with the functional tests | 21:17 |
| chmouel | which I am going to work on | 21:17 |
| ttx | chmouel: was the client lib removed from swift proper ? | 21:17 |
| chmouel | yes | 21:17 |
| ttx | devcamcar: does that affect horizon ? | 21:18 |
| chmouel | I have logged a bug on horizon to have a look at it so they can switch from cloudfiles | 21:18 |
| ttx | or did you anticipate it ? | 21:18 |
| ttx | ok. | 21:18 |
| chmouel | they are not using swift.common.client | 21:18 |
| chmouel | but python-cloudfiles | 21:18 |
| devcamcar | ttx: no, we've been using python-cloudfiles | 21:18 |
| ttx | oh, so that's actually good news for you :) | 21:18 |
| devcamcar | we do plan to move to python-swiftclient when this all settles | 21:18 |
| chmouel | well python-cloudfiles is somewhat slower than swiftclient :) | 21:18 |
| ttx | chmouel: could you post to the ML when the final bits land ? This will affect distros | 21:19 |
| chmouel | ttx: yes I was planning to do that just after this meeting | 21:19 |
| ttx | they should anticipate the work, before 1.5.1 is released | 21:19 |
| ttx | awesome | 21:19 |
| chmouel | so another thing | 21:19 |
| chmouel | There has been some discussion to have devstack gating on swift commits | 21:20 |
| ttx | #action chmouel to post about python-swiftclient separation to the ML | 21:20 |
| chmouel | and we still need to look over how's that going to work | 21:20 |
| chmouel | so I am going to get in touch with the CI to understand how's that going to work with the swift specifics | 21:20 |
| Ravikumar_hp | question: any documentation on python-swiftclient | 21:21 |
| chmouel | Ravikumar_hp: there is none | 21:21 |
| Ravikumar_hp | list of APIs and how to call | 21:21 |
| chmouel | is there any documentation for other *clients library btw: ? | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | chmouel: isn't it the same as the old swift.client docs? | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | chmouel: yes, current glance client | 21:21 |
| ttx | #action chmouel to discuss with CI on enabling swift in devstack-gate | 21:22 |
| chmouel | Ravikumar_hp: oh yeah actually they should get auto generated soon we have just merged a commit but I am not sure where this is going to be exposed | 21:22 |
| ttx | chmouel: Anything else ? | 21:22 |
| chmouel | noip | 21:22 |
| ttx | Other questions on Swift ? | 21:23 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 21:23 | |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:23 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:23 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: o/ | 21:23 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/folsom-2 | 21:23 |
| ttx | Looking at the road to api-v2, looks like continuous progress... | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | indeed | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | we've come up with some more bps in the past week or two | 21:24 |
| ttx | api-v2-links depends on api-v2-refactor-schemas, which in unassigned / unknown status ? | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | but we are making steady progress | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: you should really stop caching that info before the meetings | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I've gotten efficient at updating it just as the meeting starts :) | 21:24 |
| ttx | sigh | 21:24 |
| bcwaldon | le sigh indeed | 21:25 |
| ttx | Actually it's http://wiki.openstack.org/releasestatus/ that is not refreshed at the right time :) | 21:25 |
| bcwaldon | aha | 21:25 |
| *** yaguang has quit IRC | 21:25 | |
| bcwaldon | I don't have anything to report | 21:25 |
| *** yaguang has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:26 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: you still have an essential depending on a medium :P | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | why yes I do | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | I've created a paradox! | 21:26 |
| ttx | well, that makes it essential as well :) | 21:26 |
| bcwaldon | fixing it right now | 21:26 |
| ttx | or the other just pretends to be essential. | 21:26 |
| ttx | Did you hear from dprince about swift-tenant-specific-storage ? | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | negative | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | or I forgot | 21:27 |
| ttx | How essential is this ? | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | not as essential as I thought | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | could be Med or High | 21:27 |
| ttx | make it high :) | 21:27 |
| bcwaldon | k | 21:28 |
| ttx | Also had a question about essential stuff being targeted to folsom-3... | 21:28 |
| chmouel | I can help if dprince want | 21:28 |
| ttx | I understand why you absolutely need separate-client and glance-client-parity... | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | chmouel: I'll keep that in mind, thanks :) | 21:28 |
| ttx | But shouldn't https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/streaming-server be "High" priority instead ? | 21:28 |
| ttx | Sounds like something you'd really like to have, rather than something we can't release without. | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: true | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | done | 21:28 |
