| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:37 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 06:37 | |
| *** bourke has quit IRC | 06:41 | |
| *** bourke has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:41 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 06:50 | |
| *** zhuadl_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:00 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 07:02 | |
| *** zhuadl_ is now known as zhuadl | 07:02 | |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 07:06 | |
| *** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:06 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:10 | |
| *** metral has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:27 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 07:32 | |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:33 | |
| *** metral_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:35 | |
| *** metral has quit IRC | 07:39 | |
| *** metral_ is now known as metral | 07:39 | |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 07:39 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:57 | |
| *** eglynn has quit IRC | 08:07 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 08:22 | |
| *** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:25 | |
| *** uncleofthestick has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:25 | |
| *** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:27 | |
| *** afazekas has quit IRC | 08:29 | |
| *** metral has quit IRC | 08:33 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:34 | |
| *** eglynn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:34 | |
| *** eglynn has quit IRC | 08:35 | |
| *** eglynn_ has quit IRC | 08:41 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:42 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:43 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 08:45 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:45 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 08:49 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 08:56 | |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 09:04 | |
| *** nijaba has quit IRC | 09:08 | |
| *** nijaba has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:08 | |
| *** nijaba has quit IRC | 09:08 | |
| *** nijaba has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:08 | |
| *** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:16 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:18 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 09:20 | |
| *** darraghb has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:24 | |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:36 | |
| *** anniec has left #openstack-meeting | 09:42 | |
| *** lianhao has quit IRC | 09:44 | |
| *** rafaduran1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:57 | |
| *** rafaduran has quit IRC | 09:58 | |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:00 | |
| *** rafaduran has left #openstack-meeting | 10:00 | |
| *** asalkeld is now known as asalkeld_afk | 10:01 | |
| *** rafaduran1 has quit IRC | 10:02 | |
| *** eglynn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:09 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 10:22 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:25 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:29 | |
| *** rushiagr1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:41 | |
| *** rafaduran has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:43 | |
| *** rushiagr has quit IRC | 10:43 | |
| *** davidha has quit IRC | 10:48 | |
| *** nsavin has quit IRC | 10:59 | |
| *** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:02 | |
| *** rushiagr1 is now known as rushiagr | 11:16 | |
| *** rafaduran has left #openstack-meeting | 11:30 | |
| *** goldfish has quit IRC | 11:31 | |
| *** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:38 | |
| *** goldfish has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:46 | |
| *** gongysh has quit IRC | 12:08 | |
| *** roadTripper has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:11 | |
| *** EmilienM has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:12 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 12:16 | |
| *** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:35 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:49 | |
| *** goldfish has quit IRC | 12:50 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 12:50 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:00 | |
| *** jrd has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:00 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:01 | |
| *** tgall_foo has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:22 | |
| *** samkottler is now known as samkottler|bbl | 13:28 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:30 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:35 | |
| *** tgall_foo has quit IRC | 13:43 | |
| *** annegentle__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:46 | |
| *** annegentle___ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:47 | |
| *** dendrobates is now known as dendro-afk | 13:48 | |
| *** annegentle__ has quit IRC | 13:51 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:00 | |
| *** samkottler|bbl is now known as samkottler | 14:01 | |
| *** mtreinish has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:03 | |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:03 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:05 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 14:05 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:07 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 14:13 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:17 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:19 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:31 | |
| *** tgall_foo has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:32 | |
| *** tgall_foo has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:32 | |
| *** rushiagr has quit IRC | 14:32 | |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:40 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 14:40 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:40 | |
| *** Hitesh has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:47 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 14:57 | |
| Hitesh | alexpilotti: Hi | 14:59 |
|---|---|---|
| *** primeministerp has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:02 | |
| *** jhenner1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:04 | |
| *** jhenner has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:04 | |
| *** john5223 has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:06 | |
| *** luis_fdez has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:06 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 15:09 | |
| *** Gordonz has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:11 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:16 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 15:16 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:20 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 15:20 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 15:20 | |
| *** Hitesh has quit IRC | 15:23 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 15:30 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 15:30 | |
| *** gongysh has quit IRC | 15:34 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:36 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 15:37 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 15:39 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:53 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 15:57 | |
| primeministerp | #startmeeting hyper-v | 15:59 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 6 15:59:42 2012 UTC. The chair is primeministerp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:59 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:59 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'hyper_v' | 15:59 |
| primeministerp | hi everyone | 15:59 |
| primeministerp | there's a bunch of things to discuss today | 16:00 |
| EmilienM | o/ | 16:00 |
| primeministerp | EmilienM: yes? | 16:00 |
| primeministerp | EmilienM: something to add? | 16:00 |
| EmilienM | nothing, good morning :) | 16:00 |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:00 | |
| primeministerp | o hi | 16:00 |
| primeministerp | ;) | 16:00 |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | let's begin | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | #topic Current issues | 16:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Current issues" | 16:01 | |
| primeministerp | so people have experiencing problems with cloudinit on linux | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | I was hoping the folks from ibm could share | 16:01 |
| *** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:01 | |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: pedro | 16:02 |
| pnavarro | hi all ! | 16:02 |
| primeministerp | hi pedro | 16:02 |
| *** josecastroleon has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:02 | |
| primeministerp | josecastroleon: hi jose | 16:02 |
| josecastroleon | primeministerp: hi | 16:03 |
| pnavarro | hola josecastroleon | 16:03 |
| josecastroleon | pnavarro: hola :) | 16:03 |
| alexpilotti | hi everybody! | 16:03 |
| primeministerp | josecastroleon: we were just about talk about the magic ip/cloudinit issues | 16:03 |
| ociuhandu | hi all | 16:03 |
| josecastroleon | cool | 16:03 |
| primeministerp | I was hoping to have the others from ibm | 16:04 |
| primeministerp | on the channel | 16:04 |
| primeministerp | josecastroleon: I know you were thinking about using a vswitch plugin to deal with the problem | 16:04 |
| alexpilotti | josecastroleon: you giuy are curently running cloud-init on Linux instances on Hyper-V? | 16:04 |
| josecastroleon | primeministerp: I think it's less intrusive | 16:05 |
| *** maurosr has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| josecastroleon | alexpilotti: not on hyperv | 16:05 |
| alexpilotti | josecastroleon: did u try on hyper-v? | 16:05 |
| primeministerp | they are running only windows on hyperv | 16:05 |
| josecastroleon | alexpilotti: I didn't have time to build the sample | 16:05 |
| alexpilotti | josecastroleon: ok tx | 16:05 |
| josecastroleon | but it should be the same | 16:06 |
| alexpilotti | IMO we can already starting supporting it, I don't see many issues there. | 16:06 |
| alexpilotti | ociuhandu is testing it | 16:06 |
| josecastroleon | cool | 16:06 |
| josecastroleon | i was checking the code in cloud-init, and i didn't find any hardware specific part | 16:07 |
| alexpilotti | the magic IP is now a Quantum L3 thing | 16:07 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: do you mind laying out the key issues | 16:07 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: you've been working w/ the ibm folks on | 16:07 |
| alexpilotti | primeministerp: the IBM folks are going to test it tomorrow, today they just asked about the status | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | primeministerp: for now we'll just go with the ugly route, as we have no nova-network and no quantum… for the next 2 weeks :-) | 16:08 |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | my proposal is to go with the KVP extensions we talked about in SD and in josecastroleon's email | 16:09 |
| alexpilotti | we can just read the metadata host / port and inject it into the guest | 16:10 |
| *** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:10 | |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | has anybody other ideas on the subject? | 16:11 |
| primeministerp | josecastroleon: anything to add? | 16:11 |
| pnavarro | alexpilotti: another idea would be to use configdriveV2 | 16:11 |
| josecastroleon | it's not difficult to include it on cloud-init | 16:11 |
| josecastroleon | but there is no HW specific stuff on it | 16:12 |
| pnavarro | alexpilotti: but I've never used it | 16:12 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: sounds good | 16:12 |
| primeministerp | ultimately we probably should support config drive correct? | 16:12 |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:13 |
| primeministerp | are we all good on the status | 16:13 |
| primeministerp | of the cloudinit bits | 16:13 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: I'm going to look at it | 16:13 |
| primeministerp | should we talk more on the implementation of the windows side while on the topic? | 16:14 |
| primeministerp | i'll take that as a no... | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | ;) | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:15 |
| alexpilotti | I'd check the config drive 2 and see how OS independent it is etc | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | #topic cinder | 16:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "cinder" | 16:15 | |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: have you commited the new wmi based cinder work? | 16:16 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: if not when can we expect to see it get commited? | 16:16 |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 16:16 | |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: ping | 16:17 |
| pnavarro | primeministerp: well, the code is committed in my repository, let me some days to test it with grizzly | 16:17 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: ok | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: great, can't wait | 16:18 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: I'd love to see it in for the g1 timeframe | 16:18 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: hopefully we can have that and the inital quantum bits in time | 16:18 |
