Tuesday, 2012-07-31

*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn		00:06
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC		00:06
*** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk		00:07
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting		00:08
*** Mandell has quit IRC		00:13
*** rnirmal has quit IRC		00:13
*** Transformer has joined #openstack-meeting		00:15
*** Transformer has left #openstack-meeting		00:16
*** s0mik has quit IRC		00:18
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		00:19
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		00:21
*** dolphm has quit IRC		00:23
*** s0mik has quit IRC		00:23
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		00:24
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz		00:25
*** danwent has quit IRC		00:30
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		00:33
*** nati_ueno has left #openstack-meeting		00:45
*** littleidea has quit IRC		00:46
*** johnpur has left #openstack-meeting		00:53
*** adjohn has quit IRC		01:01
*** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting		01:05
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has quit IRC		01:05
*** jdurgin has quit IRC		01:06
*** matwood has quit IRC		01:08
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		01:10
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting		01:14
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting		01:14
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC		01:23
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting		01:25
*** dolphm has quit IRC		01:29
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		01:37
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting		01:41
*** os-beginner has joined #openstack-meeting		01:42
*** os-beginner has quit IRC		01:48
*** adjohn has quit IRC		01:50
*** blamar has quit IRC		01:51
*** anniec has quit IRC		02:01
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC		02:04
*** matwood has joined #openstack-meeting		02:05
*** maoy has quit IRC		02:16
*** PotHix has quit IRC		02:22
*** dolphm has quit IRC		02:27
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn		02:27
*** gongys has joined #openstack-meeting		02:30
*** gyee has quit IRC		02:31
*** littleidea has quit IRC		02:37
*** slim_ has joined #openstack-meeting		02:49
*** slim_ has quit IRC		02:55
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		02:57
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		02:57
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting		03:02
*** matiu has quit IRC		03:03
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		03:04
*** matiu has quit IRC		03:07
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		03:07
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		03:07
*** jog0 has quit IRC		03:16
*** matiu has quit IRC		03:16
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting		03:16
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		03:18
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		03:18
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		03:19
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC		03:26
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		03:28
*** SOURCE has joined #openstack-meeting		03:50
SOURCE	HEYA	03:51
SOURCE	eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffeeeeeefaaaaaaaaaaeffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffaaaaaaaafaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa	03:51
SOURCE	aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa	03:51
*** SOURCE is now known as STICKY-DICKS		03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:54
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	HELLO	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
STICKY-DICKS	I'm Hairy	03:55
*** STICKY-DICKS is now known as justin-bieber		03:55
*** justin-bieber is now known as f		03:55
*** f is now known as justin-bieber		03:55
*** justin-bieber is now known as SHIKIS		03:58
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting		04:08
*** dwcramer has quit IRC		04:18
*** dolphm has quit IRC		04:20
*** shang has quit IRC		04:25
*** SHIKIS is now known as PigsSNIKER		04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:34
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:35
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	SNORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BITCHES	04:36
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:36
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:36
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:36
PigsSNIKER	HOVE	04:36
*** shang has joined #openstack-meeting		04:39
*** PigsSNIKER has quit IRC		04:45
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting		04:49
*** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting		04:51
*** anniec has quit IRC		04:55
*** anniec_ is now known as anniec		04:55
*** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting		04:59
*** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting		05:05
*** cp16net is now known as cp16net\|away		05:08
*** cp16net\|away is now known as cp16net		05:08
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting		05:10
*** gongys has quit IRC		05:18
*** blamar has quit IRC		05:21
*** dolphm_ has quit IRC		05:44
*** mikal has quit IRC		05:57
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting		05:59
*** rnirmal has quit IRC		06:03
*** littleidea has quit IRC		06:07
*** GheRivero has joined #openstack-meeting		06:10
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting		06:32
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting		06:43
*** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC		07:09
*** matwood has quit IRC		07:13
*** salv-orlando has quit IRC		07:13
*** milner has quit IRC		07:13
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		07:27
*** milner has joined #openstack-meeting		07:27
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting		07:29
*** EmilienM has joined #openstack-meeting		07:35
*** matiu has quit IRC		07:38
*** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting		07:51
*** Mandell has quit IRC		07:52
*** blamar has quit IRC		07:58
*** salv-orlando has left #openstack-meeting		08:00
*** zhuadl has quit IRC		08:07
*** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting		08:17
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting		09:30
*** shang has quit IRC		09:48
*** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting		09:52
*** sandywalsh has quit IRC		09:52
*** shang has joined #openstack-meeting		10:01
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting		10:30
*** zhuadl has quit IRC		10:43
*** mikal has quit IRC		11:01
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting		11:03
*** maoy has quit IRC		11:22
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		11:30
*** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting		12:08
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		12:26
*** goldfish has quit IRC		12:29
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		12:30
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting		12:33
*** darraghb has quit IRC		12:36
*** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting		12:39
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting		12:41
*** dprince has quit IRC		12:55
*** mancdaz has joined #openstack-meeting		12:57
*** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting		13:11
*** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates		13:11
*** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting		13:13
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting		13:25
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		13:30
*** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting		13:31
*** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting		13:34
*** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting		13:35
*** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk		13:35
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting		13:42
*** littleidea has quit IRC		13:42
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting		13:43
*** hggdh has quit IRC		13:44
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		13:53
*** dolphm has quit IRC		13:53
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting		14:01
*** blamar has quit IRC		14:05
*** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting		14:06
*** mdomsch has quit IRC		14:13
*** hggdh has joined #openstack-meeting		14:17
*** Mandell has quit IRC		14:19
*** zhuadl has quit IRC		14:20
*** jaypipes has quit IRC		14:24
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting		14:27
*** creiht has quit IRC		14:29
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		14:30
*** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting		14:34
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting		14:36
*** danwent has quit IRC		14:37
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		14:43
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		14:51
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz		14:53
*** creiht has joined #openstack-meeting		14:56
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn		14:59
primeministerp	Openstack/Hyper-V discussion to begin in a couple of minutes	14:59
mattray	huzzah	14:59
primeministerp	hehe	14:59
primeministerp	#startmeeting	15:00
openstack	Meeting started Tue Jul 31 15:00:07 2012 UTC. The chair is primeministerp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	15:00
openstack	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.	15:00
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz		15:00
primeministerp	#topic Hyper-V	15:00
*** openstack changes topic to "Hyper-V"		15:00
primeministerp	Howdy everyone	15:00
primeministerp	I sent out the topics for discussion to the list	15:00
primeministerp	•Status of the Mock Hyper-V Compute	15:01
primeministerp	•Move from Essex to Folsom	15:01
primeministerp	oInstaller is for essex integration	15:01
primeministerp	•Hyper-V Testing Procedures	15:01
primeministerp	oDev stack for hyper-v testing	15:01
primeministerp	oChef for Windows automation	15:01
primeministerp	We'll go through those now	15:01
primeministerp	#topic Hyper-V Moc driver	15:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Hyper-V Moc driver"		15:02
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		15:02
primeministerp	Alessandro and I have been working to put together a plan of attack	15:02
primeministerp	alexpilotti: care to add some input	15:02
primeministerp	In a nutshell he is in the process of the implementing the wmi moc interface	15:03
*** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting		15:03
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting		15:04
primeministerp	alexpilotti: needs a minute	15:05
primeministerp	we'll come back to this	15:05
primeministerp	#topic Upstream Code integration	15:05
*** openstack changes topic to "Upstream Code integration"		15:05
*** blamar has quit IRC		15:06
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		15:06
primeministerp	Work needs to begin to integrate the upstream code	15:06
primeministerp	pnavarro: is this something you can begin looking at	15:06
primeministerp	pnavarro: we know we have issues w/ the glance, python-novaclient	15:07
* primeministerp looks up the other		15:07
pnavarro	primeministerp: yes we have, some packages are not compatible with windows	15:07
primeministerp	pnavarro: right	15:07
primeministerp	so wee need to flush those out	15:07
alexpilotti	hi guys!	15:07
primeministerp	and have the code put in to exclude it	15:08
primeministerp	alexpilotti: great	15:08
alexpilotti	pnavarro: hi!	15:08
pnavarro	hi alexpilotti	15:08
primeministerp	pnavarro: i'll be able to flush this out once testing is underway	15:08
primeministerp	pnavarro: and hopefully supply useful bits for bugs	15:09
primeministerp	pnavarro: can you expand on what you know?	15:09
*** s0mik has quit IRC		15:09
primeministerp	so	15:10
primeministerp	no hitesh today	15:10
primeministerp	ok	15:10
primeministerp	so I guess what needs to happen is people need to manually install the bits	15:11
primeministerp	to see exactly these incompatibilites exist	15:11
alexpilotti	pnavarro: do you have a list of the packages that were incompatible in your setup?	15:11
primeministerp	and then notify the people upstream	15:11
primeministerp	alexpilotti: i Have that	15:11
primeministerp	alexpilotti: at least some of it	15:11
alexpilotti	pnavarro: I'd like to cross check as well so we can file up the relevant bugs	15:11
primeministerp	one sec	15:11
pnavarro	from glance, xattr and pysendfile are incompatible	15:12
primeministerp	so	15:12
primeministerp	this is whyat i have	15:12
primeministerp	glance 2012.2	15:12
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting		15:12
*** blamar has quit IRC		15:12
primeministerp	anyjson 0.3.2+	15:13
*** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting		15:13
alexpilotti	pnavarro: pysendfile and xattr are dependencies of another package I guess. Glance itself?	15:13
primeministerp	python-novaclient-2.6.0	15:13
pnavarro	alexpilotti: yes, they are dependencies introduced in glance Folsom	15:13
primeministerp	pnavarro: then we need to file an upstream bug asap	15:14
primeministerp	pnavarro: do you have enough data to file a bug	15:14
pnavarro	primeministerp: but, it can be considered as a bug?	15:14
primeministerp	pnavarro: well we need to make someone aware	15:14
primeministerp	pnavarro: or we need to fix it	15:14
primeministerp	pnavarro: do we need to include new deps	15:15
pnavarro	primeministerp: what it's clear, they need to be considering windows when introducing new deps	15:16
primeministerp	pnavarro: correct	15:16
primeministerp	jaypipes: ping	15:16
jaypipes	primeministerp: pon	15:16
jaypipes	g	15:17
pnavarro	primeministerp: if filing a bug it's the way... why not...	15:17