| ttx | thx | 21:28 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: Anything else you wanted to mention ? | 21:28 |
| bcwaldon | no sir | 21:29 |
| ttx | Cool. Questions on Glance ? | 21:29 |
| Ravikumar_hp | Python-glanceclient - Folsom-3? | 21:29 |
| bcwaldon | Ravikumar_hp: yes | 21:29 |
| ttx | #topic Quantum status | 21:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status" | 21:30 | |
| ttx | danwent: hey | 21:30 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-2 | 21:31 |
| danwent | ttx: hello | 21:31 |
| danwent | you'll noticed i flagged a couple things with slow progress to highlight them :) | 21:31 |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 21:31 | |
| danwent | the good news is that we got the bulk of the API stuff merged | 21:31 |
| ttx | ooh. | 21:31 |
| ttx | Good thing I refreshed | 21:31 |
| ttx | So now that's done, should we consider that Melange as a separate project is dead ? | 21:32 |
| danwent | from a folsom release perspective, yes. there may still be people that use the essex version | 21:32 |
| ttx | sure. | 21:32 |
| danwent | ok, so the two big issues are DHCP and the Quantum/Nova integration | 21:33 |
| danwent | DHCP: the folks working on this say they are still confident with the F-2 date | 21:33 |
| *** sparkycollier has quit IRC | 21:33 | |
| danwent | but I haven't seen much yet. Will be trying to kick this work into high gear this week. Otherwise, we potentially need to revisit what we think we'll be able to do with the F-2 deliverable (my goals was that basic uses cases would be functionally complete by F-2) | 21:34 |
| ttx | that's how I understand the "Slow progress" you have there | 21:34 |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:34 | |
| ttx | In other news, can authorization-support-for-quantum be considered 'Implemented' ? | 21:34 |
| ttx | I saw the change landed | 21:34 |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 21:34 | |
| danwent | ttx: one patch landed, but there's one more coming | 21:34 |
| ttx | oh, ok | 21:34 |
| danwent | kevin's making good progress on that though, so i'm not worried about it. | 21:35 |
| danwent | i am worried about the nova/quantum integration, as it looks like tr3buchet may no longer be able to work on that in F-2 | 21:35 |
| ttx | Could you look into and set the priority and series goal for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/cisco-plugin-v2-api-support (proposed for F3) ? | 21:35 |
| danwent | ttx: ah, i think that's a new one. hadn't seen it yet. | 21:35 |
| danwent | will do. | 21:35 |
| danwent | done | 21:36 |
| ttx | danwent: could you explain what that nova/quantum integration blueprint will cover exactly ? | 21:36 |
| ttx | Nova QuantumManager for quantum v2 ? | 21:36 |
| danwent | ttx: nova will use the v2 quantum apis when VMs are created and destroyed | 21:36 |
| danwent | meaning that quantum will take care of IPAM as well. | 21:36 |
| danwent | and that you can now create networks directly using the quantum API, rather than using nova-manage | 21:37 |
| ttx | ok, yes, would have been good to have that in F2 | 21:37 |
| danwent | ttx: indeed, its quite central. | 21:37 |
| ttx | so that it sees some mileage | 21:37 |
| danwent | so if I can't get someone to work on it, i'll probably drop my other F-2 stuff and do it myself :( | 21:37 |
| ttx | #help volunteer needed to help with improved-nova-quantum-integration | 21:38 |
| danwent | other than that, things are going wel though. lot of good code being written an reviewed. a few new core devs. | 21:38 |
| ttx | danwent: I think it might be worth it | 21:38 |
| danwent | ttx: agreed. | 21:38 |
| ttx | (drop the other things to get that into F2) | 21:38 |
| ttx | danwent: Anything else ? | 21:38 |
| danwent | don't think so. | 21:38 |
| ttx | Questions on Quantum ? | 21:39 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:39 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:39 | |
| ttx | So we don't have vishy, i'll just ask a few questions just in case the assignees can answer | 21:39 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-2 | 21:39 |
| ttx | Plan & progress looks good to me | 21:40 |
| ttx | Quick review of the status on the essential stuff: | 21:40 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/general-host-aggregates (jog0) | 21:40 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/finish-uuid-conversion (mikal) | 21:40 |
| ttx | jog0, mikal: if you're around, a quick update on status for those BPs ^ | 21:41 |
| ttx | jgriffith: around ? | 21:41 |
| jgriffith | Yep | 21:41 |
| jog0 | ttx: making good progress. Working with Citrix guys to keep xen hv_pools working. | 21:41 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Things are looking good on cinder | 21:41 |
| ttx | jgriffith: do you know how volume-decoupling goes ? | 21:41 |
| ttx | jog0: thx, still on track for F2, then ? | 21:42 |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| jgriffith | ttx: Yeah, alot of what I'm doing this morning is part of that: | 21:42 |
| jgriffith | Between sleepsonthefloor and myself we've about got it done | 21:42 |
| ttx | cool | 21:42 |
| jgriffith | I'm just finishing some ec2 compat issues | 21:42 |