| *** dendro-afk is now known as dendrobates | 16:18 | |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: what do we do with teh old one? We just deprecate it? | 16:18 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: g-1 is in 2 weeks! :-) | 16:19 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: the fix for teh current Cinder client just went through: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15337/ | 16:19 |
| pnavarro | alexpilotti: yes, the evenlet issues makes us to have no choice but to deprecate it | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: yeah, as soon as we can commit it we can even remove the fix | 16:20 |
| pnavarro | alexpilotti: I got it | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: problem is that we'll need that fix anytime we will need to use subprocess.Popen | 16:21 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: with pipes | 16:21 |
| pnavarro | alexpilotti: We hope to not use it anymore | 16:21 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:21 | |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: in all the openstack projects? hmmm | 16:21 |
| primeministerp | interesting | 16:22 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: I started a bug in eventlet | 16:22 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: good | 16:22 |
| primeministerp | should we discuss the quantum doc alessandro sent around? | 16:22 |
| *** mnewby has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:23 | |
| primeministerp | #topic quantum | 16:23 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "quantum" | 16:23 | |
| primeministerp | alessandro circulated a document w/ outlining ideas on quantum | 16:23 |
| alexpilotti | https://bitbucket.org/which_linden/eventlet/issue/132/eventletmonkey_patch-breaks | 16:23 |
| primeministerp | #link https://bitbucket.org/which_linden/eventlet/issue/132/eventletmonkey_patch-breaks | 16:24 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: thoughts on quantum? | 16:24 |
| alexpilotti | there's more to add on the implementation side | 16:24 |
| *** woodspa has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:24 | |
| alexpilotti | beside the high level ideas in the doc | 16:24 |
| pnavarro | primeministerp: well... in general I agree Dan that the we should have an incremental approach | 16:25 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: i agree as well | 16:25 |
| *** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:27 | |
| pnavarro | it's a good document to start talking but we should plan a meeting to talk about implementation details | 16:27 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: when do you want to meet? I plan to release the first version in max 2 weeks | 16:27 |
| pnavarro | thursday it's ok for me | 16:28 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: with an ambitious idea to make it for g-1 :-) | 16:28 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: great! time? | 16:28 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 16:28 | |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: send a meeting request if possible | 16:29 |
| pnavarro | late at night | 16:29 |
| *** hemna has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:29 | |
| pnavarro | when my children are sleeping | 16:29 |
| pnavarro | I'll send a meeting request | 16:29 |
| alexpilotti | is there anybody elese that would like to join me and pnavarro? | 16:29 |
| pnavarro | ok | 16:29 |
| primeministerp | #topic general discussion | 16:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "general discussion" | 16:29 | |
| *** glauaguiar has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:29 | |
| primeministerp | anyone have anything else to add | 16:29 |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:29 | |
| pnavarro | guys, I have to leave | 16:29 |
| primeministerp | josecastroleon: how are things at cern these days | 16:30 |
| alexpilotti | if not pnavarro just call me on Skype whenever you wish and we set it up :-) | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: thx pedro | 16:30 |
| josecastroleon | see you | 16:30 |
| pnavarro | ciao | 16:30 |
| alexpilotti | bye! | 16:30 |
| EmilienM | bye pedro | 16:30 |
| luis_fdez | primeministerp: I´ve a small patch to fix the disk stats | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | luis_fdez: great | 16:30 |
| pnavarro | just a quick note, yesterday I presented Hyper-V in the meetup Paris | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: o awesome! | 16:30 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: did they like it? :-) | 16:31 |
| EmilienM | we actually did :) | 16:31 |
| alexpilotti | lol | 16:31 |
| pnavarro | yeah, there were even some people interesed as an alternative to MS private cloud | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | luis_fdez: can you past the fix? | 16:32 |
| EmilienM | people was quite curious | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | great | 16:32 |
| luis_fdez | yes alexpilotti, i´ll send you the patch file and take a look | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro EmilienM: how many people showed up? | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | EmilienM: were there slides? | 16:32 |
| pnavarro | sorry, I'll lose my bus if i'm not leaving now | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | luis_fdez: consider also that there's a fix for the stats | 16:32 |
| EmilienM | alexpilotti: about 25 people was here. | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: go | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | EmilienM: that's good | 16:33 |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:33 | |
| alexpilotti | guys I have also a meeting right now | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | ok gues | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | er guys | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | ending the meeting then | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | #endmeeting | 16:33 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 16:33 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 6 16:33:42 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:33 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-06-15.59.html | 16:33 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-06-15.59.txt | 16:33 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2012/hyper_v.2012-11-06-15.59.log.html | 16:33 |
| *** josecastroleon has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| *** woodspa has quit IRC | 16:35 | |
| luis_fdez | \quit | 16:35 |
| *** luis_fdez has quit IRC | 16:36 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:36 | |
| *** pnavarro has quit IRC | 16:37 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 16:37 | |
| *** jrd has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** heckj has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:40 | |
| *** zbitter has quit IRC | 16:41 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:43 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| *** samkottler is now known as samkottler|bbl | 16:45 | |
| *** mtreinish has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| *** edgarmagana has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| *** rushiagr has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:59 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:01 | |
| edgarmagana | all: is the LBaaS meeting in this channel? | 17:02 |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 17:05 | |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:05 | |
| *** woodspa has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:06 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:06 | |
| *** edgarmagana has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** EmilienM has left #openstack-meeting | 17:08 | |
| *** edgarmagana has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:11 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:11 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:14 | |
| edgarmagana | all: still wondering where is the LBaaS meeting :-) | 17:14 |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:17 | |
| *** rushiagr has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 17:19 | |
| alexpilotti | jgriffith: hi! | 17:19 |
| alexpilotti | jgriffith: I noticed that python-cinderclient doesn't have a openstack-common.conf | 17:20 |
| alexpilotti | jgriffith: sorry, wrong chat room :-) | 17:20 |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:20 | |
| *** woodspa has quit IRC | 17:23 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:25 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 17:28 | |
| *** shengjie has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:29 | |
| *** shengjie has quit IRC | 17:29 | |
| *** shengjie has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:32 | |
| edgarmagana | .. | 17:42 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:46 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:47 | |
| garyk | edgarmagana: http://wiki.openstack.org/Quantum/LBaaS#Mettings | 17:48 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 17:48 | |
| edgarmagana | garyk: thanks! | 17:50 |
| enikanorov | edgarmagana: | 17:51 |
| edgarmagana | going to openstack-dev | 17:51 |
| enikanorov | in 5mins at #openstack-dev | 17:51 |
| *** edgarmagana has quit IRC | 17:51 | |
| *** marek_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:52 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:53 | |
| *** mtreinish has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:55 | |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 17:58 | |
| *** davidha has quit IRC | 17:59 | |
| dolphm | heckj: time change? | 18:00 |
| heckj | yep | 18:00 |
| heckj | Keystone meeting!!! | 18:00 |
| heckj | o/ | 18:00 |
| heckj | #startmeeting keystone | 18:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 6 18:00:46 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 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'keystone' | 18:00 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 18:00 | |
| heckj | agenda at http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting | 18:01 |
| heckj | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting | 18:01 |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| heckj | #topic high priority issues | 18:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "high priority issues" | 18:02 | |
| heckj | We've got some reviews passing through to fix inadvertant breakage after we merged the V3 keystoneclient branch | 18:02 |
| ayoung | \O/ | 18:02 |
| *** samkottler|bbl is now known as samkottler | 18:02 | |
| heckj | yeah!!! | 18:02 |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| heckj | dolphm will be back in a minute or so | 18:03 |
| ayoung | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15516/1 | 18:03 |
| ayoung | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/15513/1 | 18:03 |
| heckj | while we're chilling - ayoung, what's the hierarchical data that's current in attributes? I thought that was mostly flat | 18:03 |
| ayoung | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1075376 | 18:03 |
| uvirtbot` | Launchpad bug 1075376 in keystone "keystoneclient unit tests fails on update tenants and users" [Critical,In progress] | 18:03 |
| ayoung | heckj, let me look, I think it is the role assignments | 18:03 |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:04 | |
| heckj | ayoung: ahh.. yeah, it think that gets populated out in lists, good point - would be good to do that separately | 18:04 |
| dolphm | o/ | 18:04 |
| ayoung | heckj, regardless, getting password and enabled out in one patch along with the other normalized fields would be a good thing (tm) | 18:04 |
| ayoung | lets not ask for a 100% solution up front | 18:05 |
| ayoung | If we can go completely normalized in one pass, great | 18:05 |
| dolphm | ayoung: migrations on existing data will be the tricky part there, especially for enabled | 18:05 |
| heckj | ayoung: definitely | 18:05 |
| *** bme has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:06 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, nah, it should be pretty straightforward. Once we accept that we are parsing JSON, which are the True values for enabled should be pretty clear | 18:06 |
| heckj | dolphm: yep - we'll want to make sure we can smoothly migrate that out | 18:06 |
| *** jrd has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:06 | |
| heckj | ayoung: I was triaging bugs yesterday - at least a few that you files are better as blueprints - made note of such in the bug | 18:07 |
| *** eglynn_ has quit IRC | 18:07 | |
| ayoung | heckj, that is fine | 18:07 |
| dolphm | ayoung: enabled='mondays' | 18:07 |
| *** debo_os has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:07 | |
| heckj | enabled="every third thursday" | 18:08 |
| gyee | wtf? | 18:08 |
| ayoung | dolphm, I'm more of the Arthur Dent school disabled="Thursdays" | 18:08 |
| gyee | you serious? | 18:08 |
| dolphm | gyee: exactly | 18:08 |
| dolphm | lol | 18:08 |
| heckj | gyee: sure! Why not :-) | 18:08 |
| dolphm | gyee: users are creative | 18:08 |
| heckj | sorry, getting back to topics | 18:08 |
| gyee | I mean you seen such data? | 18:08 |
| dolphm | and the client is like "awesome, Enabled: Thursdays... got it." | 18:08 |
| heckj | #topic Keystone-v3 feature branch merge | 18:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone-v3 feature branch merge" | 18:09 | |
| heckj | so aside from screwing the tests in keystone, we have the python-keystoneclient updated with V3 parts in place | 18:09 |
| * dolphm apologizes for not testing client feature/keystone-v3 against server master :( | 18:09 | |
| heckj | tests (and bad assumptions) getting fixed up now - so now we're just pending getting keystone V3 into place | 18:09 |
| heckj | dolphm: since you submitted most of those change sets, how would you like to move that forward? | 18:10 |