alexpilotti	pnavarro: I'm going to do a full folsom setup so that we can compare the results	15:17
primeministerp	jaypipes: is filing a bug the best way to get windows considered when creating deps	15:17
primeministerp	er introducing deps	15:17
primeministerp	for example	15:17
alexpilotti	pnavarro: xattr afaik is a Linux specific package	15:17
primeministerp	glance now requires xattr	15:17
alexpilotti	pnavarro: *nix non linux	15:17
primeministerp	which is a *nix only package	15:17
primeministerp	and breaks hyper-v integration	15:18
jaypipes	primeministerp: glance does NOT require xattr. I specifiically removed the xattr requirement so that the image cache could work on windows.'	15:18
primeministerp	o sorry	15:18
alexpilotti	pnavarro: if that's the case, we have to get it out of Glance, starting w a temporary patch workaround	15:18
primeministerp	jaypipes: something is requiring xattr	15:18
primeministerp	jaypipes: is that in the current versions?	15:18
primeministerp	jaypipes: maybe we haven't tried w/ the newer stuff since then	15:19
pnavarro	jaypipes: i found it in pip-requires in F2 tar.gz	15:19
jaypipes	primeministerp: well, I'm positive xattr is not needed :) perhaps this is a packaging thing? maybe xattr has been left in the packaging deps by accident.	15:19
jaypipes	primeministerp: you could certainly file a bug to remove it from pip-requires (and put it in test-requires)	15:19
primeministerp	pnavarro: can you add your data to a new bug re: ^^^^	15:20
jaypipes	primeministerp: best to file a bug, sure, and assign it to me.	15:20
primeministerp	jaypipes: thanks!!	15:20
jaypipes	primeministerp: I'll move it from pip-requires to test-requires, but I'll bring mtaylor in to ensure it's not listed in any package deps.	15:20
pnavarro	jaypipes: and what about pysendfile, it's used?	15:20
jaypipes	pnavarro: not a requirement, same as xattr..	15:21
jaypipes	pnavarro: it's used if available, ignored if not.	15:21
alexpilotti	pnavarro: were you using the installer for setting up the environment?	15:21
primeministerp	pnavarro: can you cc me on the bug as well	15:22
pnavarro	primeministerp: ok !	15:22
primeministerp	pnavarro: perfect	15:22
primeministerp	pnavarro: thx	15:22
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting		15:22
primeministerp	jaypipes: ok	15:22
primeministerp	er	15:23
primeministerp	ok	15:23
pnavarro	alexpilotti: That happened when jordan installer version was installing Folsom versions of glance	15:23
alexpilotti	jaypipes: what version of Glance should we use for Folsom?	15:23
jaypipes	alexpilotti: Folsom :)	15:24
mtaylor	jaypipes, primeministerp: I am not the right person for removing it from pacakge deps	15:24
alexpilotti	jaypipes: lol	15:24
mtaylor	but I support the moving of it to test-requires	15:24
jaypipes	mtaylor: zul?	15:24
mtaylor	jaypipes: yah	15:24
jaypipes	mtaylor: gotcha. will do.	15:24
mtaylor	jaypipes: and whoever does stuff for redhat	15:24
primeministerp	ayoung: ping	15:25
ayoung	hey primeministerp	15:25
zul	mtaylor: hmm?	15:25
primeministerp	jaypipes: we need someone from rh in the discussion for removing it from package deps?	15:25
ayoung	primeministerp, is this a nova thing? markmc is your man	15:25
primeministerp	ayoung: thx	15:26
primeministerp	mtaylor: is zul the person to talk to re: the package deps?	15:26
jaypipes	primeministerp: yeah, but I'll take care of that if you assign me the bug	15:26
primeministerp	jaypipes: perfect	15:26
primeministerp	ok	15:27
primeministerp	we'll move on	15:27
jaypipes	cheerio	15:27
primeministerp	let's note bug to be filed, assigned to jaypipes	15:27
primeministerp	#topic hyper-v moc interface	15:27
*** openstack changes topic to "hyper-v moc interface"		15:27
*** dtroyer has quit IRC		15:28
pnavarro	jaypipes: what's your launchpad ID ?	15:28
primeministerp	pnavarro: should be jaypipes	15:28
primeministerp	i believe	15:28
primeministerp	pnavarro: if you paste the link to the bug I can add it to the meeting notes	15:29
jaypipes	yup	15:29
primeministerp	jaypipes: launchpad id for pnavarro	15:29
primeministerp	to add you to the bug	15:29
pnavarro	https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1031396	15:29
uvirtbot	Launchpad bug 1031396 in glance "xattr and pysendfile dependencies broke Hyper-V integration" [Undecided,New]	15:29
primeministerp	#link https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1031396	15:30
*** ayoung has quit IRC		15:30
primeministerp	#topic hyper-v/chef	15:30
*** openstack changes topic to "hyper-v/chef"		15:30
mattray	:)	15:30
primeministerp	ok let's dicuss work to automate the provisioning and prep for a hyper-v compute node	15:30
primeministerp	I have implemented the chef infrastructure in my lab and began the process of gathering	15:31
primeministerp	all the windows chef recipes we can use as a base for our hyper-v efforts and ci integration	15:31
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		15:31
primeministerp	so	15:32
primeministerp	mattray: is from opscode and he has offered to help us in this process	15:32
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting		15:32
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC		15:32
mattray	ok, let me level set real quick	15:33
primeministerp	mattray: yes	15:33
primeministerp	mattray: please do	15:33
pnavarro	jaypipes: I couldn't change the assignee of the bug to you	15:33
primeministerp	mattray: i was thinking from a guidence perspective	15:33
mattray	opscode.com/openstack describes the Chef for OpenStack project and links to the ML and IRC channel	15:33
mattray	we have a WIP for deploying openstack with chef based on Rackspace's cookbooks	15:33
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting		15:33
primeministerp	mattray: are those specific to essex?	15:34
mattray	lots of folks are working on it, the key is that it's very modular and Chef already has good support for Windows	15:34
mattray	currently, Folsom work probably starts next week	15:34
primeministerp	mattray: exactly i'm using the existing cookbooks as a base	15:34
primeministerp	mattray: execelent, our work is specifically for configuring a hyper-v node to work w/ our openstack compute driver	15:34
mattray	there is a nova/compute recipe that I plan on pulling all the kvm support out and into another cookbook	15:35
primeministerp	mattray: interesting	15:35
mattray	once that supports pluggable back-ends, hyper-v will be a reasonable backend	15:35
mattray	(initially it will be lxc and kvm)	15:35
mattray	just following the same patterns	15:35
primeministerp	mattray: execelent	15:35
mattray	you also need glance-client right?	15:35
mattray	and keystone-client?	15:36
primeministerp	mattray: no	15:36
*** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting		15:36
primeministerp	mattray: we only install nova	15:36
alexpilotti	mattray: no, we don't	15:36
pnavarro	mattray: opscode openstack cookbooks are the same that crowbar ones?	15:37
mattray	pnavarro: no	15:37
mattray	pnavarro: forked off awhile back by Rackspace	15:37
mattray	Dell is coming back to these eventually	15:37
alexpilotti	pnavarro: I just did a pip install glance on a clean VM	15:37
primeministerp	mattray: then we should coordinate	15:37
alexpilotti	pnavarro: I can confirm that I had the same error you had	15:37
mattray	primeministerp: definitely.	15:38
alexpilotti	pnavarro: there's an xattr dependency	15:38
pnavarro	alexpilotti: thanks to confirm !	15:38
primeministerp	mattray: so when i add our building out of nova-compute	15:38
jaypipes	pnavarro: I'll assign myself...	15:38
pnavarro	jaypipes: ok, thanks !	15:38
alexpilotti	jaypipes: I did pip install glance, I confirm the xattr dep	15:38
primeministerp	mattray: i can hopefull use some of the upstream bits as well	15:39
primeministerp	mattray: specific to nova	15:39
alexpilotti	jaypipes: for Folsom, should we get Glance from its github's active branch?	15:39
alexpilotti	jaypipes: or can we relay on pip?	15:39
jaypipes	pnavarro: done	15:39
*** s0mik has quit IRC		15:39
jaypipes	alexpilotti: uhm... the client or the server?	15:40
mattray	primeministerp: sure. The loose plan is that sometime next week we'll start coordinating on folsom deployments and source builds. This will lend itself well to hyper-v support	15:40
alexpilotti	jaypipes: client, running on hyper-v's nova-compute nodes	15:40
jaypipes	alexpilotti: from PIP.	15:40
primeministerp	mattray: are you expecting to have a nova chef deployment be agnostic	15:40
primeministerp	i.e.	15:40
alexpilotti	jaypipes: ok, we need a quick workaround to get rid of xattr	15:41
primeministerp	i just have a nova recipe and it is already platform independent	15:41
jaypipes	alexpilotti: yup, onit.	15:41
alexpilotti	jaypipes: tx!	15:41
*** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates		15:42
mattray	primeministerp: I think we can work to accommodate deploying on Windows, either by attributing-out anything platform specific or with a separate recipe	15:42
primeministerp	mattray: ok then	15:42
primeministerp	mattray: i was going to build a seperate recipe	15:42
mattray	primeministerp: there will be a lot of recipes, we'll just have to have good documentation and roles to accomodate that	15:42
primeministerp	mattray: i'll continue on that path	15:42
primeministerp	mattray: hopefully I can reuse a lot of what's there and transliate it to windows	15:43
mattray	yeah	15:43
primeministerp	mattray: when you typicall deploy	15:43
primeministerp	mattray: are you doing it from package or source?	15:43
primeministerp	mattray: or both	15:43
mattray	primeministerp: currently packages. We're working on a strategy for source	15:43
*** anniec has quit IRC		15:43
primeministerp	mattray: and for python deps, pip or also packages?	15:44
mattray	all the above	15:44
mattray	you show up with the code, we'll find a way to accomodate	15:44
primeministerp	mattray: perfect	15:44
primeministerp	hehe	15:44
primeministerp	ok	15:44
primeministerp	mattray: i'm going to need help running it	15:44
mattray	as long as other stuff doesn't get broken, we'll kick to fit	15:44
primeministerp	mattray: at least from a understanding how to push to all nodes	15:44
mattray	yeah, #openstack-chef is where we gather	15:44
primeministerp	mattray: ok i'll hop in there	15:45
mattray	and I'm usually online, and #chef is full of 400+ helpful people	15:45
primeministerp	mattray: perfect	15:45
primeministerp	on that note	15:45
primeministerp	let's quickly go through the bits that need to be set for windows	15:45
primeministerp	1. disable all fw's	15:46
primeministerp	2. enable iscsi target svs	15:46
primeministerp	3. set ntp	15:46
primeministerp	4. set diskpart std policy	15:46
alexpilotti	jaypipes: by looking at the install log, I notice that it has also "greenlet" as a dep	15:46
primeministerp	5. live migration enablement	15:46
primeministerp	6. enable powershell	15:46
alexpilotti	jaypipes: building green let fails, I'm adding a comment to the bug	15:46
primeministerp	pnavarro: anything else to add to that list	15:47
pnavarro	primeministerp: it's ok for me	15:47
primeministerp	7. enable hyper-v role if server is not hyper-v server	15:47
primeministerp	8. configure bridge interfaces	15:47
primeministerp	those are the specific for hyper-v	15:48
alexpilotti	pnavarro: I noticed that compiling green let fails not (or not yet) xattr	15:48
primeministerp	for nova, we have the following	15:48
alexpilotti	pnavarro: *greenlet	15:48
primeministerp	that needs to be addressed by chef	15:48
primeministerp	1. installation of python	15:48
*** cp16net is now known as cp16net\|away		15:48
primeministerp	2. pip install of python deps	15:48
primeministerp	3. install hv code from src	15:49
primeministerp	also	15:49
primeministerp	1 install python	15:49
mattray	1 & 2 sound like we need to update the python cookbook for windows support	15:49
mattray	#3 will probably use the git resource	15:49
primeministerp	2 run installation from the openstack hyper-v installer	15:49
primeministerp	mattray: i have one	15:49
*** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting		15:49
primeministerp	mattray: that i found	15:49
primeministerp	mattray: i was planning on updating it today	15:49
mattray	primeministerp: cool	15:50
primeministerp	mattray: we use 2.7.x	15:50
mattray	feel free to follow up with me directly and I'll help get your patches upstreamed quickly	15:50
primeministerp	mattray: if i'm going send it upstream and I have to sign the contrib, it could take time	15:51
primeministerp	i'll have to get that into lcs	15:51
mattray	yeah, we need to get on that ASAP	15:51
primeministerp	er lca	15:51
primeministerp	mattray: do you have the link	15:51
mattray	primeministerp: wiki.opscode.com/display/chef/How+to+Contribute	15:51
primeministerp	mattray: how different is it than the openstack agreement	15:52
mattray	it's the Apache CLA	15:52
primeministerp	standard	15:52
mattray	s/Apache Foundation/Opscode, Inc./	15:52
primeministerp	?	15:52
primeministerp	ok	15:52
mattray	it got through VMware, Dell & HP so it's not impossible ;)	15:53
primeministerp	mattray: ok then, I'll start that process today	15:53
primeministerp	ok	15:53
primeministerp	we'll I guess we can use that as a base	15:54
primeministerp	I'll send out a email to the list as soon as my starting point is online	15:54
primeministerp	mattray: i'll send that to lca today	15:54
mattray	ok, I'll be sure to follow up on the posts outlining how we'll be collaborating	15:54
primeministerp	perfect	15:54
primeministerp	ok let's see what's left to discuss	15:55
primeministerp	#topic Status of Hyper-V ci Infrastructure	15:56
*** openstack changes topic to "Status of Hyper-V ci Infrastructure"		15:56
primeministerp	so	15:56
primeministerp	good news	15:56
primeministerp	I have been given an asa and have configured it to support the circuit i am waiting to be pulled to my rack	15:57