| ttx | jgriffith: What's left to do before Cinder becomes a first-class citizen ? | 21:42 |
| jgriffith | ttx: It already is in my book :) | 21:43 |
| jog0 | ttx: yes. Not sure if every part will be in by F2 (such as reming duplicate metadata concepts). but most will be ready | 21:43 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Fix the ec2 stuff | 21:43 |
| jgriffith | ttx: add some tests to devstack | 21:43 |
| ttx | jgriffith: Is there anything that will get broken in F2 by the completion of this ? | 21:43 |
| jgriffith | We're just about fully functional... | 21:43 |
| ttx | Like horizon, which has switch-to-cinder-client targeted to F3 now ? | 21:43 |
| jgriffith | That's up to everybody else (ie vish) | 21:43 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 21:44 | |
| jgriffith | We have it now so everything is turned on/off by flags | 21:44 |
| jgriffith | So you can go nova-volume or cinder | 21:44 |
| jgriffith | this includes devstack as well as "nova" | 21:44 |
| ttx | jgriffith: we'll probably make the decision post-F2 to do the full switch or not | 21:44 |
| jgriffith | I have a couple of challenges to get this to work correctly in nova api's but I should get there | 21:44 |
| ttx | together with the core confirmation | 21:44 |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:44 | |
| jgriffith | ttx: The only other concern is TESTS | 21:44 |
| ttx | jgriffith: TESTS are good | 21:45 |
| jgriffith | ttx: the majority of the existing tests aren't so good though | 21:45 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Most are all using fakes for everything!! | 21:45 |
| ttx | heh | 21:45 |
| ttx | nothing like a test that can't fail. | 21:45 |
| jgriffith | :) | 21:45 |
| ttx | jgriffith: anything else ? | 21:45 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Not unless anybody is interested, or better yet wants to help out :) | 21:46 |
| jgriffith | It's been me and sleepsonthefloor and that's about it | 21:46 |
| annegentle | jgriffith: what updates to the Compute docs do you expect you'll need? | 21:46 |
| ttx | #help Cinder needs more useful test coverage | 21:46 |
| ttx | Questions on Nova/Cinder ? | 21:46 |
| jgriffith | ttx: bahhh | 21:46 |
| jgriffith | docs | 21:46 |
| annegentle | #help Cinder needs documentation | 21:46 |
| jgriffith | I'll have to tackle that in force after this week | 21:47 |
| jgriffith | annegentle: I'll make a note to link up with you | 21:47 |
| ttx | ok, great | 21:47 |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:47 |
| annegentle | jgriffith: maybe you and sleepsonthefloor can tell me more about it | 21:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status" | 21:47 | |
| devcamcar | o/ | 21:47 |
| annegentle | jgriffith: sounds good | 21:47 |
| ttx | devcamcar: hey | 21:47 |
| devcamcar | ttx: howdy | 21:47 |
| ttx | devcamcar: we'll talk about a stable/essex point release after the quick folsom-2 status | 21:47 |
| jgriffith | perhaps I'll send a note out to the ML just to update folks??? | 21:47 |
| devcamcar | ok | 21:47 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-2 | 21:47 |
| ttx | jgriffith: good idea | 21:48 |
| jgriffith | ttx: KO | 21:48 |
| devcamcar | F2 blueprints are generally progressing well | 21:48 |
| ttx | #action jgriffith to update the ML with Cinder progress | 21:48 |
| devcamcar | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/nova-volume-optional may get bumped to F3 | 21:48 |
| devcamcar | when we make the rest of the cinder client changes | 21:48 |
| devcamcar | in fact, i'm going to do that now, been meaning to move it | 21:48 |
| ttx | devcamcar: Two blueprints were added to F2 without having their series goal confirmed, would be good to look into those and set Priority and Series goal accordingly: | 21:48 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/use-common-jsonutils | 21:48 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/automatic-secure-key-generation | 21:48 |
| devcamcar | ttx: will fix the series goal now | 21:49 |
| ttx | Last question, about the "Essential" blueprints in Folsom-3 (I don't really like to have essential stuff left on the last milestone): | 21:49 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/switch-to-cinder-client | 21:49 |
| ttx | I understand why this one is essential, and work is started, so we should be alright there... | 21:49 |
| ttx | * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-workflow-integration | 21:49 |
| ttx | This one has no assignee, should it just be assigned to "Nebula" team ? | 21:50 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:50 | |
| ttx | This sounds like a risky thing to consider "Essential"... Could you explain why we can't release Folsom without that feature ? | 21:50 |
| devcamcar | ttx: we can probably downgrade that to "high" | 21:51 |
| ttx | sounds like a plan. | 21:51 |
| devcamcar | it will be a poor user experience without it though | 21:51 |
| ttx | well, "High" should still definitely get done :) | 21:51 |
| devcamcar | ttx: true enough ;) | 21:52 |
| ttx | So, second subject, Horizon 2012.1.1 | 21:52 |
| ttx | The process is usually as simple as designating a commit ID as your candidate | 21:52 |
| ttx | But the tarballs are currently not generated for stable/essex and we need to clean that up first | 21:52 |