| heckj | dolphm: do you want to merge what we can, and then re-submit the remaining against master, or do it all in a feature branch and update that? | 18:10 |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| *** jhenner1 has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 18:11 | |
| heckj | gyee: I'm assuming getting that merged into master is blocking you on the stop-id components | 18:11 |
| dolphm | heckj: fix current issues ASAP, merge keystone server feature/keystone-v3, fix any unknowns, rebase pending v3 changes on master and re-review them | 18:11 |
| gyee | heckj, I can do it in master | 18:11 |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:12 | |
| dolphm | gyee: there's no v3 API in server master..? | 18:12 |
| heckj | gyee: not yet anyway | 18:12 |
| dolphm | gyee: middleware fix or something? | 18:12 |
| gyee | both middleware and backend | 18:12 |
| dolphm | gyee: can you give a quick rundown on your approach? | 18:13 |
| gyee | middleware set the token in the header for token validation | 18:13 |
| gyee | backend get it from the header | 18:13 |
| heckj | gyee: we'll want to time the middleware so that we don't screw up henrynash' work in moving auth_token into keystoneclient | 18:13 |
| gyee | should be pretty trivial change | 18:13 |
| dolphm | gyee: ah, i was thinking middleware on top of the keystone server (not referring to auth_token) | 18:13 |
| gyee | should I do it in the v3 branch? | 18:14 |
| heckj | gyee: probably easiest to do it in master after we land the V3 branch | 18:14 |
| dolphm | gyee: keystone server changes, yes | 18:14 |
| gyee | k, I'll wait then | 18:14 |
| heckj | if you can do the middleware separately (auth_token, yes), then if you have that ready to go ASAP, that might be worthwhile - get it in before we start trying to shift that to keystonelcient | 18:15 |
| dolphm | gyee: are you using X-Subject-Token? (is that what it's called in the v3 spec? lol) | 18:15 |
| gyee | dolphm, how about I make the header configurable? | 18:15 |
| gyee | X-Thuesday if you want :) | 18:16 |
| dolphm | gyee: it needs to be spec'd | 18:16 |
| dolphm | gyee: and actually, support in keystoneclient v3 auth is where this should really go :-/ | 18:16 |
| dolphm | gyee: auth_token should just be refactored to support the client, and not care about the api details | 18:16 |
| gyee | I need to be very careful about refactoring middleware again as HP is extending them | 18:17 |
| gyee | I am sure there are others | 18:17 |
| ayoung | so gyee what kind of extensions? Is this generalizable stuff? | 18:18 |
| dolphm | gyee: keystone.middleware.auth_token won't be refactored necessarily, it should just be deprecated and eventually removed, in favor of keystoneclient.middlware.whatever_the_new_name_is which utlizes the client itself | 18:18 |
| gyee | we are extending middleware class interface | 18:19 |
| dolphm | gyee: auth_token's or keystone.wsgi.Middlware? | 18:19 |
| gyee | auth_token | 18:19 |
| gyee | dolphm, right, namespace change is a lot easier than class interface change | 18:20 |
| ayoung | gyee, so once this moves to keystoneclient, it should just require you to update the import | 18:20 |
| dolphm | gyee: i'm thinking both at once | 18:20 |
| *** sharis has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:20 | |
| ayoung | what are we changing in the interface? | 18:20 |
| gyee | dolphm, you mean pluggable auth? | 18:21 |
| gyee | I am trying to understand what "both" means | 18:22 |
| dolphm | there's a couple interfaces here... gyee is concerned about auth_token's class interface | 18:22 |
| *** bme has left #openstack-meeting | 18:22 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:23 | |
| dolphm | auth_token's interface to the wsgi pipeline is stable and won't break backwards-compatibility | 18:23 |
| ayoung | dolphm, whew | 18:23 |
| ayoung | I was worried I missed something key there. | 18:23 |
| dolphm | moving auth_token into the client means new namespace and freedom to refactor the class itself... though, i don't have anything in mind | 18:24 |
| *** eglynn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:24 | |
| ayoung | heckj, did you incorporate everyone's input into some sort of overall development scheme? | 18:24 |
| dolphm | gyee: and i'm sure HP would have some feedback on how that class interface should be structured to be more easily extensible? | 18:25 |
| gyee | dolphm, yes, should I create a BP? | 18:25 |
| heckj | #topic Upcoming contribution plans for Grizzly | 18:25 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Upcoming contribution plans for Grizzly" | 18:25 | |
| dolphm | gyee: that'd be awesome | 18:25 |
| heckj | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/keystone-grizzly-plans | 18:25 |
| ayoung | dolphm, we have a load of work in the queue. I would avoid adding | 18:25 |
| dolphm | ayoung: it needs to happen in grizzly anyway, to support v3 | 18:26 |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 18:26 | |
| heckj | yeah, we've got a serious pile of work building up here | 18:26 |
| heckj | I took everyone's feedback and tossed it all into that etherpad | 18:26 |
| heckj | Thierry is asking for a generalized "what folks are doing" from all the PTLs - that's why I'm trying to consolidate that | 18:27 |
| heckj | I also went through bugs yesterday, triaged them up to a first pass, and nailed some of the blueprints against milestones for an initial cut | 18:27 |
| ayoung | heckj, so Alvaro Lopez is helping on the refactoring for Authenticate . | 18:28 |
| ayoung | Let me update that | 18:28 |
| gyee | we have some more requirements for delegation | 18:28 |
| heckj | I have some pieces targetted against grizzly-1 https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 18:28 |
| heckj | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 18:28 |
| gyee | someone from HP will create a BP, just a heads up | 18:28 |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 18:28 | |
| heckj | ayoung: thanks | 18:29 |
| heckj | We have a couple of blueprints that need to be created yet | 18:29 |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:29 | |
| heckj | need one around: authentication & token validation abstraction | 18:29 |
| gyee | meh | 18:29 |
| heckj | gyee: you were talking about creating one for service and endpoint scoping I think | 18:30 |
| gyee | yes | 18:30 |
| gyee | that too | 18:30 |
| heckj | dolphm: and you had one pending around schema validation | 18:30 |
| dolphm | heckj: pending creating a bp? | 18:30 |
| heckj | dolphm: do you already have a BP around the schema validation work you proposed a meeting or two back? | 18:30 |
| dolphm | heckj: no, drafting it now :) | 18:31 |
| heckj | dolphm: just meant that a BP was needed, but didn't exist yet | 18:31 |
| heckj | cool | 18:31 |
| gyee | dolphm, having schema validation will be awesome | 18:31 |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| heckj | pluggable auth, moving auth_token, and the merging of V3 is all the earliest pre-req stuff as far as I can see | 18:32 |
| ayoung | heckj, that is my take on it | 18:32 |
| heckj | sounds right | 18:32 |
| heckj | ayoung: you had some general elements under PKI moving forward - pieces that can be done in parallel - should that be a BP to track it? | 18:33 |
| heckj | (add signing user, policy rules for enforcing signed user, etc) | 18:33 |
| ayoung | heckj, PKI future should cover it. I don't think it calls for another BP | 18:33 |
| heckj | PKI Future - cool - will add that link in etherpad | 18:34 |
| ayoung | But instead probably should add the details | 18:34 |
| gyee | PKI is a big umbrella | 18:34 |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 18:34 | |
| ayoung | https://etherpad.openstack.org/keystone-pki-future | 18:34 |
| heckj | ayoung: uh - being blind - not seeing BP in https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone | 18:35 |
| heckj | did you create on there, or is it just in the etherpad link? | 18:35 |
| ayoung | heckj, hmm...thought It was there | 18:35 |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 18:35 | |
| *** mnewby_ is now known as mnewby | 18:35 | |
| heckj | ayoung: that list is *huge* - I think it really needs to be broken down if we want to get you help with it and lay it out against milestones in grizzly... | 18:35 |
| heckj | I'd be happy to break it apart for you if you want... | 18:36 |
| heckj | some others have already put in blueprints that overlap with some of this | 18:36 |
| ayoung | Guess I didn't add it | 18:36 |
| ayoung | heckj, True. | 18:37 |
| heckj | pre-auth, keystone-explicit-impersonation, delegation | 18:37 |
| dolphm | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/client-side-request-response-validation | 18:37 |
| ayoung | heckj, lot of it is under delegation | 18:37 |
| ayoung | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/delegation | 18:37 |
| *** eglynn_ has quit IRC | 18:37 | |
| heckj | kk - I'll start with it under delegation, and we can break out pieces that don't fit from there if we need | 18:37 |
| ayoung | which should then link the the etherpad on PKI future | 18:37 |
| ayoung | heckj, yeah | 18:37 |
| gyee | we have more requirements for delegation | 18:38 |
| heckj | just added to whiteboard | 18:38 |
| gyee | probably will add our comments there | 18:38 |
| gyee | yeah | 18:38 |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:38 | |
| heckj | there's also a wiki page that David added linked up : http://wiki.openstack.org/keystone/Delegation | 18:38 |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:39 | |
| heckj | given how much is laid out in delegation, looks like that's Grizzly-2 or grizzly-3. | 18:40 |
| ayoung | heckj, yes, that is the link for the full specification. I Need to move things from the Etherpad to there | 18:40 |
| heckj | We probably need to pick some specific milestone deliverable for it to step forward between the two milestones | 18:40 |
| heckj | kk | 18:41 |
| ayoung | heckj, perhaps. A lot depends on how much churn we have in other bugs, and whether I can get some time working on it heads down | 18:41 |
| ayoung | I knew that wehen we flipped to PKI tokens it would cause some new issues to rise to the surface | 18:41 |
| heckj | ayoung: would you like me to start with asserting it as grizlzly-2 and being aggressive with the planning for it? | 18:41 |
| heckj | ayoung: or defer to grizzly-3 and give us a few more weeks in there | 18:41 |
| dolphm | heckj: link to dates on those? | 18:42 |
| ayoung | heckj, what are the cut off dates? | 18:42 |
| heckj | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/GrizzlyReleaseSchedule | 18:42 |
| heckj | grizzly-1 is basically thanksgiving | 18:42 |
| heckj | grizzly-2 is jan 10th | 18:42 |
| heckj | grizzly-3 is feb 21st | 18:42 |
| heckj | feature ingest freeze is feb 21st | 18:43 |
| ayoung | NOt going to have it by -1 that is for sure | 18:43 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:43 | |
| heckj | ayoung: yeah, that was clear - figured it was 2 or 3 - don't have to assign it yet - but the more I can get laid out, the easier it'll be to coordinate changes later | 18:43 |
| dolphm | heckj: when is auth_token moving to the client? | 18:43 |
| heckj | dolphm: henrynash is starting to work on that ASAP - just got CLA, so I'm hoping in the next 2 weeks (grizzly-1) | 18:44 |
| ayoung | heckj, OK, so the whole thing will be -3 but let me see which pieces we can push for in -2 | 18:44 |
| dolphm | heckj: oh awesome | 18:44 |
| heckj | kk | 18:44 |
| heckj | #topic open discussion | 18:45 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion" | 18:45 | |
| ayoung | heckj, can we clear out the people on Core that never review patches? | 18:46 |
| heckj | yep | 18:47 |
| *** sharis has quit IRC | 18:47 | |
| ayoung | I'd like to eventually get some new names in there, but for now, we should show who is active | 18:47 |
| ayoung | #link https://launchpad.net/~keystone-core/+members#active | 18:47 |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 18:47 | |
| heckj | ayoung: I'll clear that out later today - I'll do keystone-core,keystone-drivers, and keystone-bugs maintenance all together | 18:47 |
| ayoung | heckj, +2 | 18:48 |
| ayoung | heckj, also, I'd like to have a couple items part of our current operating guidelines. 1. Make sure all changes will work in an HTTPD deployment. We put a lot of effort in heading toward that, and I'd hate to backtrack | 18:49 |
| ayoung | 2. We are considering auth_token locked down except for security /critical fixes until the migration is done. We need to expediate that | 18:50 |
| heckj | ayoung: "expediate"? | 18:51 |
| ayoung | 3. service.py authenticate is locked down until refactoring is done. Don't waste time writing code against the old layout | 18:51 |
| ayoung | expediafy? | 18:51 |
| ayoung | make fast! | 18:51 |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:51 | |
| ayoung | Lightning McQueen it! | 18:51 |
| heckj | ayoung: ah - yep, Henry asked some questions in email and was starting to roll on it | 18:51 |
| heckj | ayoung: how do you propose to verify we don't backtrack on #1 | 18:51 |
| gyee | a boat-load of tests :) | 18:52 |
| gyee | unit and functional | 18:52 |
| ayoung | heckj, well, the three active approvers should keep it in mind when reviewing patches. For the most part, be aware of eventlet specific additions | 18:52 |
| heckj | gyee: are tests sufficient, or does it also need to be in devstack gating? | 18:52 |
| gyee | tests are the best way to guard against these things | 18:52 |
| ayoung | heckj, I think we need to start working toward tests run in HTTPD | 18:53 |
| heckj | gyee: agreed, but only if they're run | 18:53 |
| gyee | haha | 18:53 |
| heckj | ayoung: I think that's the only way to make sure they're run. | 18:53 |
| ayoung | heckj, yeah. | 18:53 |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 18:53 | |
| heckj | ayoung: alternately, we can work with CI to talk about how to test an alternate deployment and see if they have suggestions | 18:53 |