*** cp16net\|away is now known as cp16net		15:57
primeministerp	once that is done i will have control of the network infrastructure and can begin building out the pxe infrastructure to support the deployment of the hyper-v nodes	15:57
primeministerp	additionally i have provisioned vpn access throught the asa	15:58
primeministerp	for individuals to debug	15:58
pnavarro	primeministerp: that's great !	15:58
primeministerp	additional work will need to be done to get a centralized auth infrasturcutre and other long term bits	15:58
primeministerp	however	15:58
primeministerp	as a start	15:58
primeministerp	we have some something secured	15:58
primeministerp	to use	15:58
primeministerp	once I have this in place I will also be able to complete tie into gerrit, as I currenlty have no outbound ssh	15:59
primeministerp	anything anyone else want to add?	15:59
primeministerp	ok	16:00
*** dolphm has quit IRC		16:00
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		16:01
primeministerp	ok	16:01
primeministerp	if that it i'm ending the meeting	16:02
primeministerp	thanks everyone	16:02
primeministerp	#endmeeting	16:02
*** 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"		16:02
openstack	Meeting ended Tue Jul 31 16:02:10 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)	16:02
openstack	Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-15.00.html	16:02
openstack	Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-15.00.txt	16:02
openstack	Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-15.00.log.html	16:02
*** GheRivero_ has joined #openstack-meeting		16:05
*** dolphm has quit IRC		16:05
alexpilotti	jaypipes: green let dep gets solved by installing manually the win32 version before installing glance. At this point I hit the error on xattr, so it's consistent with pnavarro's envirnoment	16:11
*** bencherian has joined #openstack-meeting		16:17
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting		16:27
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting		16:32
*** _0x44 has quit IRC		16:32
*** _0x44 has joined #openstack-meeting		16:33
*** mattray has quit IRC		16:34
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		16:37
alexpilotti	ayoung: ping	16:38
ayoung	alexpilotti, whats up	16:38
alexpilotti	ayoung: any suggestion in creating a fedora controller w the latest Folsom bits?	16:38
*** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting		16:39
ayoung	alexpilotti, devstack works	16:39
ayoung	just use FORCE=yes	16:39
alexpilotti	ayoung: ok	16:39
alexpilotti	ayoung: about this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OpenStack_Folsom	16:39
alexpilotti	ayoung: do you know when the first packages will be available?	16:40
ayoung	alexpilotti, there are RPMs. they will trail by a couple days, though	16:40
ayoung	alexpilotti, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Getting_started_with_OpenStack_on_Fedora_17	16:40
jaypipes	alexpilotti: greenlet doesn't have any relationship with xattr, AFAIK?	16:41
alexpilotti	ayoung: great tx, but aren't the Fedora 17 packages Essex related?	16:41
ayoung	alexpilotti, hm...we have Folsom packages too.	16:41
alexpilotti	jaypipes: nope, is just another Glance dep that fails to compile	16:41
jaypipes	alexpilotti: oh...	16:42
alexpilotti	ayoung: ok, I still have to deploy a Fedora based controller, so sorry for the trivial questions	16:42
alexpilotti	ayoung: Folsom packages are in a specific repository?	16:42
ayoung	alexpilotti, not a problem. WHat do you mean by Controller?	16:42
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting		16:42
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		16:43
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		16:43
alexpilotti	ayoung: a VM containing all the OpenStack roles except compute	16:43
ayoung	alexpilotti, OK. is this for testing? Because Devstack is the easiest way to get that running	16:44
ayoung	But if you want RPMS...let me ask	16:44
*** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn		16:44
alexpilotti	ayoung: for development. I want to see if there are issues	16:44
alexpilotti	ayoung: while I'll use for sure Devstack for general development	16:45
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		16:45
*** Mandell has quit IRC		16:48
ayoung	alexpilotti, Rawhide (F18) only fro Folsom. you should ask questions like these in #openstack-dev, BTW	16:48
*** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting		16:48
*** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting		16:48
*** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting		16:49
alexpilotti	ayoung: I read that F18 as introducing Folsom support. I'll post on the dev list, tx!!	16:49
ayoung	alexpilotti, yeah, that would be about right. I am going to try to spin up a F18 VM and see what happens..	16:50
alexpilotti	ayoung: great, in case I'd also like to sign up for some early testing of Folsom on F18 :-)	16:53
ayoung	alexpilotti, let me first figure out how to get an F18 VM. In the past, I've done upgrades from earlier versions of Fedora	16:54
*** Mandell_ has joined #openstack-meeting		16:54
ayoung	alexpilotti, but please joim #openstack-dev...this room will be needed for meetings shortly	16:54
alexpilotti	ayoung: already did it tx	16:55
*** derekh has quit IRC		16:57
*** Mandell has quit IRC		16:58
*** jdurgin has joined #openstack-meeting		17:11
*** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting		17:13
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		17:20
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		17:22
*** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting		17:22
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		17:25
*** kindaopsdevy_ has joined #openstack-meeting		17:25
*** bcwaldon has joined #openstack-meeting		17:26
*** troytoman-away is now known as troytoman		17:26
*** s0mik has quit IRC		17:27
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		17:29
*** kindaopsdevy_ is now known as kindaopsdevy		17:29
*** darraghb has quit IRC		17:31
*** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting		17:42
*** PotHix has joined #openstack-meeting		17:43
*** oubiwann has joined #openstack-meeting		17:47
*** Shrews has joined #openstack-meeting		17:48
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting		17:52
ayoung	Who is here for Keystone?	17:57
gyee	\o	17:58
rafaduran	\o	17:58
ayoung	http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting	17:58
ayoung	heckj ?	17:59
heckj	o/	18:00
heckj	sec	18:00
liemmn	o/	18:00
heckj	#startmeeting	18:00
openstack	Meeting started Tue Jul 31 18:00:51 2012 UTC. The chair is heckj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	18:00
openstack	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.	18:00
heckj	Okay - let's get this ball rolling	18:01
ayoung	http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting	18:01
ayoung	#topic domains	18:01
heckj	ayoung was gracious enough to get us an agenda set up	18:02
*** timchan has joined #openstack-meeting		18:02
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		18:02
* ayoung has to leave at about 1:45..so in a bit of a hurry		18:02
heckj	ayoung: what's the domain topic?	18:02
heckj	np	18:02
ayoung	heckj, OK, so Domains is gyee's bailywick. I figured we should sort out what we are doing with them	18:02
ayoung	My take is: get them in in a minimal format	18:03
ayoung	no groups	18:03
ayoung	and first we need an agreement of what is acceptable/expected	18:03
heckj	ayound: adding as extension to V2 API, or dependent on V3 API?	18:03
gyee	not sure if anyone have a chance to look at my draft review	18:03
ayoung	gyee, have you changed it recently?	18:03
gyee	no	18:04
heckj	I've glanced over it, but not read in depth	18:04
*** dolphm_ has joined #openstack-meeting		18:04
gyee	why change it, its perfect :)	18:04
ayoung	#link http://etherpad.openstack.org/keystone-domains	18:04
ayoung	gyee, since we are not doing a formal V3 for Folsom anyway, are you OK with doing it as an extension?	18:05
heckj	adding domains as an extension to V2 API isn't an issue, but changing the token format and output would be a significant API change - which I believe is needed to make it useful to external services	18:05
ayoung	We can migrate Extension to V3 in Grizzly	18:05
*** jlr has joined #openstack-meeting		18:05
gyee	sure	18:05
gyee	as of know, the code is parked in contrib	18:05
gyee	now	18:05
ayoung	good	18:05
gyee	so are we OK with the current impl?	18:06
ayoung	OIK, so my understanding is that each user and tenant is owned by exactly one domain	18:06
gyee	I heard rejection city the last go around	18:06
ayoung	gyee, I heard arguing over details, but I think that we were close to consensus	18:06
liemmn	FYI... Guang's implementation would support the single-home user RBAC model, i.e., a user may have only one home domain.	18:07
liemmn	http://etherpad.openstack.org/KeystoneRoles	18:07
gyee	right	18:07
heckj	It's unclear that users need to be fully segmented as well - using the policy engine, we can get the same enforcement	18:07
*** devananda has joined #openstack-meeting		18:07
ayoung	heckj, I see this as more "the eggs Policy usese to make omlettes"	18:08
gyee	if we have the domain_id in the users, we can easily implement isolation	18:08
ayoung	you have to put a user "somewhere"	18:08
heckj	and with the V2 API, the "admin" has uber-rights over everything	18:08
ayoung	once we put them there, they stay there	18:08
gyee	heckj, with my impl, domain admin can control their own domain	18:08
gyee	domain admin is a role	18:09
heckj	Yep - not asserting what your code does, asserting what current code and V2 API expectations are	18:09
gyee	meaning user from one domain can have the domain admin role in multiple domains	18:09
gyee	we are not doing anything outside the realm of RBAC	18:10
ayoung	heckj, is the question "a mechanism that is domain specific" versus "a mechanism based on the policy impl?"	18:10
ayoung	IE, we can implement the domain spec using the policy code?	18:11
heckj	(in V3) I think we have everything we need to enforce the domain admin needs even down to users using policy	18:12
heckj	My primary concern with gyee's current extension/V2 work is that I don't think we can meaningfully make this a V2 API extension	18:12
heckj	If we start changing responses to the API, we'll get a lot	18:12
heckj	of pushback that the API needs to be revised/revisioned	18:13
heckj	(recent conversations related to changing the API and what that means to versioning)	18:13
ayoung	heckj, agreed that we are too late to do modifications of V2 APIs	18:13
liemmn	I think that domain is a core concept and should be part of the core, rather than an extension... It is messier as an extension.	18:13
ayoung	liemmn, yes, but not until V3	18:13
liemmn	yep	18:13
heckj	liemmn: I'm totally with you - and I think it needs to flow all the way out ot all services (nova, glance, etc)	18:13
liemmn	hence, voting for v3	18:13
liemmn	(as core)	18:13
heckj	I really appreciate gyee's work, but I think we'd be better getting identity wrapper and moved in a V3 API and get started with impl there	18:14
gyee	I am OK with V3	18:14
gyee	but we have to have user isolation	18:14
gyee	which means domain_id in users	18:14
ayoung	gyee, so long as it is an attribute, and not in the URL that should not break anything	18:15
ayoung	I think that meets the letter of the law WRT dkranz's policy doc	18:15
gyee	right	18:15
gyee	domain_id is an attribute of user, just like tenant	18:15
*** pnavarro has quit IRC		18:16
ayoung	gyee, so do you have enough to get a new impl out for review?	18:16
gyee	keep in mind that having domain_id in user does not prevent user from assigning to tenants	18:16
heckj	gyee: I'm asserting that you can and do have domain isoliation of users with a reasonable use of policy.json. I don't think it's critical to enforce it in the data model as well	18:16
liemmn	With domain model + domain_id on user, I think we can implement the user isolation as described in the KeystoneRoles doc ("single-home user" option)	18:17
gyee	^^^ what he said	18:17
uvirtbot	gyee: Error: "^^" is not a valid command.	18:17
ayoung	heckj, so to add a new domain, we would need to update policy.json ?	18:18
gyee	I am ready to rock n roll if you guys are cool with it	18:18
heckj	ayoung: not at all - just add a role & rule in policy.json that to add a user, reset a user, etc you need to be the domain admin for relevant tenants	18:19
*** dolphm_ has quit IRC		18:19
ayoung	heckj, I think that domain_id would be default to null for most deployments, but be in the data model to be used in "multi domain deployments"	18:19
*** dolphm has quit IRC		18:19
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting		18:20
heckj	If the implementation you have completey segregates tenants and users are in tenants, you can use the default_tenant_id to determine the appropriate domain to use to verify for password resets and such	18:20
ayoung	heckj, but tenants can't be nested, and thus we don't have an organizational mechanism for tenants/	18:20
heckj	ayoung: if it's null, then it can't be mandatory. If it's optional, then what's the difference between it and using the domain assocaited with the default tenant?	18:21
heckj	ayoung: in this first cut, they can't be nested - but I think we all agree that we want to enable that in a future round	18:21
gyee	heckj, have default_tenant_id as domain_id, we are essentially overloading the meaning of default tenant	18:21
gyee	not very flexible	18:21
gyee	and confusing	18:21
liemmn	heckj, I provided an argument against using default tenant for linking domain in the KeystoneRoles document.	18:21
heckj	gyee: I absolutely do not want to overload a value	18:21
jlr	default tenant is for scoping the token. domainId is for isolating the user	18:22
gyee	amen	18:22
heckj	I'm happy using them as a chain to look up relevant data, but the meaning of an attribute has to be crisp and clear	18:22
gyee	so what's the problem with having domain_id and default_tenant_id as separate attributes?	18:22