| devcamcar | ttx: yes, we've gotten a number of back ports into stable/essex that are helpful, so as soon as one more lands, we can tag it | 21:52 |
| devcamcar | ttx: ok | 21:52 |
| ttx | I'll discuss with markmc and see how we'll proceed here exactly | 21:53 |
| ttx | (markmc is the release team member that handles stable release updates) | 21:53 |
| devcamcar | for the record, a few stable/essex reviews here would help: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/7730/ | 21:53 |
| ttx | fwiw, here is how he handled the 2011.3.1 releases: http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranchRelease | 21:53 |
| devcamcar | #help need reviews on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/7730/ | 21:54 |
| ttx | devcamcar: so, i'l discuss with him, fix CI and come back to you | 21:54 |
| devcamcar | ttx: sounds good | 21:54 |
| ttx | #action ttx to clarify Horizon 2012.1.1 release process and fix CI to match | 21:54 |
| ttx | devcamcar: Anything else ? | 21:54 |
| devcamcar | ttx: nope | 21:54 |
| ttx | Questions for Horizon ? | 21:54 |
| ttx | #topic Other Team reports | 21:55 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports" | 21:55 | |
| ttx | annegentle, jaypipes, mtaylor: ? | 21:55 |
| annegentle | doc team met yesterday - here are notes: | 21:56 |
| annegentle | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-11-20.03.html | 21:57 |
| *** mdomsch has quit IRC | 21:57 | |
| annegentle | I didn't hire an intern for the summer, sorry folks. 4 final candidates took other positions. | 21:57 |
| annegentle | Need to start in March not April next year. | 21:57 |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 21:57 | |
| ttx | intern drought in Texas | 21:57 |
| ttx | Any other team lead with a status report ? | 21:57 |
| annegentle | I'm testing chinese language output through the maven plugin | 21:57 |
| annegentle | Will report back on progress. | 21:58 |
| annegentle | Looking for writers for http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide | 21:58 |
| annegentle | And reviewers for the high availability document draft https://review.openstack.org/#/c/8139/ | 21:58 |
| ttx | #help <annegentle> Looking for writers for http://etherpad.openstack.org/EssexOperationsGuide | 21:59 |
| annegentle | Also, the CI team is working on a doc-related consistency project | 21:59 |
| ttx | #help <annegentle> And reviewers for the high availability document draft https://review.openstack.org/#/c/8139/ | 21:59 |
| annegentle | maybe mtaylor or jeblair or clarkb can explain better | 21:59 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:59 | |
| ttx | Anything else, anyone ? | 21:59 |
| ttx | Quick glance at the effect of the BugTriage day on Nova: http://webnumbr.com/untouched-nova-bugs | 22:00 |
| ttx | Now we need to discuss how to make that more permanent :) | 22:01 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meeting channel. See http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings for schedule and http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/ for meeting logs" | 22:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Jun 12 22:01:09 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-21.03.html | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-21.03.txt | 22:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-12-21.03.log.html | 22:01 |
| ttx | Thanks everyone ! | 22:01 |
| *** lzyeval has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| *** yaguang has left #openstack-meeting | 22:01 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 22:02 | |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 22:02 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:07 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:10 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:19 | |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 22:21 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:21 | |
| *** markmc has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:30 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 22:34 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:34 | |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 22:40 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 22:47 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:47 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 22:49 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:51 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 22:57 | |
| *** rafaduran has quit IRC | 23:03 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 23:10 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 23:16 | |
| *** torgomatic has left #openstack-meeting | 23:26 | |
| *** sleepsonthefloor is now known as sleepsonzzz | 23:26 | |
| *** joearnold has quit IRC | 23:26 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 23:31 | |
| *** edygarcia has quit IRC | 23:35 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 23:38 | |
| *** dtroyer_zzz is now known as dtroyer | 23:40 | |
| *** dtroyer is now known as dtroyer_zzz | 23:45 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 23:45 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:51 | |
| *** Ravikumar_hp has quit IRC | 23:54 | |
| *** jgriffith has quit IRC | 23:58 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