| ayoung | heckj, I suspect that first step is normalizing the user table. | 18:54 |
| ayoung | Then we can use the REMOTE_AUTH in conjunction with the mod_auths in apache to run in HTTPD | 18:54 |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:54 | |
| ayoung | Need devstack support. Perhaps first off is an option to deploy Keystone in HTTPD along side the Horizon code. Can be optional to start | 18:55 |
| heckj | ayoung: makes sense | 18:55 |
| ayoung | Heh, that would let me finally close the IPv6 ticket, too | 18:55 |
| heckj | ayoung: does devstack use httpd now? Thought it was a different config... | 18:55 |
| heckj | ayoung: nevermind - just was told it does | 18:55 |
| ayoung | heckj, devstack uses httpd for Horizon, and eventlet for the rest of the services | 18:56 |
| ayoung | heckj, they do some neat things in there to make it developer friendly, so you run as yourself and not as root or the httpd user | 18:56 |
| ayoung | I had some problem getting logging working, which was making dev a PITA. | 18:56 |
| ayoung | Since I am waiting on the refactoring for other work, I can do a spike on the normalization. | 18:57 |
| heckj | ayoung: sounds good | 18:57 |
| ayoung | So who is full time coding on Keystone now: /me, dolph, gyee, soon to be nash, | 18:57 |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:58 | |
| heckj | I'm part time only - and mostly on client at the moment | 18:58 |
| heckj | I think that's it | 18:58 |
| heckj | Jose part time too | 18:58 |
| ayoung | heckj, I don't know if we'll get any more of boden's time either | 18:58 |
| *** darraghb has quit IRC | 18:59 | |
| heckj | I think that's it for now | 18:59 |
| heckj | Ok - wrapping up meeting | 18:59 |
| heckj | #endmeeting | 18:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 18:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 6 18:59:24 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-06-18.00.html | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-06-18.00.txt | 18:59 |
| *** Shengjie_Min has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:59 | |
| ayoung | OK, the four of us can do enough damage on our own | 18:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2012/keystone.2012-11-06-18.00.log.html | 18:59 |
| heckj | :-) | 18:59 |
| *** marek_ has left #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| heckj | I'll kick a note to David - had hoped to see him here today, but I don't think he ever popped in | 19:00 |
| *** eglynn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| *** debo_os has quit IRC | 19:04 | |
| ayoung | heckj, that is OK they have there own agenda, and if it is dependent on our changes, they will come around | 19:05 |
| ayoung | OK, my wife needs to go vote. Gotta go kid-watch | 19:05 |
| *** ayoung is now known as ayoung-afk | 19:05 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| *** uncleofthestick has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| *** ayoung-afk is now known as ayoung | 19:12 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:12 | |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:13 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:16 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 19:16 | |
| *** mnewby_ is now known as mnewby | 19:16 | |
| *** boden has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:20 | |
| boden | ayoung -- can't stay for keystone meeting but wanted to point out a bug I just opened related to REMOTE_USER change: https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1075710 | 19:22 |
| uvirtbot` | Launchpad bug 1075710 in keystone "Keystone REMOTE_USER with no metadata causes 404 on auth" [Undecided,New] | 19:22 |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 19:27 | |
| *** samkottler is now known as samkottler|call | 19:28 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:30 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:31 | |
| *** glauaguiar has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| *** jakedahn_zz is now known as jakedahn | 19:36 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 19:36 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:37 | |
| *** jakedahn is now known as jakedahn_zz | 19:38 | |
| *** samkottler|call is now known as samkottler | 19:42 | |
| *** milner has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:42 | |
| *** rkukura has quit IRC | 19:44 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 19:45 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:48 | |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:50 | |
| *** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:50 | |
| *** shardy has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:51 | |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:54 | |
| *** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:55 | |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 19:57 | |
| *** mnewby_ is now known as mnewby | 19:57 | |
| *** jfriedly has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| ttx | hola | 20:00 |
| *** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| notmyname | hi | 20:00 |
| ttx | TC members: who's around ? | 20:01 |
| markmc | hey | 20:01 |
| russellb | hi | 20:01 |
| danwent | hi | 20:01 |
| jaypipes | o/ | 20:01 |
| ttx | (That makes 6, we need a minimum of 7 members to hold the meeting) | 20:01 |
| jaypipes | mordred: ? | 20:01 |
| annegentle___ | o/ | 20:01 |
| jaypipes | \o/ | 20:02 |
| ttx | and..; 7 | 20:02 |
| gabrielhurley | o/ | 20:02 |
| russellb | 8 \o/ | 20:02 |
| notmyname | well, we need vishy and mordred for most of the discussions, I think | 20:02 |
| ttx | yes | 20:02 |
| ttx | hopefully they will join | 20:02 |
| ttx | #startmeeting tc | 20:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 6 20:02:47 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:02 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 20:02 |
| bcwaldon | hello! | 20:02 |
| ttx | The agenda for the meeting is at: | 20:02 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/TechnicalCommittee | 20:03 |
| ttx | We'll probably have to defer some of those to next week any way | 20:03 |
| heckj | o/ | 20:03 |
| ttx | #topic Motion: Heat application for incubation | 20:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Motion: Heat application for incubation" | 20:03 | |
| ttx | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2012-October/000039.html | 20:03 |
| ttx | We need to decide if we grant Heat the additional resources and focus that come with the Incubated status | 20:03 |
| ttx | Like for Ceilometer I'd like to organize the discussion of this in 3 parts | 20:03 |
| ttx | Technical quality / code maturity, Project management / openness / collaboration, and core scope / OpenStack feature complementarity | 20:04 |
| ttx | Let's talk Technical quality / code maturity first | 20:04 |
| ttx | do we have the Heat people around ? | 20:04 |
| shardy | yup | 20:04 |
| stevebake | o? | 20:04 |
| zaneb | yep | 20:04 |
| ttx | yay | 20:04 |
| stevebake | o/ | 20:04 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I did want to ask if we should hit the last topic in your agenda before this | 20:04 |
| gabrielhurley | not to digress but wouldn't this discussion be better *after* we resolve what incubation means (as per the Board's request)? | 20:04 |
| ttx | ah. | 20:05 |
| notmyname | ttx: doesn't this depend on a large part about the BoD request to refine the incubator process (and the points raised last week on a lack of definition for overall openstack core goals)? | 20:05 |
| ttx | I fear we may not go to the bottom of their request soon enough though | 20:05 |
| ttx | but ok, let's discuss that first | 20:05 |
| notmyname | soon enough for what? | 20:05 |
| gabrielhurley | I was wondering the same thing | 20:06 |
| ttx | well, they want us to start discussing it in a joint committee starting November 26 | 20:06 |
| ttx | if you want to wait for the result of that, it delays the Heat incubation process accordingly | 20:06 |
| annegentle___ | the heat original request was in July http://www.mail-archive.com/openstack@lists.launchpad.net/msg14506.html | 20:06 |
| markmc | and Heat gave us plenty of notice | 20:06 |
| ttx | right | 20:06 |
| markmc | right, July | 20:06 |
| ttx | but I'm ok to discuss what we should do of the BoD request first, if tat makes more sense | 20:07 |
| * markmc can't find a link to the mail now | 20:07 | |
| ttx | #topic Preliminary discussion: Incubator process update | 20:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Preliminary discussion: Incubator process update" | 20:07 | |
| ttx | That topic is a formal request from the BoD | 20:07 |
| ttx | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2012-November/000072.html | 20:07 |
| ttx | In summary they want to form a joint committee to discuss the future of the Incubation process | 20:07 |
| markmc | thanks | 20:07 |
| ttx | keyword is "future". | 20:08 |
| *** maurosr has quit IRC | 20:08 | |
| ttx | Some of it is about setting better expectations, some of it is about creating new long-lasting classes of non-Core OpenStack projects | 20:08 |
| ttx | A reduced number of TC members interested to discuss that would join that committee, with a deadline for selection on November 26 | 20:08 |
| ttx | Personally I see a number of issues with that | 20:08 |
| ttx | First, unless we define a common position on that topic first, it will be hard for a subset of the TC to "represent" the TC's view | 20:08 |
| markmc | it seems to be about making incubator more inclusive than just "makes sense for core" ? | 20:08 |
| ttx | markmc: that seems t obe their intent yes | 20:09 |
| ttx | Second, I think a lot of TC members feel strongly on the issue so we might end up dispatching a too-large group to that joint committee (they mentioned "select 2" to me) | 20:09 |
| ttx | Third, I'm not sure a committee (text/voice) meeting is the right way to build consensus around this, I would prefer to flesh out the idea on mailing-lists first. | 20:09 |
| ttx | Thoughts ? | 20:09 |
| markmc | agree on mailing list discussion | 20:09 |
| russellb | +1 to that | 20:10 |
| vishy | o/ (btw) | 20:10 |
| markmc | kind of thing I'd like to mull over as the discussion goes on | 20:10 |
| ttx | (I also think that in the mean time we can make a provisional decision on Heat) | 20:10 |
| notmyname | based on the bylaws, isn't it a TC decision? seems that what the BoD is asking for is some clarification and to be kept abreast of the discussions | 20:10 |
| markmc | notmyname, certainly an important part of the discussion | 20:10 |
| *** pabelanger has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:11 | |
| ttx | notmyname: the idea is to avoid the case of an incubation process where the BoD applies veto on the core project promotion at the very end | 20:11 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:11 | |
| ttx | which is I think bad for all | 20:11 |
| ttx | but they also want the notion of "Incubation" to be revisited apparently | 20:11 |
| markmc | veto against "core project promotion" as distinct from "promoted to being a part of openstack" | 20:11 |
| ttx | the email hints at a new class of project that would not be core, too | 20:12 |
| gabrielhurley | "being a part of openstack" is very amorphous in that context | 20:12 |
| ttx | We could call the whole joint committee idea a bad idea, but that's how the BoD does things... | 20:12 |
| notmyname | ttx: sure, that makes sense. and I agree that we need to actually define the stages. since they are approving what we decide, I'm glad they are giving some direction on what they want to see. but the decision is something we make, right? not something a subcommitee makes (for the reasons you gave) | 20:12 |
| ttx | Alternatively we /could/ start the ML discussion (where ?) and try to converge to a common position and then select a reduced number of TC members to represent it on that joint committee. | 20:12 |
| jaypipes | ttx: like what? we already have library, supporting, core and incubated, right? | 20:12 |
| russellb | sounds like "core, but not as core as core" | 20:13 |
| ttx | jaypipes: I suspec they want to use "core" to mean not just "important", but "necessary" for smoe definition of what an openstack cloud is | 20:13 |
| jaypipes | wtfdtm? :) | 20:13 |
| russellb | (i don't really get it) | 20:13 |
| notmyname | russellb: all projects are equal but some are more equal than others? ;-) | 20:13 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 20:13 | |
| markmc | russellb, agree, but core has a specific definition in the bylaws | 20:14 |
| ttx | in which case you would have the "openstack projects, a subset of which would be core | 20:14 |
| markmc | russellb, a definition that folks seem to want to be precious about | 20:14 |
| russellb | around trademark usage? | 20:14 |
| jaypipes | I continue to define core in terms of "infrastructure vs. platform". | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | jaypipes: +1, it seems like thats what this discussion is really about, drawing the line there | 20:14 |
| russellb | jaypipes: that's an interesting way to put it | 20:14 |
| bcwaldon | openstack is essential infrastructure | 20:15 |
| jaypipes | I also very much like the language notmyname used when differentiating between "product" and the underlying project when talking about Cloud Files vs. Swift, etc | 20:15 |
| markmc | see http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Foundation/Bylaws#ARTICLE_IV._BOARD_OF_DIRECTORS | 20:15 |
| markmc | 4.1 (b) | 20:15 |
| markmc | so the bylaws are quite specific about all this stuff | 20:15 |
| ttx | notmyname: the TC defines what it cares about... what "core" or "openstack" or "official" exactly means is the BoD decision | 20:15 |
| markmc | what classes of project apart from core make up the OpenStack release etc. | 20:15 |
| ttx | i.e. they get to choose the label, we get to choose the stuff we work on as a community | 20:16 |