gyee	that's very clear	18:22
*** danwent has quit IRC		18:22
liemmn	I think that is overloading the usage of default tenancy. If I understand correctly, default tenancy is used for the purpose of authentication if a tenant is not specified. A default tenant is also optional. A user's "home domain" is not. A user (except for a super-admin) must always have a "home domain." So, I decided to introduce the concept of "home domain" for better separation of concern and enforcement of immutability. To	18:23
liemmn	answer your question:	18:23
liemmn	1) "can a user have a default tenant but a null home domain?" -> No, a user (except the super-admin) always has a home domain.	18:23
liemmn	2) "can a user's default tenant not belong to the user's in the user's home domain?" -> Yes, in the given proposal, user's default tenancy and home domain are 2 separate concerns. For example, I have a guest tenancy in domain B and a home domain A. However, whenever I log on, I always want to log onto the guest tenancy I have in domain B. Therefore, I will set my default tenancy to guest tenancy in domain B.	18:23
heckj	gyee: that is clear - are you OK with asserting that domain_id is optional and can be null?	18:23
liemmn	(cut-and-paste)	18:23
gyee	I am OK with it being "null"	18:23
heckj	gyee: and thereby being also optional?	18:23
gyee	deployment does not use domain doesn't need to set a domain_id	18:23
ayoung	heckj, I would state that for all domain_id = null we assume the default domain.	18:23
ayoung	As opposed to any chained lookup	18:24
gyee	sounds good	18:24
jlr	it is an all or nothing thing... if it is used in a deployment, it is a mandatory field	18:24
liemmn	Maybe we can create a configuration to specify if the deployment is a "domain-aware" deployment (similar to PKI, for example)... If it is so, we will need to enforce non-null domainId when creating a user.	18:24
jlr	+1	18:24
gyee	+1	18:24
heckj	ayoung: inconsistency is going to bite us there	18:24
liemmn	It's a deployment option.	18:24
gyee	I am OK with that	18:25
heckj	liemmn: and you're arguing to encode deployment options in the data model, which I'm not OK with	18:25
ayoung	heckj, you mean there is the potential for an inconsistnacy between the domain of the user (null) and the domain of the default tenant?	18:25
liemmn	data model is always there.	18:25
heckj	ayoung: yes	18:25
ayoung	heckj, I would say that is an acceptable setup in some cases	18:25
liemmn	enforcement of non-null domainId is there... For a domain-aware install, a user without a domain does not make sense.	18:25
ayoung	say a migration scenario	18:25
heckj	I'm ok with adding a domain_id attribute to the user if we assert it can be Null, and therefore is an optional attribute based on backend driver	18:26
ayoung	where a domain was not used in the past	18:26
gyee	hackj, +1	18:26
gyee	heckj, my bad	18:26
ayoung	heckj, I can buy that	18:26
heckj	no	18:26
heckj	np	18:26
heckj	now I can't type	18:26
gyee	:)	18:26
liemmn	gyee spreaded the can't type bug	18:26
ayoung	OK. gyee can you write up what we agreed on here in a couple short sentances and we';; # action them?	18:27
gyee	its my middle finger	18:27
gyee	ayoung, you got it	18:27
ayoung	heckj, OK to move on to PKI?	18:28
liemmn	ayoung, for migration from a non-domain deployment to a domain-aware one, we will need to lob all those users into some sort of default domain...	18:28
ayoung	liemmn, exactly	18:28
heckj	liemmn: +1	18:29
ayoung	so there might be a point where a default tenant is part of a domain, but the user isn't or some other weirdness	18:29
heckj	ayoung: yep	18:29
heckj	#topic PKI	18:29
*** openstack changes topic to "PKI"		18:29
ayoung	first up is location of the cached certs	18:29
ayoung	it came to my attention that sticking them in /tmp is a no-no	18:29
ayoung	there is a potential elevation of privs: say a user on the Keystone system gets to /tmp/keystone-blah ahead of time	18:30
ayoung	and sticks in their own cert	18:30
ayoung	then they can authenticate using a bogus token	18:30
ayoung	So the question is what should the default be?	18:31
heckj	ayoung: any way we can make that a configurable option?	18:31
ayoung	heckj, it is already	18:31
heckj	ayoung: ah, we're just talking about sensible default then	18:31
ayoung	the question is what should the default be,	18:31
ayoung	yep	18:31
heckj	proposal: /var/lib/keystone	18:31
heckj	?	18:31
ayoung	I think /var/cache is slightly more correct	18:31
ayoung	but then the issue is the user name	18:32
ayoung	so	18:32
gyee	what's the issue with user name?	18:32
ayoung	/var/cache/<server>/keystone-certs	18:32
ayoung	gyee, OK possible race condition	18:32
ayoung	assume that there are two services running as the same user, say nova	18:32
ayoung	and both get a request at the same time	18:32
ayoung	one fetches the certs, and starts writing	18:33
ayoung	the other tests for existence of the files, which succeeds, and attempts to validate	18:33
heckj	ayoung: I'm ok with /var/cache - sounds like you've got to deal with the async race regardless of directory	18:33
ayoung	validation will fail since they only have say, half a cert	18:33
ayoung	heckj, so, will /var/cache be acceptable across the distros?	18:33
ayoung	There is nothing in there right now	18:34
*** Gordonz has quit IRC		18:34
heckj	ayoung: as far as I know, yeah - I'd poke a quick question at adamg or zul in #openstack-packaging if you want an ubuntu check	18:34
ayoung	we'll have to modify any install process to make a writable subdir in there	18:34
*** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting		18:34
ayoung	and I am not sure the correct general mechanism to do that	18:35
ayoung	so lets take that as a #action?	18:35
liemmn	ayoung, you can use a touch file to specify that a cert has been written completely.	18:35
ayoung	liemmn, yep	18:35
*** torgomatic has left #openstack-meeting		18:35
heckj	ayoung: sounds reasonable	18:35
ayoung	liemmn, maybe even the cert fingerprint....	18:36
gyee	+1	18:36
gyee	we use fingerprint for out-of-band validation as well	18:36
ayoung	#action use the cert fingerprint as a touch file to indicate download has completed	18:37
liemmn	yep	18:37
ayoung	heckj, can I get ops to post?	18:37
*** reed has joined #openstack-meeting		18:37
heckj	ayoung: I'm being dense. "ops to post"?	18:37
ayoung	or, better yet, you repost my #actions, that way I get spellcheck :)	18:37
heckj	Ah!	18:37
heckj	#action ayoung to	18:38
heckj	#action ayoung to use the cert fingerprint as a touch file to indicate download has completed	18:38
heckj	heh	18:38
heckj	you're going to hate this	18:38
ayoung	#action check with adamg or zul in #openstack-packaging about use of /var/cache for certificates	18:38
heckj	#action: ayoung to touch base with Zul/AdamG (or IRC #openstack-packaging or mailing list in general) to check on suitability of /var/cache/**/ directory creation on install	18:39
ayoung	heckj, you are wrong. I love this	18:39
heckj	heh	18:39
heckj	more on PKI?	18:39
ayoung	OK...let me come back to acceptance criteria...	18:39
ayoung	two quick matters	18:39
heckj	#action: add domain_id as optional attribute to V3 API model on users	18:39
ayoung	one, I've been told that the enable/disable for pki config options are poorly named	18:40
ayoung	they don't like my double negatives	18:40
ayoung	so I am thinking: token_format = PKI \| uuid	18:40
gyee	heckj, is the /v3 path implemented, where am I going to park the domain code?	18:41
ayoung	with uuid being the equivalent of the current default	18:41
ayoung	gyee, do you mean in the future?	18:41
gyee	near future	18:41
ayoung	I would assume it would have to be part of the identity provider	18:41
heckj	gyee: It's be under the identity provider for a V3 api route	18:42
gyee	oh ok	18:42
ayoung	OK, I have to disappear	18:43
*** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting		18:43
heckj	ayoung: ciao	18:43
ayoung	I'll start an etherpad for Summit sessions.	18:43
ayoung	We can argue there and get it down to areasonable number	18:44
ayoung	unless there is a better suggestion?	18:44
ayoung	OK...I'm gone. I'll beat you guys up over the rest of the Agenda items in #openstack-dev	18:45
heckj	kk	18:46
heckj	Other topics/issues?	18:46
gyee	v3 api	18:48
gyee	(DELETE) /users/{user_id}/roles/{role_id} ==> delete_role_from_user	18:48
gyee	if I assign the same role to multiple tenants, which role is the above deleting?	18:48
gyee	all of them?	18:48
liemmn	unless the tenantId is part of the payload somewhere	18:49
liemmn	but, that's not very restful	18:49
gyee	right, same for domain roles as well	18:49
heckj	gyee: good question	18:50
liemmn	Also... we need an update API for credentials (my feedback on draft#3)	18:50
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting		18:50
liemmn	so, to allow update to an access key, for example (enable/disable)	18:51
gyee	speaking of access key, we are ready to start on the tempURL impl	18:52
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC		18:52
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting		18:52
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting		18:52
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has quit IRC		18:52
liemmn	I've got to run... Later, heckj	18:53
heckj	gyee: I believe so	18:53
*** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting		18:53
heckj	liemmn: I'll hit a draft update this week/weekend if nothing else	18:53
gyee	then how do we remove just a tenant-role association?	18:54
gyee	or domain-role association	18:54
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting		18:55
heckj	gyee: we should totally be able to do that - I need to re-read that section to see what the hell I was thinking	18:55
gyee	oh ok :)	18:56
heckj	yeah - very distracted right now	18:56
heckj	Im going to wrap this up	18:56
heckj	#endmeeting	18:56
*** 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"		18:56
openstack	Meeting ended Tue Jul 31 18:56:45 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)	18:56
openstack	Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-18.00.html	18:56
openstack	Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-18.00.txt	18:56
openstack	Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-18.00.log.html	18:56
*** jlr has quit IRC		18:57
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC		18:59
mtaylor	heckj: wait, what? you ... finished early/on-time?	18:59
* heckj smacks mtaylor		19:00
gabrielhurley	heckj, mtaylor: I can feel the love	19:00
mtaylor	gabrielhurley: we want to keep you amused	19:00
mtaylor	#startmeeting	19:00
openstack	Meeting started Tue Jul 31 19:00:53 2012 UTC. The chair is mtaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	19:00
openstack	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.	19:00
mtaylor	anybody interested in CI?	19:01
mtaylor	#topic horizon	19:01
*** openstack changes topic to "horizon"		19:01
Shrews	Cuddling Iquanas?	19:01
mtaylor	what is an Iquana?	19:01
*** timchan has quit IRC		19:01
Shrews	same as an Iguana, but more exotic	19:01
mtaylor	neat	19:01
* mtaylor forward-proposes the openstack I relase to be named Iquana, invoking the bcwaldon rule		19:02
mtaylor	ok. so - gabrielhurley did you get a chance to read the email I sent this morning?	19:02
gabrielhurley	mtaylor: I did	19:02
gabrielhurley	andI was thinking similarly about using selenium tests to ensure some of that stuff	19:02
mtaylor	gabrielhurley: excellent. that means less typing now	19:02
mtaylor	perfect!	19:03
gabrielhurley	it is a bit of a catch-22 though, where we need to test against the future changes but also against the current pip-requires lists...	19:03
mtaylor	it is. I think the key is to make sure that changes don't go in that _can't_ work with released libs	19:04
mtaylor	if the client libs start ganking with existing apis too much it'll screw all the other projects too anyway	19:04
gabrielhurley	yeah, it just happened to be that we (Horizon) hit it first	19:05
gabrielhurley	it's definitely not a horizon-only problem	19:05
mtaylor	and then, if someone is adding a new api call/feature to a client lib that you desperately need in horizon ...	19:05
mtaylor	they need to cut a release	19:05
gabrielhurley	yep	19:05
gabrielhurley	Brian Waldon is pushing a new glanceclient release today	19:05
mtaylor	do you think there would be any value in running selenium tests against the devstack install too?	19:05
jeblair	gabrielhurley: he already did it, and it's on pypi! 0.2.0	19:05
gabrielhurley	jeblair: nice	19:05
*** GheRivero_ has quit IRC		19:05
gabrielhurley	mtaylor: definitely value in that	19:05
mtaylor	gabrielhurley: k. I'll put that on the list of things for clarkb to think about	19:06
jeblair	mtaylor: one further question for clarkb to think about -- can it be incorporated into tempest, or does that make no sense.	19:06
mtaylor	+	19:07
mtaylor	++	19:07
mtaylor	that is	19:07
mtaylor	clarkb: this is what happens when you go to lunch instead of this meeting - you get assigned things	19:07
mtaylor	gabrielhurley: cool. so I think we're set for now, until we think of something else	19:07
gabrielhurley	sounds good. we'll give it a try and revise as needed	19:08
mtaylor	awesome	19:08
mtaylor	#topic PTL's + client lib releases	19:09
*** openstack changes topic to "PTL's + client lib releases"		19:09
mtaylor	jeblair: so - bcwaldon made a releaes because I explicitly added him to the acls for that project a few weeks ago, which is obviously the wrong way to do things	19:09
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has quit IRC		19:10
mtaylor	I believe the ML decision was to add $project-drivers to python-${projet}client with tagging acls, yeah?	19:10
*** novas0x2a\|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting		19:10
mtaylor	so I think we can get that done - BUT - it brings up a thought...	19:10
jeblair	mtaylor: that makes sense to me	19:11
mtaylor	should we manage the project ACL files int eh config branches with puppet?	19:11
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		19:11
jeblair	mtaylor: neat idea.	19:11
mtaylor	jeblair: I was thinking about it when I was making the "create a project" additions	19:11
mtaylor	since the acls part is the most annoying part	19:11
* mtaylor assigns clarkb to think about that when he gets back		19:12
mtaylor	#action clarkb manage project acls with puppet	19:12
mtaylor	#actoin clarkb think about running selenium against devstack	19:12
mtaylor	damn	19:12
mtaylor	#action clarkb think about running selenium against devstack	19:13
mtaylor	#action clarkb think about running selenium in tempest	19:13
mtaylor	ok	19:13
mtaylor	recorded those	19:13
mtaylor	#topic renaming client libs	19:13
*** openstack changes topic to "renaming client libs"		19:13
mtaylor	notmyname: you aroud?	19:14
mtaylor	around	19:14
mtaylor	dammit	19:14
mtaylor	zul: how about you?	19:14
zul	around? not really	19:14
zul	ill lurk continue without me	19:15
jeblair	so the gist was that automated packaging scripts have problems with "python-fooclient" because they want to call the result "python-python-fooclient"	19:15
notmyname	mtaylor: here	19:15
jeblair	which isn't a problem for, say, ubuntu, who just pick the right name, but for individuals making their own .debs	19:15
mtaylor	also, we do already have a pile of extra logic in stuff to deal with the fact that some of our projects are named differently than their main module	19:16
jeblair	and i guess we should distinguish between the git repo name, and the setup.py name -- it's the setup.py name that the deb build scripts pick up, so that's what's being wanted to change.	19:16
mtaylor	yes. it is not necessary that we change the git repo name - although I kinda think that if we change the one we should consider changing the other too	19:17
notmyname	IMO, the git repo name makes sense	19:17
mtaylor	however, this would affect the tarball name that we produce, which might affect ubuntu a little	19:17
*** jgriffith has joined #openstack-meeting		19:18
mtaylor	and we should consider whether or not it should affect the launchpad project name	19:18
jeblair	right, so that brings up the question "why are they named python-fooclient?" is it because we might have an openstack/java-fooclient project someday? if so, yeah, we might want to leave it as-is.	19:18
mtaylor	yes. I believe that was the reason	19:18
jeblair	so, if we consider just changing the setup.py name, what breaks?	19:18
mtaylor	also, we'll need to make new pypi entries	19:18
jeblair	(but leaving the git repo name alone)	19:18
mtaylor	if all we change is the setup.py name	19:18
gabrielhurley	if you change the setup.py name the names on PyPI will get screwed	19:19
mtaylor	yeah - it'll be a whole new pypi thing	19:19
gabrielhurley	you'll need to update all the pip-requires in all the projects with the new names as well	19:19
mtaylor	++	19:19
mtaylor	although that could be done in a rolling fashion	19:19
gabrielhurley	I don't object to that, btw. just sayin' it's the case	19:19
mtaylor	yup	19:19
jeblair	mtaylor: do tarball names come from that?	19:19
mtaylor	yes	19:20
jeblair	so that would affect distros	19:20
*** rnirmal has quit IRC		19:20
mtaylor	yup - although we've pre f3, so I think it's maybe still ok?	19:20
mtaylor	ttx: ?	19:20
mtaylor	notmyname: any sense of whether the other python-*client people have interest in following suit?	19:21
jeblair	mtaylor: i'm sure we'd have a whole bunch of puppet config files that would need changing, but that's probably not a huge deal.	19:21
notmyname	no idea. I got the request from people building python-swiftclient packages	19:21
soren	I'm apparently missing some context.	19:22
mtaylor	k.	19:22
soren	What are we renaming from and to?	19:22
mtaylor	soren: the suggestion is to make setup(name='python-swiftclient' be setup(name='swiftclient'	19:23
mtaylor	soren: and, of course, if we think about that, we'd like to think about doing that across the board	19:23
soren	And what's the motivation? Did I miss a mailinglist discussion?	19:23
mtaylor	but leaving the git repo named the same	19:23
mtaylor	motivation is - apparently there are packaging tools for python which pull the python name from setup.py and pre-pend python- to it	19:24
notmyname	package building tools take the internal name (python-fooclient) and turn it into python-python-fooclient	19:24
mtaylor	so those are making python-python-swiftclient packages	19:24
notmyname	which implies that clients of the module are a python-python-swiftclient-client	19:24
jeblair	i'm sure those can change, but it does also seem weird that these are in pypi as "python-swiftclient" because it's obviously python.	19:25
jeblair	so it's certainly worth considering	19:25
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		19:25
soren	There are hundreds of projects named python-* on pypi.	19:25
soren	How do they manage?	19:25
jeblair	there are tens of thousands that aren't. :)	19:26
mtaylor	https://github.com/emonty/openstack-depends/blob/master/tools/pip-requires#L42	19:26
mtaylor	there are 58 things openstack depends on	19:26
soren	jeblair: That's got to be the worst argument ever fo.	19:26
soren	jeblair: For anything :)	19:26
mtaylor	3 of them that are not our projects are prefixed with python-	19:26
mtaylor	so I'd say that the general trend seems to be non-python prefixing for pypi modules	19:27
mtaylor	with the one really odd-one out being MySQL-python which installs MySQLdb - but Andy is weird anyway	19:27
jeblair	soren: i won't get into a meta-argument with you, i will just note that it was a rebuttal to your rebuttal to my _actual_ point that the name is redundant.	19:27
soren	jeblair: It's not redundant. It's the python blahclient (as opposed to the java blahclient or haskell blahclient etc).	19:28
soren	jeblair: How's it redundant?	19:28
* mtaylor abstractly wants to be a meta-observer		19:28
mtaylor	soren: it's redundant on pypi	19:28
mtaylor	soren: it makes sense for the ubuntu package to be named python-${pypi-package-name}	19:29
soren	I don't think that should dictate naming.	19:29
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		19:29
mtaylor	I'm not saying that it should	19:29
soren	Ok.	19:29
soren	Hm.	19:29
soren	So what are you saying?	19:29
*** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting		19:29
mtaylor	purely that, for the name whose main purpose is tarball naming and pypi project, python- isn't essential	19:30
soren	I think it is. For tarball naming.	19:30
mtaylor	because we're likely, as a project, to produce ${foo}-novaclient where foo!=python ?	19:31
soren	Having the t at the end for client also isn't essential. In fact, it's redundant, because "clien" isn't a real world, and the context should reveal its true purpose.	19:31
jeblair	that is a good point; the tarball exists in a similar context to the git repo, so its name having python- makes sense.	19:31
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		19:31
soren	mtaylor: Absolutely.	19:31
soren	mtaylor: I'm surprised we don't already.	19:31
mtaylor	I'mnot	19:31
jeblair	to be clear, soren's point about tarball naming was a good point. not "clein". :)	19:31
mtaylor	we make python libs becuase we're a python based projects	19:31
mtaylor	java and ruby libs are silly	19:31
mtaylor	because ruby people should be using fog	19:32
mtaylor	and java people should be using jclouds	19:32
mtaylor	and even when they aren't	19:32
mtaylor	the java project is named after openstack	19:32
mtaylor	and not after each project	19:32
notmyname	mtaylor: actually because the API isn't a language, it's HTTP. we simply provide wrappers for a particular language	19:32
mtaylor	notmyname: indeed. and we do that _purely_ because our projects need to be able to talk to each other	19:32
mtaylor	and then we use those libraries as the basis for command line clients ... but it isn't part of a larger decision to try to make openstack-project generated client libraries for all languages	19:33
*** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting		19:34
notmyname	this seems to be way off track. current proposal is to internally drop the language prefix and externally (the repo and maybe the tarball) to have the prefix? and what issue does that cause	19:34
mtaylor	but - that's just my opinion, of course	19:34
soren	mtaylor: Even if we don't create them, there's a great big world out there whose namespace we're sharing.	19:34
mtaylor	the tarball name is generated from the name	19:34
soren	If someone wants to build php-glanceclient, more power to them.	19:34
mtaylor	soren: no. I disagree. the only place it would matter is our tarballs ftp server	19:34
mtaylor	I cannot be responsible for a theoretical global namespace of tarballs	19:34
mtaylor	soren: sure. and they can call it python-glanceclient for all I care	19:35
mtaylor	notmyname: so the reason we're ratholing	19:35
mtaylor	notmyname: is python setup.py sdist	19:35
soren	mtaylor: Well, that's just silly. We pick the names fo things to avoid collisions with others.	19:35
soren	Heck, half this discussion has been about other people's namespace!	19:35
soren	PyPi and Ubuntu, to be exact.	19:35
mtaylor	notmyname: which bases its tarball name on what's in setup.py(name=	19:35
notmyname	ya. like stdeb makes it python-<name from setup.py>	19:36
soren	mtaylor: So don't give me the "we don't care about other people's namespace".	19:36
mtaylor	yup	19:36
mtaylor	soren: "we don't care about it for tarballs" - because there is no shared tarball namespace we need to care about	19:37
mtaylor	we upload to a shared thing called pypi, and we kinda talk to the ubuntu people	19:37
mtaylor	but I belive we are wandering	19:37
mtaylor	into a meta argument again	19:37
mtaylor	more to the point - tarball name, setup(name= and pypi name are tied together	19:37
mtaylor	so, unless we want to get weird, changing one changes all three	19:38
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		19:38
mtaylor	notmyname: can we touch base with bcwaldon and jk0? I know I'm arguing against soren here, but that's probably just because it's fun - there is potentially a valid concern in there	19:39
*** gabrielhurley has quit IRC		19:39
jeblair	mtaylor: perhaps we should take this to the ML?	19:39
mtaylor	and I doubt we're going to come to conclusion here right now	19:40
mtaylor	yeah	19:40
mtaylor	I think we know which things would change and where the issues might be	19:40
notmyname	mtaylor: ya, sure. like I said earlier, this certainly isn't an issue that's important enough to be different about. it's mostly an "awkwardness in naming" issue	19:40
notmyname	mtaylor: jeblair: thanks for talking through it	19:40
*** littleidea_ has joined #openstack-meeting		19:40
jeblair	indeed, this has been useful to explore the issue, and i think it's worth finding out what others think	19:41
mtaylor	++	19:41
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		19:42
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting		19:42
mtaylor	ok. so those were talky	19:42
ttx	mtaylor: what's the question ?	19:42
mtaylor	#topic statuses of stuff	19:42
*** openstack changes topic to "statuses of stuff"		19:42
mtaylor	ttx: we'll bring it back on ML or over in normal chanel	19:42
*** littleidea has quit IRC		19:42
*** littleidea_ is now known as littleidea		19:43
*** dtroyer has joined #openstack-meeting		19:43
mtaylor	a few quick status things:	19:43
*** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting		19:43
ttx	python-python-python	19:43
mtaylor	I got a bunch of puppet module re-org done (yay) and we have some code in from Ryan_Lane to get our new wiki up and going	19:43
mtaylor	clarkb got selenium tests going against horizon	19:44
mtaylor	jeblair: did you accomplish anything worthwhile last week?	19:44
mtaylor	;)	19:44
jeblair	zuul should be testing/merging changes in an optimal order now	19:44
jeblair	if that looks like it's working...	19:44
jeblair	i'll switch the CI repos to cherry-pick so we can dogfood that idea before proposing we change the rest of the projects	19:45
jeblair	and i finally have tests for zuul, so we can make changes to it without the _extremely_ laborious process of clicking around in jenkins and gerrit	19:45
jeblair	eol	19:46
*** markmcclain has quit IRC		19:46
mtaylor	YAY!	19:46
mtaylor	anybody got anything else?	19:47
devananda	yep	19:47
devananda	patches for devstack and devtack-gate to support testing openvz have been proposed	19:48
devananda	just waiting for reviews/etc now	19:48
mtaylor	w00t!	19:48
mtaylor	if anybody around here has devstack review status, checking those out would be god	19:48
mtaylor	good	19:48
Shrews	devananda: is RS ready to push once those changes are in? i know daniel has already merged in my patches	19:49
devananda	oh, and i did a pretty big re-org from something jaypipes pointed out (the openvz glance image gets handled just like the other images now)	19:49
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		19:49
devananda	Shrews: whether or not they think they are, no, they're not	19:49
jaypipes	w00t.	19:49
devananda	it fails several tests right now, most notably volume and snapshots	19:49
Shrews	devananda: ah, right	19:49
devananda	but it's testing them, heh ;)	19:50
*** reed has quit IRC		19:50
*** thingee has joined #openstack-meeting		19:50
Shrews	well, we might need to fix that ourselves	19:50
devananda	i think it won't be too hard, at least the volume stuff seemed almost there when I read it	19:51
devananda	eol	19:52
*** liemmn has quit IRC		19:53
*** mcaway has joined #openstack-meeting		19:54
jeblair	mtaylor: endmeeting?	19:55
mtaylor	#endmeeting	19:55
*** 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"		19:55
openstack	Meeting ended Tue Jul 31 19:55:20 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)	19:55
openstack	Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-19.00.html	19:55