| jaypipes | markmc: right, but the bylaws also say that the TC decides what is core and what isn't.. | 20:16 |
| *** pabelanger has left #openstack-meeting | 20:16 | |
| ttx | or a tleast that's my understqanding of it | 20:16 |
| markmc | "The Technical Committee shall have the authority to determine the modules for addition, combination, split or deletion from the OpenStack Project except for modules of the Core OpenStack Project" | 20:16 |
| markmc | ah, yes | 20:16 |
| ttx | in all cases I don't think that affects our ability to decide if Heat is a good candidate and ready for Incubation | 20:16 |
| markmc | ttx, agree | 20:17 |
| ttx | it may affect which label may be attached to it in the end | 20:17 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: don't we need to decide if Heat should be core? It doesnt make sense to incubate without that plan in mind, yes? | 20:17 |
| bcwaldon | I was assuming incubated was solely a path to core | 20:17 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: that's the core (eh) of the BoD request. Make incubation not be linked to the concept of core | 20:17 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, how do non-core projects get added then? | 20:17 |
| ttx | i.e. you need to be inclubated to be core | 20:18 |
| ttx | but you could be incubated and become something else | 20:18 |
| russellb | what is something else? | 20:18 |
| bcwaldon | we don't need to go through an incubation process for non-core | 20:18 |
| bcwaldon | we dont need to control it so closely | 20:18 |
| markmc | russellb, at the moment "library projects, gating projects and supporting projects" | 20:18 |
| russellb | other than library, supporting, and gating | 20:18 |
| ttx | russellb: their emali wouldn't say. Up to tha tjoint committtee to define I guess | 20:18 |
| annegentle___ | currently incubation is required to become core (or get a split-off-core-one-time-fastpass) | 20:18 |
| markmc | russellb, but I think the assumption is we add more classes | 20:18 |
| russellb | ok. | 20:19 |
| annegentle___ | or discover/study whether incubation is valuable | 20:19 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, we still need to evaluate them, similar criteria for incubation acceptance I thinik | 20:19 |
| jaypipes | markmc: I'd prefer NOT to add more classes, frankly... | 20:19 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: yes, I agree that, I just want to be clear about what class of project we're evaluating for | 20:19 |
| ttx | If I had to guess I'd say they want a "core" and "main" class of openstack projects | 20:19 |
| russellb | we either need another class, or need to make core not so precious | 20:19 |
| markmc | russellb, that's my take | 20:19 |
| russellb | ttx: that makes sense | 20:20 |
| bcwaldon | core has to stay precious - it partially defines what an openstack cloud is | 20:20 |
| jaypipes | markmc: because as soon as we do, we end up in the "so is this a 'recommended OpenStack project' ... " arena and the product guys start seeing monetization. | 20:20 |
| ttx | both would receive attention, but they would place requirements like "an openstack cloud" is one that implements all core and any main | 20:20 |
| annegentle___ | core also requires the most resources | 20:20 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, assuming core and trademark usage are linked | 20:20 |
| markmc | annegentle___, why? | 20:21 |
| ttx | So I'd like to propose we start the discussion on the ML (-dev ?) | 20:21 |
| gabrielhurley | I'm definitely not a fan of "curated but not core"... I've seen that go wrong in lots of projects. they turn into ghettos and/or stifle community becuase people think something's blessed when it's not really. Better to just foster the ecosystem and let natural selection take its course. | 20:21 |
| notmyname | markmc: which they are in the bylaws | 20:21 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: I don't really want to care about trademark usage right now, this is a technical committee ;) | 20:21 |
| jaypipes | markmc: they are linked... per 4.1 above. | 20:21 |
| ttx | and keep on considering incubation old-style in the mean time | 20:21 |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 20:21 | |
| annegentle___ | markmc: does "requires the most non-dev resources" clarify? Core has certain expectations of release, test, doc, etc. | 20:21 |
| markmc | notmyname, bcwaldon, yep | 20:21 |
| jaypipes | "The other modules which are part of the OpenStack Project, but not the Core OpenStack Project may not be identified using the OpenStack trademark except when distributed with the Core OpenStack Project" | 20:21 |
| ttx | with e caveat that the game rules may well change soon | 20:21 |
| bcwaldon | jaypipes: we might want to disconnect that relationship | 20:22 |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:22 | |
| notmyname | according to the bylaws, core == can use the trademark and is part of the combined release. | 20:22 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: precisely. | 20:22 |
| jaypipes | bcwaldon: we don't have the ability to do that... :( | 20:22 |
| Daviey | .win 265 | 20:22 |
| bcwaldon | why do *we* need to care about trademark usage? | 20:22 |
| notmyname | but that's not a very good guide to use to determine if something should be core | 20:22 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, because we care about "core" and they're currently linked :) | 20:22 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: agreed... just pointing out the boundaries of this discussion. :) | 20:23 |
| * ttx reposts his suggestion | 20:23 | |
| ttx | <ttx> So I'd like to propose we start the discussion on the ML (-dev ?) | 20:23 |
| ttx | <ttx> and keep on considering incubation old-style in the mean time | 20:23 |
| markmc | ttx, agree | 20:23 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: yes | 20:23 |
| jaypipes | lol, agreed. | 20:23 |
| russellb | agree | 20:23 |
| ttx | <ttx> with thee caveat that the game rules may well change soon | 20:23 |
| jaypipes | ttx: all fine and good but I still think this needs to be resolved before any decision on Heat would be applied. | 20:24 |
| markmc | so, part of this will be considering whether we think it's a candidate for core | 20:24 |
| bcwaldon | let's Move On™ | 20:24 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:24 | |
| russellb | but it could also be, is it worth additional resources right now understanding that could be core, or some other new class of project, pending the result of this (probably lengthy) discussion | 20:25 |
| ttx | jaypipes: that's a valid remark... maybe we can cover it in the Heat discussion ? | 20:25 |
| ttx | But if you see incubation as a resorce investment to support a promising project, more than a pre-stamp for core... | 20:25 |
| ttx | I think we can decide now | 20:25 |
| ttx | nothing prevents us from removing a project from incubation basically | 20:25 |
| markmc | yeah | 20:26 |
| ttx | #agreed Start discussion on BoD request on -dev ML | 20:26 |
| *** nachi_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:26 | |
| *** nachi has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:26 | |
| *** nachi_ has quit IRC | 20:26 | |
| ttx | Back to Heat | 20:26 |
| ttx | #topic Motion: Heat application for incubation | 20:26 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Motion: Heat application for incubation" | 20:26 | |
| ttx | So.. Technical quality / code maturity first | 20:26 |
| jaypipes | so what is the difference between a project we think has promise to become a non-core supporting OpenStack project and an incubated project that we think has promise to become a non-core supporting OpenStack project!? ... | 20:26 |
| ttx | I need to read that a few times now | 20:27 |
| notmyname | jaypipes: I think eventlet is a promising project that supports openstack ;-) | 20:27 |
| *** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:27 | |
| russellb | ttx: i think the ? was, what does incubation mean. | 20:27 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: I think swift is a promising project that supports glance. :) | 20:27 |
| jaypipes | russellb: precisely. | 20:28 |
| *** jrd has quit IRC | 20:28 | |
| markmc | jaypipes, it means we hope it will be officially included as a supporting project in the H release | 20:28 |
| ttx | Incubation is: do we care e nough about Heat to give it extra attention | 20:28 |
| heckj | #link http://stackmeat.org <-- open community of openstack-related projects that *just* started this past week | 20:28 |
| creiht | jaypipes: isn't glance infrastructure then? ;) | 20:28 |
| notmyname | jaypipes: and linux is promising too! | 20:28 |
| creiht | erm not infrastructure :) | 20:28 |
| ttx | notmyname: yeah, I like linux too | 20:28 |
| jaypipes | markmc: and what does the incubation actually entail then vs. just people thinking it's got promise? access to CI team and other stuff? | 20:28 |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 20:28 | |
| russellb | btw, eventlet is *not* promising. | 20:28 |
| jaypipes | hehe | 20:28 |
| markmc | jaypipes, what does it mean for potential core projects? | 20:28 |
| ttx | jaypipes: CI, release management | 20:28 |
| jaypipes | creiht: :) | 20:29 |
| jaypipes | ttx: ok, that's fine then. just wanted some clarification on what incubation means if it doesn't mean "will likely become core | 20:29 |
| annegentle___ | jaypipes: ttx: docs and test too? | 20:29 |
| ttx | jaypipes: it's perfectly valid to abstain to the Heat thing saying it's not the right time | 20:29 |
| * markmc hopes the heat guys are "enjoying" this | 20:29 | |
| russellb | markmc: i was thinking that too :) | 20:29 |
| ttx | markmc: yeah a bit of bad timing for them | 20:29 |
| annegentle___ | traditionally incubation doesn't give you extra docs resources | 20:30 |
| stevebake | :) | 20:30 |
| jaypipes | ttx: well, no, I'll be voting against Heat because I don't think it's infrastructure, not because it's not the right time ;) | 20:30 |
| creiht | markmc: doesn't every incubation request always start with a spirited discussion about what core should be? :) | 20:30 |
| ttx | jaypipes: twice as many reasons, awesome | 20:30 |
| bcwaldon | jaypipes: same | 20:30 |
| * jaypipes would like to point out he really likes HEAT. | 20:30 | |
| markmc | creiht, you'd hope we'd be over that by now | 20:30 |
| jaypipes | just not as core IaaS | 20:30 |
| ttx | Arh, technical discussion on the merits of Heat firs tplace | 20:30 |
| ttx | core scope will be discussed last | 20:30 |
| jaypipes | ttx: k, sorry | 20:30 |
| ttx | Had a question about the choice of CloudFormation template format (probably showing the extent of my ignorance of it) | 20:30 |
| ttx | Does that restrict us in terms of resources that we can effect ? For example, would it support Quantum-like resources ? Or do you embrace/extend it ? | 20:31 |
| danwent | ttx: stevebake says they already added native quantum type resources to heat | 20:31 |
| jaypipes | right. | 20:31 |
| danwent | so I think the answer is that they are not limited in this fashion | 20:31 |
| ttx | jaypipes: should we read your "I really like HEAT" as no opposition on technical grounds ? | 20:31 |
| stevebake | I've just implemented a full set of Quantum resources, announcement will be going out to os-dev list today | 20:31 |
| jaypipes | ttx: that is correct. no opposition at all on technical grounds. | 20:31 |
| zaneb | ttx: we can add whatever resources we like | 20:32 |
| ttx | stevebake: so the template format is extensible, cool | 20:32 |
| zaneb | just put them in a separate namespace | 20:32 |
| zaneb | amazon ones start with AWS:: | 20:32 |
| shardy | ttx: intention is to move to openstack-native resource names, which will be a superset of AWS named resources | 20:32 |
| ttx | then no issue on the technical side for me | 20:32 |
| stevebake | CloudFormation format is just json. We're considering an additional native format like YAML as an alternative | 20:32 |
| ttx | any other question on the technical side ? | 20:32 |
| ttx | OK, let's talk Project management / openness / collaboration then | 20:33 |
| ttx | A few random remarks on that... | 20:33 |
| ttx | The gap to cover is slightly bigger than with Ceilometer, which was already using launchpad / openstack meetings / mailing-lists etc... which means this incubation is slightly more costly | 20:33 |
| ttx | but nothing impossible | 20:33 |
| zaneb | heat has moved to launchpad and the os mailing list already | 20:33 |
| ttx | Oh, recently ? | 20:34 |
| markmc | e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat | 20:34 |
| ttx | saw github issues being referenced, was confused | 20:34 |
| zaneb | launchpad move happened last week I think | 20:34 |
| shardy | We've discussed moving meetings here too last week | 20:34 |
| russellb | have been doing openstack-style meetings, at least, too. i've seen meeting notes on the list in the past | 20:34 |
| ttx | looks like you read my mind | 20:34 |
| zaneb | we've been on openstack-dev for ages | 20:34 |
| jaypipes | ++ | 20:34 |
| ttx | Also I'm a bit worried by the lack of external contributions. The team is AFAICT all-RedHat and almost all new contributors | 20:34 |
| ttx | I hope that's more a visibility issue than an interest issue... | 20:35 |
| shardy | ttx: github issue tracker now removed | 20:35 |
| ttx | otherwise collaboration wit hother core projects seems to be going well... no other remark from me | 20:35 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I'm less concerned about that after seeing the openness with which communication has occurred. | 20:35 |
| zaneb | yes, meetings are all on IRC in #heat, but we could move easily here | 20:35 |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:35 | |
| markmc | some openstack-common contribs have come from heat guys, which is cool | 20:36 |
| ttx | anything else before we move to core scope ? | 20:36 |
| ttx | OK, then lets' talk core scope / OpenStack feature complementarity | 20:36 |
| ttx | wanted to make sure the ohter bases were covered before we go on the most problematic point | 20:37 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I'm more concerned about disambiguating some of the apparent cross-project code between Ceilo, Synaps, and HEAT, and ensuring each of those projects has a clear path to sharing of common code. | 20:37 |
| markmc | I think it's a really solid addition - ties together all of OpenStack APIs | 20:37 |
| ttx | On that topic I would have preferred if we moved up the stack a bit more slowly... | 20:37 |
| ttx | ...though I recognize that there is a need for a one-stop shop for orchestration of several openstack services | 20:37 |
| russellb | i don't really think it moves up the stack that much.. | 20:37 |
| shardy | So to be clear, we've been working with ceilometer guys (asalkeld primarily) such that we can use their metric collection infrastructure | 20:38 |
| markmc | even a simple "launch instance, assign floating IP" thing is possible through Heat | 20:38 |
| shardy | we have no intention of long-term overlap | 20:38 |
| jaypipes | shardy: ++ | 20:38 |
| jaypipes | shardy: good to hear. (more concerned re: Synaps, but that's a different discussion ;) | 20:38 |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 20:38 | |
| *** mnewby_ is now known as mnewby | 20:38 | |
| shardy | jaypipes: IMO synaps is not really relevant to this discussion | 20:38 |
| *** mnewby has quit IRC | 20:39 | |
| jaypipes | shardy: because of its implementation or something else? | 20:39 |
| zaneb | synaps is a tricky one because it has not been developed in the open with involvement from the community | 20:39 |
| stevebake | we'll use whatever monitoring solution emerges, we just need it to support autoscaling etc | 20:39 |
| ttx | so fro mprevious mentions in the meeting some (bcwaldon, jaypipes) have reservations based on Heat not being IaaSy enough ? | 20:39 |
| shardy | ie perhaps the CW api might end up in ceilometer or somewhere else, it's not a core part of our orchestration | 20:39 |
| jaypipes | k, gotcha. | 20:39 |
| ttx | would like them to voice them more clearly now, since I think tat's the heart of the decision we have to take | 20:39 |
| jaypipes | shardy: HEAT is more the CF part, less the CW part... | 20:40 |
| shardy | Yep, we just need a monitoring service, it can be whatever ends up working | 20:40 |
| jaypipes | k | 20:40 |
| shardy | jaypipes: exactly, we just need metrics for HA/autoscaling decisions | 20:40 |
| shardy | I just bolted on a partial CW api for easier testing really | 20:40 |
| danwent | I personally like the idea of an orchestration service like heat, otherwise people try to shove orchestration into indvidual services (where it makes less sense, in my opinion). | 20:40 |
| shardy | and becuse I thought it might be useful | 20:40 |
| jaypipes | right. well, you saying you're working with the other folks to align towards a common codebase for collection/monitoring is good enough for me. | 20:41 |
| ttx | danwent: in tha tsense it could be seen as up the stack as Horizon | 20:41 |
| markmc | jaypipes, they could have chosen not to implement auto-scaling because OpenStack doesn't have an API for it | 20:41 |
| jaypipes | danwent: totally agreed. | 20:41 |
| markmc | jaypipes, but they saw it as pretty essential | 20:41 |
| jaypipes | sure, understood | 20:41 |
| zaneb | jaypipes: http://julien.danjou.info/blog/2012/openstack-synaps-exploration see conclusion | 20:42 |
| jaypipes | markmc: it's my duty to bring up these kinds of things, that's all :) | 20:42 |
| shardy | markmc: there are several places where we've done our own impementations, but longer term would like to use external aaS implementations (e.g LBaaS) | 20:42 |
| danwent | ttx: yes | 20:42 |
| jaypipes | zaneb: ah, cheers, thx for that link. very helpful. | 20:42 |
| markmc | jaypipes, sure, I wondered too - but it's all good | 20:42 |
| ttx | jaypipes, bcwaldon: so is it seufficiently off your vision of what "openstack core" should be to be denied incubation ? | 20:42 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I believe that totally is dependent on the outcome of our previously discussed topic for the ML about what is core, no? | 20:43 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I'm becoming increasingly concerned with what 'incubation' and 'core' mean | 20:43 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: so I would say 'no' until I understand that better | 20:43 |
| jaypipes | ttx: I've stated this opinion before.. I believe core == infrastructure. and infrastructure == <crap won't run without it> | 20:43 |
| ttx | Personally I think we could grant it, with the clear caveat that the rules of the game are in the process of changing so this may be reverted soon in another meeting once those rules are defined | 20:43 |
| jaypipes | ttx: this is why I voted no on Horizon being in core originally. | 20:43 |
| ttx | jaypipes: agreed, that's consistent | 20:44 |
| ttx | but would you support a motion to REMOVE horizon from core now ? | 20:44 |
| jaypipes | ttx: it's a great project, it just didn't meet the "won't run without it" factor. | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | I agree with the comparison to Horizon and the question to me is does it add enough value | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | there's a clear uptick in adoption based on Horizon's inclusion | 20:44 |
| jaypipes | ttx: no, I would NOT support that. just saying what the basis of my opinion is. | 20:44 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: do you see Horizon making use of Heat if it ever becomes a core project ? | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | would the same be true of HEAT?maybe | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | Horizon-Heat integration would absolutely happen | 20:45 |
| jaypipes | gabrielhurley: good point re: the addition of value vs. infrastructure over platform. | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | although amusingly you could also use Heat to deploy Horizon | 20:45 |
| stevebake | FYI an external contributor is working on a Horizon Heat ui | 20:45 |
| jaypipes | gabrielhurley: I guess it all boils down to what is core... | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | I'm still undecided, FWIW | 20:45 |
| shardy | ttx: heat plugin for horizon in-progress | 20:45 |
| markmc | stevebake, got the link? | 20:45 |
| markmc | it's on github | 20:45 |
| * markmc can't find it | 20:45 | |
| gabrielhurley | I've seen it | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | it's very nascent, but does exist | 20:45 |
| shardy | https://github.com/heat-api/heat-horizon | 20:45 |
| jaypipes | shardy: shouldn't that be "mirage"? :) | 20:46 |
| gabrielhurley | heh | 20:46 |
| gabrielhurley | +1 | 20:46 |
| notmyname | I agree with bcwaldon and jaypipes (except I would support removing current core non-IaaS projects) | 20:46 |
| stevebake | I think this is an older screencast http://radez.fedorapeople.org/thermal1.ogv | 20:46 |
| shardy | there is also a screencast demo from radez around somewhere, not got the link to hand | 20:46 |
| ttx | Does anyone need extra information before deciding ? Note that the decision needs 5 "yes" or 5 "no"... so if enough people abstain the decision is pushed back (vote "abstain" if you want to delay decision) | 20:46 |
| stevebake | https://github.com/heat-api/heat-horizon | 20:46 |
| markmc | gabrielhurley, part of heat templates are almost a UI description - i.e. the list of parameters to prompt a user for, including defaults, lists to select from, etc. | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | yep | 20:47 |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:47 | |
| gabrielhurley | I'm familiar with cloudformation and how it's all supposed to work | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | it's an interesting challenge | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | what Amazon ended up with is awful | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | we'd have to do better ;-) | 20:47 |
| markmc | heh | 20:47 |
| zaneb | gabrielhurley: we'd love to hear your input about that on the ML :) | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | for sure | 20:47 |
| stevebake | lots of potential for autogenerated ui | 20:48 |
| gabrielhurley | definitely | 20:48 |
| *** adam_g has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| *** adam_g has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:48 | |
| * ttx repeats: <ttx> Does anyone need extra information before deciding | 20:48 | |
| bcwaldon | nope | 20:48 |
| jaypipes | no | 20:48 |
| markmc | not me | 20:48 |
| danwent | no | 20:48 |
| ttx | or can we move on to vote (abstain being an option) | 20:48 |
| ttx | ok then, let's vote, for the decision to be final at least 5 yes or 5 no need to be obtained | 20:49 |
| ttx | #startvote Approve Heat application for incubation? yes, no, abstain | 20:49 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: Approve Heat application for incubation? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:49 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:49 |
| jaypipes | #vote abstain | 20:49 |
| markmc | #vote yes | 20:49 |
| gabrielhurley | #vote abstain | 20:49 |
| notmyname | #vote no | 20:49 |
| russellb | #vote yes | 20:49 |
| vishy | #vote abstain | 20:50 |
| danwent | #vote yes | 20:50 |
| bcwaldon | #vote abstain | 20:50 |
| ttx | #vote yes | 20:50 |
| annegentle___ | #vote yes | 20:50 |
| heckj | #vote abstain | 20:50 |
| ttx | ouch, that's close | 20:50 |
| gabrielhurley | wow | 20:50 |
| ttx | 30 more seconds, unlikely to chnag ethe results anyway | 20:51 |
| heckj | I think we're sending a poor message approving for incubation and what it implies | 20:51 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: just curious, you voted no instead of abstain because you aren't concerned about the outcome of the discussion on "what is core" or you think you know what the decision will be? | 20:51 |
| ttx | note that you can change your vote. | 20:51 |
| * annegentle___ is only voting for incubation, core is in the future | 20:51 | |
| ttx | heckj: if most abstain switch to "no" then they beat the "yes" (you need more "yes" than there is "no") | 20:52 |
| * ttx is only voting for incubtaion with the caveat that we may revisit the decision soon | 20:52 | |
| markmc | that's a long 30 seconds :) | 20:52 |
| jaypipes | notmyname: or because you are saying that core is for infrastructure and incubation is for going into core and HEAT isn't infrastructure and so shouldn't be incubated? :) | 20:52 |
| bcwaldon | I don't know how we can reasonably vote for this without understanding what this means | 20:52 |
| russellb | annegentle___: that was my thought. incubation now, the rest is obviously up in the air | 20:52 |
| ttx | basically, start pushing the resources but be ready to pull them out | 20:52 |
| notmyname | jaypipes: yes that (the "old" or "current" definition) | 20:52 |
| jaypipes | :) k | 20:52 |
| heckj | ttx: understood, but I'm abstaining because I think it's important to nail down what incubation means first. | 20:53 |
| ttx | markmc: as long as people discuss... | 20:53 |
| ttx | heckj: I respect that, almost abstained myself | 20:53 |
| * markmc basically thinks "if this isn't the kind of project we want to welcome into OpenStack, what is?" | 20:53 | |
| ttx | ok then 20 seconds | 20:53 |
| gabrielhurley | On the plus side, giving them some resources for now will help them build a better project either way so we've done a good deed. | 20:53 |
| markmc | talk about sending a bad message ... | 20:53 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: we need to define what it means to 'welcome into openstack' | 20:53 |
| ttx | #endvote | 20:53 |
| openstack | Voted on "Approve Heat application for incubation?" Results are | 20:53 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: I'm more than happy for the project to exist and be associated | 20:53 |
| russellb | gabrielhurley: +1 to that | 20:53 |
| markmc | rejecting would be an awful message of exclusivity IMHO | 20:54 |
| openstack | yes (5): markmc, ttx, russellb, danwent, annegentle___ | 20:54 |
| openstack | abstain (5): heckj, gabrielhurley, jaypipes, bcwaldon, vishy | 20:54 |
| openstack | no (1): notmyname | 20:54 |
| jaypipes | markmc: only if you assume that not going into incubation is somehow bad (which it isn't) | 20:54 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, yeah, we suck we don't know what that means yet | 20:54 |
| heckj | bcwaldon: +1 | 20:54 |
| creiht | lol | 20:54 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: we need to be exclusive - we can't just accept anybody | 20:54 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, we're not | 20:54 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: I wrote a project that spins up vms based on a script, should that be OpenStack™ | 20:54 |
| danwent | it seems like the logic being applied here is not consistent with the ceilometer vote last time | 20:54 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, I thought we weren't talking about trademarks :) | 20:55 |
| notmyname | danwent: FWIW, I voted the same way :-) | 20:55 |
| danwent | I voted yes for the same reason I voted yes for ceilometer | 20:55 |
| danwent | notmyname: fair :) | 20:55 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: I've had to come down to your level ;) | 20:55 |
| bcwaldon | damn trademarks | 20:55 |
| jaypipes | danwent: would I be inconsistent | 20:55 |
| jaypipes | dansmith: ? | 20:55 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, trademarks are the last thing I want to talk about! | 20:55 |
| jaypipes | gah. danwent ... | 20:55 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: me too! blah | 20:55 |