openstack	Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-19.00.txt	19:55
openstack	Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-19.00.log.html	19:55
*** mnewby has quit IRC		19:55
*** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting		19:57
ttx	mtaylor: staying around for PPb to defend the supporting project list ?	19:57
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		19:58
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		19:59
*** anotherjesse_zz is now known as anotherjesse		20:01
ttx	...	20:01
heckj	o/	20:01
bcwaldon	ttx: mtaylor is on a call, he says	20:01
notmyname	o/	20:01
ttx	Chair chair	20:02
ttx	any other PPB member ?	20:02
bcwaldon	anotherjesse is around	20:03
bcwaldon	vishy is too	20:03
ttx	anotherjesse, danwent, devcamca-, jaypipes, johnpur... ?	20:03
vishy	o/	20:03
danwent	o/	20:04
jaypipes	ttrifonov: o/	20:04
jaypipes	ttx: o/	20:04
*** dolphm has quit IRC		20:04
ttx	That's 8	20:04
anotherjesse	o/	20:04
* ttx checks if that means quorum		20:05
ttx	looks like it does, anyone volunteering to chair ?	20:05
bcwaldon	I nominate ttx	20:06
ttx	nothing like chairing two meeting in a row	20:06
ttx	#startmeeting	20:06
openstack	Meeting started Tue Jul 31 20:06:29 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	20:06
openstack	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.	20:06
bcwaldon	ttx: we know you can do it!	20:06
ttx	Two topics on http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB	20:06
*** Shrews has left #openstack-meeting		20:06
ttx	#topic API stability	20:06
*** openstack changes topic to "API stability"		20:06
ttx	http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/APIStability	20:06
ttx	anyone up to defend this one ?	20:07
mcaway	yep	20:07
mcaway	so, it should be pretty straightforward	20:07
ttx	Your nick now sounds like some express takeaway at McDo.	20:07
*** mcaway is now known as markmc		20:07
markmc	heh	20:07
markmc	idea is that the project should make its stance on API stability a bit more clear	20:07
markmc	with a "this is very important to OpenStack" statement	20:08
*** ewanmellor has joined #openstack-meeting		20:08
jaypipes	markmc: ++	20:08
markmc	and, second, that the PPB should encourage folks to help out with a set of API guidelines	20:08
markmc	the two links are	20:08
ttx	markmc: so this is our "yes we care" moment ?	20:08
markmc	http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/APIStability	20:08
markmc	ttx, pretty much	20:09
* markmc shrugs		20:09
markmc	http://wiki.openstack.org/APIChangeGuidelines	20:09
markmc	the guidelines thing will help a lot of we can flesh them out	20:09
ttx	ok, any questions before we formally express whether we care about APi stability or not ?	20:09
markmc	looks like we had a nod to this before:	20:09
vishy	I support guidelines, although they clearly need some more editing	20:09
markmc	http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/APIGoals	20:09
markmc	"Each successive implementation of the APIs should always be backwards-compatible;"	20:10
markmc	vishy, they certainly do	20:10
vishy	for example, I don't think adding post parameters to an api without versioning is acceptable	20:10
vishy	(putting them in an extension is fine by me though)	20:10
markmc	ah, there's a question	20:11
markmc	do extensions fall under this?	20:11
*** mnewby has quit IRC		20:11
markmc	I had presumed yes	20:11
bcwaldon	extensions should be thought of a mini-apis	20:11
anotherjesse	I think the "example" section is a great way of exploring the api space…	20:11
markmc	bcwaldon, with same or lesser API stability expectations?	20:11
bcwaldon	markmc: 'each successive implementation...' needs to be better defined	20:11
bcwaldon	markmc: same expectations	20:11
markmc	bcwaldon, that's an old proposal - just point it out for completeness	20:12
bcwaldon	markmc: versioned independently	20:12
heckj	anotherjesse: +1	20:12
vishy	markmc: extensions should be able to add things to requests and response, but I don' tthink they need any other requirements above that	20:12
bcwaldon	markmc: kk	20:12
johnpur	o/	20:12
jaypipes	vishy: what about adding a limit=XXX&marker=XXX post params? that would need API minor version increment, not major version increment, right?	20:12
ttx	The proposal still needs work, at this point we are just saying whether we care	20:12
bcwaldon	we absolutely care	20:12
vishy	jaypipes: sure although we haven't minor versioned any apis yet	20:12
vishy	jaypipes: so why not do it with an extension?	20:12
bcwaldon	for me, its just been an understanding that we all care	20:12
ttx	and if our care extends to extensions	20:13
markmc	yeah, right now it's a question of whether the PPB agrees with the stance here:	20:13
markmc	http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/APIStability	20:13
bcwaldon	I guess we need to explicitly say what we care about?	20:13
bcwaldon	markmc: yes, lets vote	20:13
ttx	I think yes on both accounts is pretty much a given, but the proposals authors would like affirmative vote	20:13
*** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting		20:13
* ttx tries to remember how voting works		20:13
markmc	well, not me actually :)	20:13
jaypipes	vishy: is the time when an extension is merged back into core something that is written down somewhere?	20:13
* markmc always happy with rough consensus		20:13
markmc	which I figure we had anyway	20:13
bcwaldon	thats fine, nobody has said no	20:14
markmc	awesome	20:14
ttx	#startvote Agreement on proposed API Stability Statement: yes, no	20:14
bcwaldon	voting just makes it obvious and records it in notes	20:14
bcwaldon	#vote yes	20:14
jaypipes	#vote yes	20:14
ttx	hmm	20:14
vishy	#vote yes	20:14
johnpur	#vote yes	20:14
danwent	#vote yes	20:14
ttx	wait the thing didn't work	20:14
anotherjesse	#vote yes	20:14
Ravikumar_hp	#vote yes	20:14
patelna	#vote yes	20:14
anotherjesse	haha	20:14
johnpur	lol	20:14
anotherjesse	#vote petunia	20:14
notmyname	ttx: gotta have the "?"	20:14
ttx	#startvote Agreement on proposed API Stability Statement ? yes, no	20:15
openstack	Begin voting on: Agreement on proposed API Stability Statement ? Valid vote options are yes, no.	20:15
openstack	Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.	20:15
ttx	YEAH	20:15
vishy	#vote yes	20:15
*** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting		20:15
bcwaldon	#vote yes	20:15
jaypipes	#vote yes	20:15
johnpur	#vote yes	20:15
ttx	start again, only PPB members vote please	20:15
ttx	#vote yes	20:15
danwent	#vote yes	20:15
ttx	notmyname, anotherjesse ?	20:16
ttx	heckj?	20:16
anotherjesse	#vote yes	20:17
heckj	#vote yes	20:17
ttx	closing in 30 seconds	20:17
notmyname	#vote yes	20:18
nati_ueno	#vote yes	20:18
ttx	#endvote	20:18
openstack	Voted on "Agreement on proposed API Stability Statement ?" Results are	20:18
openstack	yes (10): anotherjesse, bcwaldon, ttx, notmyname, vishy, heckj, jaypipes, johnpur, danwent, nati_ueno	20:18
jaypipes	wow, contentious.	20:18
ttx	nati_ueno: only PPB members vote, sorry :)	20:18
markmc	thanks	20:18
* markmc moves to /Approved		20:18
ttx	markmc: anything more on that subject ?	20:18
bcwaldon	markmc: I would love to work with you on api goals when the time comes	20:19
markmc	ttx, everyone help with the guidelines! :)	20:19
markmc	bcwaldon, cool	20:19
ttx	#topic Supporting projects	20:19
*** openstack changes topic to "Supporting projects"		20:19
ttx	#link http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/SupportingProjectDefinition	20:19
ttx	So this is a try to align our current structure with the proposed future TC structure	20:20
ttx	Basically we have a number of projects that are considered "OpenStack" with contributors that are relevant technical contributors that should be allowed to vote in TC elections	20:20
ttx	So we need to assert that this category of project exist, and put a number of them in that category	20:21
annegentle	I'd like to voice a concern about leaving openstack-chef and the TryStack project off that list	20:21
*** EmilienM has left #openstack-meeting		20:21
ttx	Gives those project contributors the right to vote in directly-elected TC seats election	20:21
annegentle	Those two projects help increase adoption and support documentation efforts by providing real environments.	20:21
annegentle	They're also great bridge projects to operators and cloud users.	20:21
ttx	On the other hand, puts that project under the TC authority	20:21
ttx	so it's a bit of a two-edged sword	20:22
ttx	So first, do we agree about the category ?	20:22
ttx	i.e. Proposal 1 in http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/SupportingProjectDefinition	20:22
ttx	Questions on that part ?	20:22
ttx	annegentle: let's discuss which projects are and aren't considered in that category when we'll discuss Proposal 2	20:23
johnpur	LGTM	20:23
annegentle	ttx: got it	20:23
anotherjesse	ttx: can you give examples in part 1 (in the doc?)	20:23
anotherjesse	err, nevermind	20:23
devcamca-	o/	20:24
*** devcamca- is now known as devcamcar		20:24
ttx	ready to vote on the first part ?	20:24
ttx	#startvote Creating a "supporting" project official category? yes, abstain, no	20:24
openstack	Begin voting on: Creating a "supporting" project official category? Valid vote options are yes, abstain, no.	20:24
openstack	Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.	20:24
* ttx is getting better at this startvote thing		20:25
bcwaldon	#vote yes	20:25
johnpur	#vote yes	20:25
ttx	#vote yes	20:25
danwent	#vote yes	20:25
*** blamar_ has joined #openstack-meeting		20:25
devcamcar	#vote abstain	20:25
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		20:26
bcwaldon	ttx: you might want to expand on what the requirements are to be a supporting project	20:26
vishy	#vote yes	20:26
bcwaldon	ttx: i.e. what you are expected to do	20:26
ttx	bcwaldon: You inherit allthe duties of other openstack official projects, but maybe I could expand on that	20:27
*** blamar has quit IRC		20:27
ttx	http://wiki.openstack.org/ProjectTypes	20:27
*** blamar_ is now known as blamar		20:27
bcwaldon	sure, or maybe I should just read more	20:27
anotherjesse	#vote yes	20:27
*** dprince has quit IRC		20:28
ttx	bcwaldon: there are a few pieces out there that assume the supporting projects already exist ;)	20:28
ttx	vote closes in 30 sec	20:28
heckj	#vote abstain	20:28
notmyname	#vote no	20:28
ttx	#endvote	20:29
openstack	Voted on "Creating a "supporting" project official category?" Results are	20:29
openstack	yes (6): anotherjesse, bcwaldon, ttx, vishy, johnpur, danwent	20:29
openstack	abstain (2): devcamcar, heckj	20:29
openstack	no (1): notmyname	20:29
notmyname	not because it those projects aren't important. but because I don't think it makes them important enough	20:29
ttx	notmyname: as in... less important than core projects because they don't get an aassigned seat on the TC ?	20:29
johnpur	notmyname: what is your alternative?	20:29
vishy	I would be curious to know how many people contribute to these projects that don't also contribute to an official project	20:30
vishy	my thought is that it is close to 0	20:30
heckj	vishy: docs might be an example of a difference, but that's the only one that comes to mind	20:31
notmyname	johnpur: for example, gating + CI + docs together as "one" project with a lead that gets a seat on the PPB/TC	20:31
ttx	notmyname: why not 3 seats then ?	20:31
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		20:32
notmyname	I don't know. why not? :-)	20:32
ttx	you know my position on this.. you can't weigh a project against another, the only way to do it fairly is to have all seats elected in the same way, with proportional rep	20:32
ttx	but that ship has sailed	20:32
ttx	ok, looking into proposal 2	20:32
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		20:32
ttx	which of those projects should actually be considered a supporting project	20:33
ttx	the first on the list are no-brainers in my opinion	20:33
ttx	Anyone objects to the "Official documentation" list of projects ?	20:33
bcwaldon	ttx: you've got my approval on the rest of the proposal	20:33
annegentle	to me, the official documentation list looks correct	20:34
ttx	The only ones I had doubts with are pbr and git-review	20:35
annegentle	sorry, I have to catch a ride back to Austin, but basically I am advocating Supporting project definition that include deployers	20:35
bcwaldon	ttx: both totally necessary	20:35
ttx	The rest is pretty much openstack and openstack-centric	20:35
ttx	annegentle: we can discuss further additions another time anyway	20:36
bcwaldon	ttx: I think putting something in openstack/ should mean it is some sort of offical openstack project	20:36
annegentle	great, thanks all	20:36
ttx	annegentle: i'll discuss it with you	20:36
ttx	bcwaldon: indeed, the idea would be to remove the ones that are abusively under openstack/ and should not be considered ours	20:37
*** Ravikumar_hp has quit IRC		20:37
ttx	then we can use review.openstack.org/openstack/ as "the" list	20:37
*** Ravikumar_hp has joined #openstack-meeting		20:37
bcwaldon	ttx: ok, so I could see git-review moving under the stackforge banner	20:37
ttx	and generate active contributors directly from gerrit	20:37
bcwaldon	ttx: and pbr could really exist outside of openstack	20:37
ttx	mtaylor: wanna step up and defend those ?	20:37
bcwaldon	ttx: we should let mtaylor/jeblair argue those points	20:37
*** jk0 has joined #openstack-meeting		20:37
ttx	everyone agrees on the rest of the list ?	20:38
ttx	(from openstack/compute-api to openstack-dev/openstack-nose)	20:38
bcwaldon	seems so	20:39
mtaylor	aroo?	20:39
mtaylor	reading	20:39
ttx	wanna make an argument about wht pbr and git-review should be IN ?	20:39
ttx	why*	20:39
mtaylor	same reason as openstack-nose, honestly	20:40
mtaylor	they were written for openstack and are kinda central to what we do	20:40
ttx	mtaylor: openstack-nose has a smarter name :P	20:40
mtaylor	the fact that they were written to be friendly and non-openstack _specific_ is beside the point	20:40
bcwaldon	mtaylor: so I made the opposite decision for warlock	20:40
mtaylor	however, if people want them to move, I don't think it will hurt anything	20:40
bcwaldon	mtaylor: which I wrote for openstack, but it has nothing to do with the domain	20:40
*** dwcramer has quit IRC		20:41
mtaylor	I could see git-review moving to openstack-dev rather than openstack-ci - or honestly just somewhere else	20:41
mtaylor	I'm not wedded to it being in openstack-ci	20:42
bcwaldon	mtaylor: is git-review specific to openstack? Isn't it more of a way to interact with a stackforge cite?	20:42
bcwaldon	site*	20:42
mtaylor	with a gerrit	20:42
ttx	So... no objection to doc and core infra categories, still a bit of discussion around openstack-nose, pbr and git-review	20:42
bcwaldon	sure, even just a gerrit	20:42
mtaylor	it was originally written as a re-write of a shell script we had in our repos	20:42
mtaylor	which is why it's in our system	20:42
mtaylor	same with pbr - which is actually mostly just code from openstack-common	20:42
*** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting		20:42
mtaylor	packaged up to be easier to work with	20:42
mtaylor	both have some openstack assumptions in them (pbr more-so than git-review)	20:43
bcwaldon	mtaylor: right, one thing I don't want to do is to prevent other open source projects from consuming our stuff	20:43
mtaylor	pbr could just as easily be called openstack-setup or something :)	20:43
bcwaldon	mtaylor: and not have to care about openstack	20:43
mtaylor	totally	20:43
ttx	I propose we vote to add the first two categories and let the discussion continue some other day about the others.	20:43
bcwaldon	ttx: sure	20:43
mtaylor	yeah - we can offline pbr and git-review discussion just fine	20:43
*** kindaopsdevy_ has joined #openstack-meeting		20:43
* mtaylor does noth ave the passionate feelings on this topic - it's a grey area honestly		20:43
johnpur	ttx: +1	20:44
ttx	#startvote Add Official doc and Core Infrastructure projects lists to the "supporting" category? yes, abstain, no	20:44
openstack	Begin voting on: Add Official doc and Core Infrastructure projects lists to the "supporting" category? Valid vote options are yes, abstain, no.	20:44
openstack	Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.	20:44
ttx	I think that roughly covers 100% of contributors anyway	20:44
bcwaldon	#vote yes	20:44
johnpur	#vote yes	20:44
ttx	#vote yes	20:44
ttx	so we can use them to get the right list of people voting	20:44
vishy	#vote yes	20:44
ttx	in the elections next month	20:44
anotherjesse	#vote yes	20:44
heckj	#vote yes	20:44
devcamcar	#vote yes	20:44
danwent	#vote yes	20:45
*** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC		20:45
ttx	30 seconds more	20:45
notmyname	#vote abstain	20:45
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting		20:45
ttx	#endvote	20:45
openstack	Voted on "Add Official doc and Core Infrastructure projects lists to the "supporting" category?" Results are	20:46
openstack	yes (8): anotherjesse, bcwaldon, ttx, vishy, heckj, johnpur, danwent, devcamcar	20:46
openstack	abstain (1): notmyname	20:46
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		20:46
*** kindaopsdevy_ is now known as kindaopsdevy		20:46
ttx	ok, I think we are done... 14 minute recess before next meeting ?	20:46
bcwaldon	sure	20:46
bcwaldon	thanks, ttx	20:46
ttx	#endmeeting	20:47
*** 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"		20:47
openstack	Meeting ended Tue Jul 31 20:47:09 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)	20:47
openstack	Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-20.06.html	20:47
openstack	Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-20.06.txt	20:47
openstack	Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-20.06.log.html	20:47
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		20:48
*** ewanmellor has quit IRC		20:48
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		20:49
*** jk0 has left #openstack-meeting		20:50
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		20:51
*** johnpostlethwait has quit IRC		20:54
*** johnpostlethwait has joined #openstack-meeting		20:54
*** markmcclain1 has quit IRC		20:58
ttx	back on stage	21:01
ttx	markmc, heckj, notmyname, bcwaldon, jgriffith, vishy, devcamcar, danwent: [still] around ?	21:01
danwent	o/	21:01
notmyname	o/	21:01
gabrielhurley	ttx: I'll be your devcamcar for today.	21:01
heckj	o/	21:01
markmc	yep	21:01
ttx	gabrielhurley: awesome	21:02
ttx	let's start and bcwaldon/vishy/jgriffith will catch up	21:02
ttx	#startmeeting	21:02
openstack	Meeting started Tue Jul 31 21:02:53 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	21:02
openstack	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.	21:02
ttx	Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting	21:03
*** jerdfelt has joined #openstack-meeting		21:03
ttx	#info Two weeks left for Folsom features! Propose code now or it will wait for Grizzly.	21:03
ttx	#topic Actions from previous meeting	21:03
*** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting"		21:03
ttx	* notmyname to retroactively create some blueprints to cover 1.6.0 main features: DONE	21:03
ttx	* vishy to defer trusted messaging and user configurable rbac to Grizzly: DONE	21:03
vishy	o/	21:03
ttx	* gabrielhurley/devcamcar to clarify droppage of ext-roles due to lack of RBAC support	21:04
ttx	gabrielhurley: Now marked "Slow progress", so it's still relevant ?	21:04
gabrielhurley	ttx: it is still relevant, yes	21:04
ttx	but unlikely.	21:04
gabrielhurley	ttx: it's a stretch goal, but we're working on it	21:04
ttx	gabrielhurley: ok, thx	21:04
gabrielhurley	ttx: it's actually not hard for horizon, it's just dependent on keystone	21:04
ttx	* ttx to confirm green light to nova and keystone 2012.1.2	21:04
ttx	...let's discuss that in the next topic.	21:04
bcwaldon	ttx: here	21:05
ttx	gabrielhurley: anything specific you are waiting on in Keystone ?	21:05
gabrielhurley	ttx: like you said, we can discuss that during the keystone topic ;-)	21:05
ttx	Well, I was actually speaking of 2012.1.2, but let's do that yes	21:06
*** anotherjesse is now known as anotherjesse_zz		21:06
ttx	#topic 2012.1.2 stable release	21:06
*** openstack changes topic to "2012.1.2 stable release"		21:06
ttx	markmc: So we are now aiming for August 9 for 2012.1.2 ?	21:06
markmc	ttx, yes, pushing out by a week because of a fix in the pipeline	21:07
ttx	Does that mean there is still room for more last-minute fix backports in Keystone/Nova ?	21:07
markmc	ttx, still looking good, had a nice bunch of nova fixes	21:07
ttx	or you'd rather not ?	21:07
markmc	happy to take some more, looks like there's some in the queue for keystone	21:07
heckj	markmc: yeah, apevec has been busy there	21:07
markmc	haven't re-checked horizon and glance since last week	21:07
ttx	sounds good. Anything more on that topic ?	21:08
markmc	not from me	21:08
*** mnewby has quit IRC		21:08
ttx	#topic Keystone status	21:09
*** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status"		21:09
ttx	heckj: o/	21:09
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/folsom-3	21:09
heckj	(refresh if you haven't recently)	21:09
ttx	heckj: Not much visible progress since last week ?	21:09
* ttx refreshes		21:09
heckj	PKI getting landed and bugs on it	21:09
heckj	Some no-progress elements removed from F3 milestone goals	21:09
ttx	VERY recently :)	21:10
heckj	that's why I suggested you refresh. Wanted to be more like bcwaldon	21:10
ttx	He's alreday tainting you, I see	21:10
bcwaldon	AoE	21:11
ttx	Looks good now	21:11
ttx	heckj: Quick priority sanity-check: Can you confirm you're fine with deferring to Grizzly all those features if they are not merged in by August 14 ?	21:11
heckj	ttx: I really wanted to get more done, but yeah - I'd prefer stability and consistency over last-minute change to just shove something in the door	21:11
ttx	right, obviously all the "High" are very much wanted	21:12
heckj	still hoping to have parts of the V3 API stubbed out and "draft" or "beta" available for F3	21:12
heckj	yep	21:12
ttx	heckj: anything else ?	21:12
heckj	not from me - question time	21:13
ttx	gabrielhurley: what is it you're depending on in Keystone ?	21:13
gabrielhurley	ttx: perhaps heckj can comment on his thinking about the policy consolidation and CRUD in keystone (which is the main dependency for horizon's RBAC blueprint)	21:13
ttx	gabrielhurley: perhaps he can.	21:13
gabrielhurley	(he and I have spoken about it, but probably best to share...)	21:13
heckj	There's a slow-progress blueprint about consolidating all the various policy.json files and suggesting a best-practice/small-deployment setup for those and assocaited roles.	21:13
heckj	That's really the key piece there - just getting some intended consistency to deployments	21:14
heckj	there's also some V3 API around letting keystone host those policy files,	21:14
gabrielhurley	if there's consistency and we an API to query the policy, then horizon has trivial work to do to support it in the UI	21:14
*** markmc is now known as mcaway		21:14
heckj	but that's after we get a basic around the roles across projects, etc.	21:14
ttx	gabrielhurley: you'd need document-deployment-suggestions-policy complete ASAP to be unblocked ?	21:15
heckj	that's the gist of it all - horizon's UI would require the V3 Policy crud API and conventions around how to read those files	21:15
gabrielhurley	^^^that	21:16
uvirtbot	gabrielhurley: Error: "^^that" is not a valid command.	21:16
* heckj loves the uvirtbot		21:16
gabrielhurley	lol	21:16
gabrielhurley	if it all falls through we haven't lost much... we're just still stuck with the two roles (admin and member)	21:16
ttx	heckj: do you think it would be reasonable for Horizon to use a part of the V3 API ?	21:16
*** markvoelker has quit IRC		21:17
heckj	that portion, yes - it's totally new and independent of the other API elements	21:17
ttx	OK. Other questions about Keystone ?	21:17
gabrielhurley	ttx heckj: since I thoroughly vetted the v3 API I'm pretty comfortable with using it, particularly that bit. we can adjust over time if necessary.	21:17
ttx	#topic Swift status	21:18
*** openstack changes topic to "Swift status"		21:18
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.6.0	21:18
ttx	notmyname: hey	21:18
notmyname	howdy	21:18
ttx	1.6.0 still being QA'ed ?	21:18
notmyname	ya	21:19
ttx	notmyname: more fixes coming up, or just more time to complete the QA round ?	21:19
notmyname	there was a slow start to getting them tested, and a couple of issues came up. so both :-)	21:20
ttx	notmyname: OK. just push the Final=True thing onto milestone-proposed when you're fine with it	21:20
notmyname	I will	21:20
ttx	It will be our secret signal	21:20
notmyname	don't tell	21:20
*** maoy has quit IRC		21:20
ttx	notmyname: ideally the bugs we are waiting on should be visible on the milestone page (targeted to 1.6.0)	21:21
ttx	so that everyone knows what we are blocking on	21:21
ttx	notmyname: anything else ?	21:21
notmyname	the page is up to date. the most recent was actually a regression. it broke old functionality (the bug would be "everything is the same as it was")	21:21
ttx	Ack. Questions on Swift ?	21:22
notmyname	there are no known blockers right now. simply waiting for QA to be done	21:22
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-3	21:23
* ttx refreshes		21:23
bcwaldon	hey	21:23
ttx	Good progress overall, still a bit worried about essential stuff...	21:24
bcwaldon	you don't trust me!?	21:24
ttx	bcwaldon: When worried I go from being a weekly PITA to being a daily PITA :P	21:24
ttx	Let's see where we stand...	21:24
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/api-v2-store-access	21:24
*** s0mik has quit IRC		21:24
ttx	Still not started ? But short enough ?	21:24
bcwaldon	I have someone who will do it over the next week	21:25
bcwaldon	if its not done, I'm gonna do it	21:25
ttx	heh	21:25
bcwaldon	thats how a lot of things get done	21:25
bcwaldon	markwash has been super helpful in the v2 implementation	21:26
ttx	if not done next week, that will just leave you with the weekend to do it :)	21:26
bcwaldon	and he's wrapping up his remaining blueprints as we speak	21:26
*** ohnoimdead has joined #openstack-meeting		21:26
bcwaldon	ttx: thats enough time, I just have other things to do right now	21:26
ttx	So api-v2-links is close to completion once part 1 is merged ?	21:26
bcwaldon	ttx: I think the review up now is all that needs to be done	21:27
ttx	OK, so that leaves us with https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/separate-client	21:27
ttx	Blocked on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/integrate-python-glanceclient and https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-glanceclient/+spec/glance-client-parity	21:27
bcwaldon	yep, I have code for integrate-python-glanceclient	21:27
bcwaldon	got that working last night	21:27
ttx	vishy: OK to raise priority of integrate-python-glanceclient to "Essential" to match ?	21:27
bcwaldon	and glance-client parity has one thing left - porting ssl code from legacy client	21:28
vishy	sure	21:28
bcwaldon	which someone else could do!	21:28
*** heckj has quit IRC		21:29
ttx	#help Volunteer needed to port ssl code from legacy client in glance-client-parity	21:29
ttx	Needed for some Folsom-essential stuff ^	21:30
ttx	bcwaldon: About https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/api-v2-property-protection -- is that part of the API v2 stuff ? Should that be Essential ?	21:30
bcwaldon	sounds like someone who cares about using glanceclient over ssl could step up	21:30
bcwaldon	ttx: we might get a really dumb version of that implemented, but it might get bumped to grizzly	21:31
ttx	(it's also a good occasion to focus on something that is important for the release success, rather than some pet itch)	21:31