| russellb | i think voting yes to ceilometer and abstain to heat is inconsistent. | 20:55 |
| danwent | jaypipes: :) to me there was uncertaintly about the definition of "core" and "incubation" in both cases | 20:55 |
| jaypipes | russellb: is that what I did? | 20:55 |
| russellb | i don't know, just making a general statement, we had almost all yes to ceilometer | 20:56 |
| jaypipes | russellb: if so, yes, I was inconsistent and should not have been. | 20:56 |
| gabrielhurley | I think they ceilometer/heat land at somewhat different levels in the stack... also ecosystem competition and level of integration are very different between the two. | 20:56 |
| ttx | bcwaldon++ | 20:56 |
| * ttx lags | 20:56 | |
| danwent | I don't remember individual votes, but the end result is certainly different. I was just curious if people saw a major difference that I was missing | 20:56 |
| ttx | err, just was off network for a bit | 20:56 |
| ttx | did the bot record the results and my #endvote ? | 20:57 |
| jaypipes | yes | 20:57 |
| ttx | ok, I guess I'll read the log | 20:57 |
| ttx | #topic Preliminary discussion: Third-party APIs | 20:57 |
| notmyname | ttx: 5-5-1 | 20:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Preliminary discussion: Third-party APIs" | 20:57 | |
| markmc | shardy, stevebake, zaneb, welcome :) | 20:57 |
| heckj | ttx: with 3 minutes remaining? | 20:57 |
| russellb | what does 5-5-1 mean, basically abstain? | 20:57 |
| russellb | or what? | 20:57 |
| ttx | The thread is in full swing on the mailing-list... Would be good if it could distill down into a clear motion to be discussed and proposed at the next meeting | 20:57 |
| ttx | russellb: it means yes | 20:57 |
| Daviey | a user sevice orchestration tool and a metering/billing centralised project is very differnet.. I can see how one is infra, and the other is an end user tool | 20:57 |
| russellb | ttx: ok, thanks. | 20:58 |
| ttx | russellb: more yes than no, and at least 5 yes or no | 20:58 |
| markmc | heckj, this is an easy conversation :) | 20:58 |
| markmc | ttx, I can summarise the motion | 20:58 |
| ttx | NB: Motions to be voted on need to be posted for public discussion before the end of day on Wednesday the week before | 20:58 |
| markmc | vishy, you agree that it's just a "we agree with the apis-should-be-external-aspiration, but we're not ready for that in Nova yet" motion? | 20:58 |
| ttx | #action markmc to summarize and propose a clear motion by EOD tomorrow | 20:59 |
| ttx | for next meeting | 20:59 |
| ttx | #action ttx to start discussion on the incubation/core process on -dev ML | 20:59 |
| vishy | markmc: yes | 20:59 |
| markmc | vishy, thanks | 20:59 |
| ttx | ok, no time for more today, see you all next week ? | 21:00 |
| *** davidha has quit IRC | 21:00 | |
| *** Vek has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:00 | |
| bcwaldon | yep, thanks ttx | 21:00 |
| annegentle___ | thanks ttx | 21:00 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 6 21:00:34 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-06-20.02.html | 21:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-06-20.02.txt | 21:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2012/tc.2012-11-06-20.02.log.html | 21:00 |
| stevebake | thanks all! | 21:00 |
| *** davidha has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:01 | |
| ttx | markmc, heckj, notmyname, bcwaldon, jgriffith, vishy, gabrielhurley, danwent: around ? | 21:02 |
| *** salv-orlando_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| markmc | yep | 21:02 |
| notmyname | here | 21:02 |
| danwent | o/ | 21:02 |
| gabrielhurley | o/ | 21:02 |
| heckj | o/ | 21:02 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: yes | 21:02 |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| *** salv-orlando_ is now known as salv-orlando | 21:03 | |
| ttx | #startmeeting project | 21:03 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 6 21:03:30 2012 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:03 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:03 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'project' | 21:03 |
| ttx | Agenda @ http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting | 21:03 |
| ttx | #topic Actions from previous meeting | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Actions from previous meeting" | 21:03 | |
| ttx | All done except | 21:03 |
| ttx | * ttx to discuss oslo versioning with mordred and markmc | 21:03 |
| ttx | We still need to have that discussion, delayed by ETOOMUCHTRAVEL | 21:04 |
| markmc | oh, versioning | 21:04 |
| markmc | hmm, it's not top of my list to figure out with oslo | 21:04 |
| vishy | o/ | 21:04 |
| markmc | thinking it'll be a week or two more before it becomes really important | 21:04 |
| markmc | i.e. when we go to release oslo-config | 21:04 |
| ttx | markmc: still something we need to find a solution for, early enough | 21:04 |
| markmc | (blocked on argparse re-write) | 21:04 |
| markmc | ttx, yep, totally | 21:04 |
| ttx | #topic Oslo status | 21:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Oslo status" | 21:04 | |
| *** nachi has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| jgriffith | 0/ | 21:05 |
| eglynn_ | o/ (covering for nijaba on ceilo) | 21:05 |
| markmc | so, I've begun the renaming from openstack-common | 21:05 |
| ttx | #action markmc/ttx/mordred to discuss oslo versioning | 21:05 |
| markmc | project and teams created, bugs and blueprints moved over | 21:05 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/grizzly | 21:05 |
| markmc | I've mostly gone over the blueprints apart from ttx's latest ones | 21:05 |
| markmc | which I'm sure are fine | 21:05 |
| ttx | Looks like a pretty good plan... is it complete from your perspective ? | 21:05 |
| markmc | last renaming task is moving openstack-common.git to oslo-incubator.git | 21:06 |
| markmc | ttx, yeah, I think it's pretty complete | 21:06 |
| markmc | ttx, will double check against design summit decisions | 21:06 |
| ttx | Would be good to get people to indicate which milestone they intend to see their stuff drop | 21:06 |
| markmc | ttx, yep, that's next on my list to chase down | 21:06 |
| ttx | Looking into grizzly-1 now (which is two weeks from now) | 21:06 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:06 |
| markmc | #action markmc get milestone targets for oslo blueprints | 21:06 |
| ttx | Only cfg-argparse is on the map, which sounds pretty conservative to me | 21:06 |
| ttx | (in the good sense of conservative, I know it's election day somewhere) | 21:07 |
| markmc | true | 21:07 |
| markmc | and some of them are pretty much done | 21:07 |
| markmc | service-infrastructure at least | 21:07 |
| ttx | markmc: ok, just target the ones that are likely to hit, helps setting expectations right | 21:07 |
| *** annegentle___ has quit IRC | 21:07 | |
| markmc | election day? somewhere interesting? | 21:07 |
| bcwaldon | only America | 21:07 |
| * markmc chuckles | 21:07 | |
| ttx | markmc: Anything you wanted to mention ? | 21:07 |
| markmc | ttx, yep, will do | 21:07 |
| markmc | I think that's it | 21:08 |
| bcwaldon | markmc: what is 'oslo-incubator'? | 21:08 |
| ttx | Questions on Oslo ? | 21:08 |
| *** Tushar has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:08 | |
| markmc | will send out an email when the renaming is complete | 21:08 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, where APIs go on the way to being ready for a library release | 21:08 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, https://etherpad.openstack.org/grizzly-oslo | 21:08 |
| bcwaldon | okay | 21:08 |
| bcwaldon | thanks | 21:08 |
| markmc | bcwaldon, i.e. what the current openstack-common repo is | 21:08 |
| markmc | np | 21:08 |
| ttx | clarifies that it's only temporary | 21:08 |
| ttx | Other questions ? | 21:09 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status" | 21:09 | |
| ttx | heckj: o/ | 21:09 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/grizzly | 21:09 |
| heckj | getting stuff written up based on those status - just cleaned them up in the past few hours | 21:09 |
| ttx | heckj: is that a complete plan from where you sit ? | 21:09 |
| heckj | ttx: at this point, best estimate - yep | 21:10 |
| *** Tushar_Patil has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:10 | |
| ttx | Looking at recently-targeted grizzly-1 stuff... | 21:10 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:10 |
| ttx | Sounds reasonable and on track to me | 21:11 |
| ttx | heckj: anything else ? | 21:11 |
| heckj | email coming soon summarizing all that | 21:11 |
| ttx | awesome | 21:11 |
| ttx | Questions about Keystone ? | 21:11 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:12 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status" | 21:12 | |
| ttx | notmyname: hi! | 21:12 |
| notmyname | hi | 21:12 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.7.5 | 21:12 |
| ttx | Original plan was to QA-cut on November 5 and release on November 8 | 21:12 |
| ttx | any update on that ? | 21:12 |
| notmyname | yes | 21:12 |
| notmyname | I was told yesterday that the QA env was being phsically moved and therefore QA wouldn't be ready until at least tomorrow | 21:12 |
| notmyname | all patches required for 1.7.5 have been merged | 21:13 |
| notmyname | we may have one more land this afternoon | 21:13 |
| notmyname | and the 1.7.5 release should be cut either tonight or tomorrow | 21:13 |
| ttx | notmyname: ok, just ping me when I can cut milestone-proposed | 21:13 |
| notmyname | tentative changelog update is https://github.com/notmyname/swift/commit/cd4ede501f7c616bf80264a9f3e1a9d9d8e99839 | 21:13 |
| notmyname | tons of good stuff in this release | 21:14 |
| notmyname | ttx: I will let you know as soon as I know | 21:14 |
| ttx | Is the milestone page reflecting the major changes in Swift 1.7.5 ? Or could it use a bit more work ? | 21:14 |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| notmyname | it could probably use a bit more work, but I did spend some time on LP bugs and blueprints this morning. | 21:14 |
| ttx | notmyname: Final release is still tentative to Nov 8 or should we already move it back ? | 21:14 |
| notmyname | I didn't change any targeting, though | 21:14 |
| notmyname | ttx: probably need to move it back | 21:15 |
| ttx | Nov 9 ? Nov 12 ? | 21:15 |
| notmyname | how about next tuesday (Nov 13)? | 21:15 |
| ttx | Works for me | 21:15 |
| ttx | we can adjust if we know better soon | 21:15 |
| *** milner has quit IRC | 21:15 | |
| ttx | notmyname: anything else ? | 21:16 |
| *** boden has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| notmyname | I don't have anything else | 21:16 |
| ttx | updated to Nov 13 | 21:16 |
| ttx | Questions on Swift ? | 21:16 |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status" | 21:16 | |
| ttx | bcwaldon: o/ | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: hey | 21:17 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/grizzly | 21:17 |
| ttx | Looks good to me | 21:17 |
| ttx | You should set a priority to streaming-server | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | why thank you | 21:17 |
| bcwaldon | ttx: I'm not sure if streaming-server will happen, but I'll figure that out this week | 21:17 |
| ttx | You should still be able to say how critical it is for a successful grizzly cycle though | 21:18 |
| bcwaldon | sure | 21:18 |
| ttx | oh. "if" | 21:18 |
| ttx | not "when" | 21:18 |
| ttx | ok, sure, keep it as it is until you know | 21:18 |
| ttx | In general would be good to get a better indication of what milestone each feature is likely to land | 21:19 |
| ttx | i.e. grizzly-2, grizzly-3 etc | 21:19 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:19 |
| ttx | All implemented, anything else that will probably land in the next two weeks that we could target to grizzly-1 ? | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | possibly | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | glance-domain-logic-layer | 21:20 |
| bcwaldon | I'll talk with markwash about that | 21:20 |
| ttx | ok, adjust-at-will | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | ep | 21:21 |
| ttx | bcwaldon: Anything else ? | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | and I just sent out my grizzly planning email that you requested | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | subject 'Glance Grizzly Planning' | 21:21 |
| ttx | cool, haven't had time to read it yet, but I will soon | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | well, Planing | 21:21 |
| bcwaldon | that's great | 21:21 |
| ttx | Questions on Glance ? | 21:21 |
| ttx | #topic Quantum status | 21:22 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status" | 21:22 | |
| danwent | o/ | 21:22 |
| ttx | danwent: hey | 21:22 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/grizzly | 21:22 |
| danwent | btw, am about to send out note to ML about quantum in grizzly | 21:22 |
| ttx | yay 38 blueprints | 21:22 |
| danwent | hehe… quantum team is always BP happy | 21:22 |
| ttx | danwent: would be great to prioritize the "undefined priority" blueprints soon | 21:22 |
| ttx | danwent: How complete is that list from your perspective ? | 21:23 |
| danwent | nearly everything we covered at the summit is there, with one possible exception | 21:23 |
| ttx | You have A proposed @ https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/grizzly/+setgoals | 21:23 |
| ttx | s/A/1/ | 21:23 |
| ttx | Looking into grizzly-1 targets now | 21:24 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:24 |
| danwent | yeah, i actually just updated the whiteboard of that BP indicating that I didn't want to target for grizzly until i had a better understanding of what it meant | 21:24 |
| ttx | OK, with two weeks left, this looks even more unlikely than usual... | 21:24 |
| ttx | Feeling lucky ? Or have secret plans to start deferring stuff to grizzly-2 ? | 21:24 |