ttx	bcwaldon: so it's not an integral part of API v2 ?	21:31
bcwaldon	ttx: no, its a nice-to-have	21:31
bcwaldon	ttx: its something that will make the v2 api more powerful, but its a behind-the-scenes feature	21:32
bcwaldon	its not built into the spec	21:32
ttx	bcwaldon: last question, apart from the already-marked-Essential stuff, you're fine with deferring to Grizzly anything not merged by Aug 14 ?	21:32
bcwaldon	ttx: I want to make sure dprince's tenant-specific storage stuff gets in	21:32
ttx	just checking we are not forgetting some essential stuff.	21:32
bcwaldon	ttx: he has code in review already	21:33
bcwaldon	ttx: I hope to get those in shortly	21:33
ttx	bcwaldon: should we set that to Essential to reflect that you'd not release folsom without it ?	21:33
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		21:33
bcwaldon	ttx: yes	21:34
ttx	bcwaldon: will do. Anything else ?	21:34
*** ryanpetrello has quit IRC		21:34
bcwaldon	ttx: I'll go over it again but nothing to bring up now	21:34
ttx	Questions on Glance ?	21:34
ttx	#topic Quantum status	21:35
*** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status"		21:35
ttx	danwent: yo	21:35
danwent	hi	21:35
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/folsom-3	21:35
ttx	Good progress on High/Essential stuff... let's see the Essential ones in more detail	21:35
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/provider-networks	21:35
ttx	One more small part still needed, right ?	21:35
danwent	been promised a review by monday	21:35
danwent	yes, patch 3 of 4	21:36
danwent	or rather, 4 of 4	21:36
danwent	3 of 4 are in	21:36
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-v2-public-networks	21:36
ttx	Code proposed at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/9845/, could benefit from some reviewing activity ?	21:36
*** s0mik has quit IRC		21:36
danwent	its actually been through a decent amount of review, given that salvatore puts together good code to start with	21:37
danwent	but one of the two core devs reviewing the patch is now on vacation, so we need to find another one	21:37
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-l3-fwd-nat	21:37
ttx	Status on that ?	21:37
danwent	finally making good progress on that.	21:37
*** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting		21:37
danwent	have committed to a review by monday	21:37
ttx	You mentioned splitting that one in two, did you abandon the idea ?	21:37
danwent	am hoping to have a WIP done sooner than that.	21:37
danwent	I'm actually going to do the bulk of it myself, but slice a few pieces off.	21:38
danwent	nati_ueno also will be helping	21:38
ttx	ok, looks like we should be mostly set in a week	21:38
ttx	(for the essential stuff)	21:38
*** s0mik has quit IRC		21:38
ttx	Do you agree to un-folsom3-target the (unassigned) expose-dhcp-server-ip and api-rate-limiting ?	21:39
danwent	yeah, essential and high should all be in for review by tuesday	21:39
ttx	Will still be in folsom map but out of F3 since nobody is signed up yet for them	21:39
danwent	expose-dhcp-server-ip is trivial, and i'm going to try and hand it to someone	21:39
danwent	very small patch	21:39
danwent	rate-limiting will be bumped	21:39
ttx	ok	21:39
danwent	i'm also planning on moving anything in slow progress out as well	21:39
*** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting		21:39
ttx	Same priority-sanity-check, apart from the stuff marked Essential, you're fine with deferring to Grizzly anything that doesn't make it to master by Aug 14 ?	21:39
danwent	feature-wise, yes	21:40
ttx	danwent: Anything else ?	21:40
ttx	Questions on Quantum ?	21:40
danwent	i'm a bit worried we may have an 'oh crap' of something possible in nova network that we didn't handle in quantum, but i've done my best to cover the core use cases.	21:40
danwent	btw, multi-host stuff probably won't make it unless someone steps up.	21:41
ttx	danwent: we could cover them as bugs/exceptions if they are not too intrusive	21:41
danwent	ttx: ok.	21:41
ttx	#topic Cinder status	21:41
*** openstack changes topic to "Cinder status"		21:42
ttx	jgriffith: around ?	21:42
ttx	Hmm, let's do Nova first	21:42
ttx	#topic Nova status	21:42
*** openstack changes topic to "Nova status"		21:42
*** hggdh has quit IRC		21:42
ttx	vishy: hey	21:42
vishy	hi	21:42
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/folsom-3	21:42
ttx	Let's see progress on essential stuff:	21:43
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/general-host-aggregates (jog0)	21:43
ttx	Still waiting to get step 2/5 merged ?	21:43
jog0	ttx: needs code review	21:43
ttx	#help Review needed on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/10256/	21:44
ttx	jog0: How complex are the remaining steps ?	21:44
*** patelna has quit IRC		21:45
ttx	vishy: please mention that review during your meeting if it's not covered by then, looks like the one most likely to spillover	21:45
jog0	ttx: fairly easy, besides moving AZs to aggregates internally	21:46
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/integrate-python-glanceclient	21:46
ttx	We mentioned this earlier when we discussed Glance...	21:46
ttx	bcwaldon has working code, should be proposed soon	21:47
bcwaldon	ttx: code is up, just getting testing to work	21:47
*** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting		21:47
vishy	i will	21:48
ttx	Also wanted to look into a few "High" ones:	21:48
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/extract-nova-volumes	21:48
ttx	vishy: how is this one looking ?	21:48
vishy	ttx: the nova side is done barring potential export code in nova-manage	21:48
vishy	jgriffith is looking at that now	21:48
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/no-db-messaging	21:48
ttx	Lots of changes were merged for this... any indication of how much more there will be ?	21:49
ttx	(are the last 4 proposed the last ones ?)	21:49
vishy	ttx: down to a few	21:50
ttx	Minor cleanups now, those two blueprints look completed to me, please confirm:	21:50
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/update-flavor-key-value	21:50
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/xenstore-metadata	21:50
vishy	ttx: russelb just found a couple more spots in the scheduler he needs to fix	21:50
ttx	(no need to look at them now, just set to Implemented after meeting if appropriate)	21:51
ttx	And this one looks like it could be targeted to F3:	21:51
vishy	k	21:51
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/xenapi-live-block-migration	21:51
vishy	yes should be targeted	21:51
ttx	vishy: Same question as the other projects, apart from Essential stuff, you're fine with deferring to Grizzly anything that doesn't make it by Aug 14 ?	21:51
ttx	targeting...	21:51
vishy	yes	21:51
ttx	vishy: Anything else ?	21:51
vishy	we are going to check those key blueprints in the thursday meeting	21:51
*** arosen has quit IRC		21:51
vishy	I will let you know next week if there is anything that comes up there as a blocker	21:52
ttx	sounds good	21:52
ttx	Questions on Nova ?	21:52
ttx	#topic Horizon status	21:53
*** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status"		21:53
ttx	gabrielhurley: hey	21:53
gabrielhurley	ttx: hi	21:53
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/folsom-3	21:53
gabrielhurley	not as much progress since last week as I'd have liked, but not time to cut things quite yet	21:53
ttx	We clarified ext-roles earlier...	21:53
ttx	had a question for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/swiftclient -- is that blocked on Swift 1.6.0 release ? Or just work in the pipe ?	21:53
gabrielhurley	just work in the pipe	21:54
ttx	Finally about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/readd-quantum-support	21:54
ttx	This looks pretty high-prio... how is that going ?	21:54
gabrielhurley	going well. Akihiro and company have been pushing new revisions of the code regularly and it's definitely gonna land.	21:54
ttx	Finally same question than for the others... you're fine with deferring all those features if they are not merged in by August 14 ?	21:55
*** EdB has joined #openstack-meeting		21:55
gabrielhurley	all the ones that aren't started yet are fine to defer if they don't land	21:55
gabrielhurley	the ones that are started I'd be sad about	21:55
gabrielhurley	but still not blockers	21:55
ttx	gabrielhurley: anything else you wanted to mention ?	21:55
*** EdB has quit IRC		21:56
*** rnirmal has quit IRC		21:56
gabrielhurley	I think I got my mentioning done earlier. ;-)	21:56
*** patelna has quit IRC		21:56
ttx	Questions for Horizon ?	21:56
ttx	#topic Cinder status try 2	21:56
*** openstack changes topic to "Cinder status try 2"		21:56
ttx	jgriffith: howdy!	21:56
jgriffith	howdy :)	21:56
ttx	#link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/folsom-3	21:56
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/migrate-nova-volumes-to-cinder	21:57
ttx	Any progress on that ?	21:57
jgriffith	little, as Vishy mentioned that's my next list item	21:57
*** dolphm has quit IRC		21:57
jgriffith	I plan to have a first pass thrown out tomorrow afternoon hopefully	21:57
ttx	Was wondering if you'd consider it's OK to release Cinder/Folsom if this is not completed.	21:57
jgriffith	meh	21:57
jgriffith	I don't think it will come to that	21:57
ttx	i.e. shouldn't it be "essential" rather than "high"	21:57
jgriffith	given the tone of the ML responses I think it's essential	21:58
jgriffith	Just my opinoin	21:58
jgriffith	opinion	21:58
jgriffith	I'm happy to change it, but I'll have it for F3	21:58
jgriffith	guaranteed	21:58
ttx	jgriffith: that's the spirit :)	21:58
ttx	Will mark it essential	21:58
*** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting		21:58
ttx	* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/cinder-notifications	21:58
* jgriffith has sucker on his forehead		21:58
ttx	Any news from cp16net ?	21:59
jgriffith	ttx: Yea, he said he's going to finish it	21:59
jgriffith	ttx: The only question is when	21:59
ttx	So it's started, low priority ?	21:59
jgriffith	ttx: He did say in the next week or so (that was last week)	21:59
jgriffith	ttx: yes, started low pri	21:59
ttx	jgriffith: Anything else ?	21:59
jgriffith	ttx: The only thing that keeps me hanging on to it is that it's in nova now	22:00
ttx	Questions on Cinder ?	22:00
jgriffith	Ummm.... lots but nothing anybody cares about likely	22:00
jgriffith	:)	22:00
ttx	#topic Other Team reports	22:00
*** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports"		22:00
ttx	Any other team lead with a status report ?	22:00
ttx	#topic Open discussion	22:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion"		22:01
ttx	Anything else, anyone ?	22:01
ttx	#endmeeting	22:02
*** 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"		22:02
openstack	Meeting ended Tue Jul 31 22:02:17 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)	22:02
openstack	Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-21.02.html	22:02
openstack	Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-21.02.txt	22:02
openstack	Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-07-31-21.02.log.html	22:02
lloydde	thnx	22:02
ttx	Just below the one hour mark	22:03
ttx	Started 21:02:53, Ended 22:02:17	22:03
*** thingee has left #openstack-meeting		22:03
*** kindaopsdevy has left #openstack-meeting		22:03
*** patelna has quit IRC		22:05
*** littleidea has quit IRC		22:07
*** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting		22:07
*** arosen has joined #openstack-meeting		22:10
*** EdB has joined #openstack-meeting		22:12
*** EdB has left #openstack-meeting		22:13
*** gabrielhurley has quit IRC		22:14
*** jerdfelt has left #openstack-meeting		22:14
*** heckj has quit IRC		22:24
*** Gordonz has quit IRC		22:25
*** littleidea_ has joined #openstack-meeting		22:25
*** lcheng has quit IRC		22:25
*** littleidea has quit IRC		22:25
*** littleidea_ is now known as littleidea		22:25
*** lloydde has quit IRC		22:28
*** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting		22:28
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		22:40
*** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz		22:43
*** mattray has quit IRC		22:46
*** mnewby has quit IRC		22:47
*** ecarlin has joined #openstack-meeting		22:50
*** danwent has quit IRC		22:52
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC		22:53
*** blamar_ has joined #openstack-meeting		22:53
*** rafaduran has quit IRC		22:57
*** blamar has quit IRC		22:57
*** blamar_ is now known as blamar		22:57
*** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk		22:59
*** blamar has quit IRC		23:01
*** matiu has quit IRC		23:03
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting		23:04
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		23:06
*** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting		23:08
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		23:10
*** kindaopsdevy has quit IRC		23:10
*** kindaops_ has joined #openstack-meeting		23:10
*** kindaops_ has quit IRC		23:11
*** kindaopsdevy has joined #openstack-meeting		23:11
*** dolphm has quit IRC		23:12
*** lloydde has quit IRC		23:14
*** ohnoimdead has quit IRC		23:15
*** dwcramer has quit IRC		23:16
*** Ravikumar_hp has quit IRC		23:20
*** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting		23:30
*** gyee has quit IRC		23:41
*** mnewby has quit IRC		23:42
*** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting		23:47
*** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz		23:47
*** lzyeval has joined #openstack-meeting		23:49
*** dmd17 has joined #openstack-meeting		23:54
*** johnpur has quit IRC		23:54
*** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting		23:54
*** mikal has quit IRC		23:56
*** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting		23:58
*** johnpur has quit IRC		23:58
*** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting		23:59

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!