| danwent | we've sunk a lot of cycles into sevice insertion + LBaaS design review | 21:25 |
| danwent | work on those will start in G-1, but will definitely not land | 21:25 |
| danwent | I expect about 1/3 of BPs to be deferred | 21:25 |
| danwent | I'm just not sure which 1/3 :-/ | 21:25 |
| ttx | danwent: you can target them to g2 while starting on them on g1 | 21:25 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| ttx | the idea is to give an indication on when feature land... being pessimistic is better than optimistic | 21:26 |
| danwent | ttx: sure. by next meeting, they will either be likely, or moved out. | 21:26 |
| ttx | ok | 21:26 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:26 | |
| danwent | hello? | 21:27 |
| danwent | i guess i bored ttx to sleep | 21:27 |
| ttx | cisco-plugin-enhancements is in grizzly-1 but not in grizzly series goal | 21:27 |
| ttx | no just a script that took too long to run | 21:27 |
| danwent | hehe, will clean that up. | 21:27 |
| ttx | danwent: Anything else ? | 21:27 |
| danwent | nope. just trying to push the team to finish talking and start coding :) | 21:28 |
| ttx | Questions on Quantum ? | 21:28 |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 21:28 | |
| ttx | #topic Cinder status | 21:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Cinder status" | 21:28 | |
| ttx | jgriffith: o/ | 21:28 |
| jgriffith | yo | 21:28 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/grizzly | 21:28 |
| jgriffith | ttx: getting there | 21:29 |
| jgriffith | ttx: awaiting a few things from chuck and from the folks at HP | 21:29 |
| ttx | Yes, I see. Would be great to set a priority on each of those | 21:29 |
| jgriffith | ttx: yeah, I've started that | 21:29 |
| jgriffith | ttx: been a bit distracted past couple days :) | 21:29 |
| ttx | jgriffith: so it's almost complete as far as you can tell ? | 21:29 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Yes | 21:30 |
| ttx | You have two proposed at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/grizzly/+setgoals | 21:30 |
| jgriffith | ttx: I don't know of any large additions coming in other than those I mentioned | 21:30 |
| ttx | probably worth going through them too | 21:30 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:30 |
| ttx | Not looking good with only two weeks left... and some blocked | 21:31 |
| ttx | jgriffith: Could you set an explicit status on the "unknown" ones ? | 21:31 |
| jgriffith | Yep, I'll update | 21:31 |
| ttx | I suspect they are "not started" which makes me pessimistic :) | 21:31 |
| jgriffith | ttx: non-believer! | 21:31 |
| ttx | jgriffith: maybe adjust g1 goals by next week ? | 21:31 |
| *** annegentle__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:31 | |
| ttx | Also one of them is unassigned, and therefore a bit unlikely to land in this milestone | 21:32 |
| ttx | (volume-type-scheduler) | 21:32 |
| jgriffith | ttx: actually that one is about done | 21:32 |
| ttx | ah! an unknwon almost done | 21:32 |
| jgriffith | ttx: There was some flopping in who was working on it | 21:32 |
| ttx | iscsi-chap and cinder-protocol-enhancements should have their series goal set to grizzly, too, if you intend to include the min the general plan | 21:33 |
| jgriffith | ttx: You'll notice some of those aren't approved | 21:33 |
| jgriffith | ttx: for a reason :) | 21:33 |
| ttx | hmkay, maybe remove the milestone target on them so that they don't pollute your g1 roadmap then | 21:34 |
| jgriffith | gotya | 21:34 |
| ttx | cool | 21:34 |
| ttx | it's actually not looking that bad now | 21:34 |
| ttx | jgriffith: Anything else ? | 21:34 |
| jgriffith | Just trying to get the gate tests to work again :) | 21:34 |
| ttx | aw. | 21:34 |
| *** gatuus has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:35 | |
| markmc | was about to ask - is that all down to cinder? | 21:35 |
| markmc | or just the likely culprit? | 21:35 |
| ttx | jgriffith: how is that going ? | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | markmc: no | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | ttx: markmc I don't think it's cinder TBH | 21:35 |
| ttx | markmc: it's actually a kernel issue fwiw | 21:35 |
| markmc | jgriffith, ok, good to know | 21:35 |
| markmc | oh | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | ttx: markmc it's not that either I don't believe | 21:35 |
| * markmc can offer a decent kernel to try :) | 21:35 | |
| ttx | but jgriffith is helping narrowing it down | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | this is something *new* | 21:35 |
| markmc | (sorry) | 21:36 |
| ttx | jgriffith: a mutant ? | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | and I believe it's keystone issue | 21:36 |
| ttx | jgriffith: oh, it's not the thing I think it is then | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | a patch was merged that was hoped to fix it, but doesn't look like it | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | ttx: nope | 21:36 |
| ttx | jgriffith: any bug reference where the action is happening ? | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | ttx: but I have a patch in to quit messing with that stupid thing too | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | ttx: Not yet, it's been more trying to get to root than anything else | 21:37 |
| jgriffith | ttx: In other words not even sure what to log it against :( | 21:37 |
| *** asalkeld_afk is now known as asalkeld | 21:37 | |
| dolphm | https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1075630 ? | 21:37 |
| uvirtbot` | Launchpad bug 1075630 in devstack "Keystone 'invalid user token' on default devstack installation" [Undecided,New] | 21:37 |
| ttx | jgriffith: ok, when you have a bug ref, sent it my way so that I follow progress there | 21:37 |
| jgriffith | dolphm: to the rescue | 21:38 |
| ttx | Other questions on Cinder ? | 21:38 |
| dolphm | jgriffith: same issue? | 21:38 |
| jgriffith | yep, pretty much | 21:38 |
| ttx | ok cool | 21:38 |
| jgriffith | but there's all sorts of interesting details in jenkins | 21:38 |
| jgriffith | I should sync up with dolphm after this | 21:39 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:40 |
| ttx | vishy: o/ | 21:40 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/grizzly | 21:40 |
| ttx | vishy: That looks quite good... is it near-complete ? | 21:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status" | 21:40 | |
| ttx | oops lag again | 21:40 |
| vishy | ttx yeah | 21:40 |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:40 | |
| vishy | I suspect a few things might be missing | 21:40 |
| ttx | One left @ https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/grizzly/+setgoals | 21:40 |
| ttx | user-configurable-rbac is marked obsolete, can I remove it from list ? | 21:41 |
| vishy | but there is a lot in there already | 21:41 |
| vishy | yes | 21:41 |
| ttx | You should encourage assignees to set a milestone target too. | 21:41 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:41 |
| ttx | Would be great to have updated status on grizzly-hyper-v-nova-compute | 21:42 |
| ttx | About server-count-for-nova-flavors... | 21:42 |
| ttx | it's se tto grizzly-1 but not formally approved for grizzly series goal | 21:43 |
| ttx | you might want to fix it one way or another | 21:43 |
| *** gabriel has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:43 | |
| ttx | Otherwise this milestone looks in pretty good shape. | 21:43 |
| vishy | yeah just got it | 21:43 |
| ttx | Oh, and nova-v2-api-audit needs an updated status too (sdague) | 21:44 |
| ttx | vishy: Anything else ? | 21:44 |
| vishy | ttx: no. Update coming soon | 21:44 |
| sdague | ttx: yeh, sure, I just moved to grizzly-1 today, it may be tight for that, but wanted to set myself something agressive | 21:44 |
| ttx | Cool. Questions on Nova ? | 21:45 |
| ttx | sdague: just set to anoything but "unknown" which means we lost contact with the assignee | 21:45 |
| sdague | sure | 21:45 |
| sdague | set to started | 21:45 |
| ttx | sdague: thx! | 21:45 |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:45 | |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status" | 21:46 | |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: hey | 21:46 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/grizzly | 21:46 |
| gabrielhurley | hey | 21:46 |
| ttx | Looks good, is it complete from where you stand ? | 21:46 |
| gabrielhurley | it is, as far as I know | 21:47 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/grizzly-1 | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | might see one or two blueprints come out fo the quantum team | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | but that'll be at their discretion | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | G1 is coming along | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | I'll roll most of the bugs into the next milestone | 21:47 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: sure, that's ok, just need to reflect the current knowledge, which is sometimes hard to do after the summit :) | 21:47 |
| gabrielhurley | but the high priority stuff is done | 21:47 |
| ttx | Would be good to set status on define-flavor-for-project, otherwise looks on track to me | 21:48 |
| gabrielhurley | 'will do | 21:48 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: anything else ? | 21:48 |
| gabrielhurley | nope, just keep up the good work | 21:48 |
| ttx | Questions for Horizon ? | 21:48 |
| ttx | #topic Incubated projects | 21:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Incubated projects" | 21:48 | |
| ttx | Anyone to talk Ceilometer ? | 21:48 |
| eglynn_ | o/ | 21:48 |
| jd__ | o/ | 21:48 |
| ttx | here you are :) | 21:48 |
| eglynn_ | so the team is still working on distilling outputs from summit discussion into roadmap items | 21:49 |
| eglynn_ | and prioritizing according to needs/interests | 21:49 |
| ttx | Yes, I'd recommend you start working on a Grizzly plan here | 21:49 |
| ttx | Creating milestones, and targeting blueprints there | 21:49 |
| ttx | We are planning on trying to be release-managed by me for G2 ? | 21:49 |
| eglynn_ | yep, that work is in train | 21:49 |
| eglynn_ | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/EfficientMetering/RoadMap | 21:49 |
| eglynn_ | (still a WIP) | 21:50 |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 21:50 | |
| eglynn_ | plan is to get in train with the milestone releases by G-3, latest | 21:50 |
| ttx | #action ttx to look into what's missing in CI to support integrated releases | 21:50 |
| ttx | (for ceilometer) | 21:50 |
| ttx | eglynn_: anything else on your mind ? | 21:50 |
| eglynn_ | also awaiting a gerrit reboot to reflect renaming (stackforge/ceilo -> openstack/ceilo) | 21:50 |
| eglynn_ | IIUC to be batched up with the common -> oslo renaming | 21:51 |
| ttx | right, any eta on that ? | 21:51 |
| jd__ | depends on -infra I guess? | 21:51 |
| eglynn_ | not a concrete ETA as yet | 21:51 |
| ttx | sure, wondering if they gave you one | 21:51 |
| fungi | any idea who in ci you were working with on that? | 21:51 |
| *** jfriedly has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:51 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:51 | |
| ttx | fungi: jeblair methinks | 21:52 |
| eglynn_ | yep jeblair | 21:52 |
| fungi | okay, i'll ping him but he's somewhat out of pocket | 21:52 |
| ttx | eglynn_: anything else you wanted to mention ? | 21:52 |
| eglynn_ | still some unknowns we need to clarify, e.g. requirements for detailed instrumentation | 21:52 |
| eglynn_ | also I'm working on getting my hands around Synaps | 21:52 |
| eglynn_ | (a big ol' beast with some awkward dependencies) | 21:52 |
| eglynn_ | that's about it ... | 21:53 |
| ttx | Will include Heat in that slot for next week | 21:53 |
| *** arosen has quit IRC | 21:53 | |
| ttx | (since it was just accepoted for incubation as well) | 21:53 |
| ttx | #topic Other Team reports | 21:54 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Other Team reports" | 21:54 | |
| ttx | QA, Docs, CI: anyone ? | 21:54 |
| fungi | just one quick item for ci | 21:54 |
| * annegentle__ sent my updates to the mailing list | 21:54 | |
| fungi | annegentle__ can go first | 21:54 |
| ttx | annegentle: anything to add on top of your email update ? | 21:55 |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 21:55 | |
| annegentle__ | nope, go ahead fungi | 21:55 |
| fungi | okay | 21:55 |
| *** markmc has quit IRC | 21:55 | |
| fungi | mordred and jeblair just wanted me to raise visibility for the issue jgriffith was discussing above | 21:55 |
| *** gabriel has quit IRC | 21:55 | |
| fungi | basically to note that it's resulting in some nondeterminism in the devstack gate | 21:56 |
| ttx | hte keystone one, not the kernel one, right ? | 21:56 |
| fungi | right | 21:56 |
| ttx | yes, it's a high priority to fix that one | 21:56 |
| fungi | so if volume creation results in a "ERROR: n/a (HTTP 401)" it's that issue | 21:56 |
| fungi | a recheck *may* get you back on track | 21:56 |
| fungi | anyway, that was all for us as far as i know | 21:57 |
| ttx | jgriffith should ping us all if he's blocked on progress on that issue | 21:57 |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 21:57 | |
| ttx | Any other team lead with a status report ? | 21:57 |
| fungi | seems to be #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1075630 as dolphm said earlier | 21:57 |
| uvirtbot` | Launchpad bug 1075630 in devstack "Keystone 'invalid user token' on default devstack installation" [Undecided,New] | 21:57 |
| ttx | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1075630 | 21:58 |
| ttx | #info CI borked by above bug, top prio to fix | 21:58 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion" | 21:58 | |
| ttx | Anything else, anyone ? | 21:58 |
| * ttx wonders if with the addition of oslo and new incubated projects we should reorganize this meeting to have more time | 21:59 | |
| ttx | maybe have release guys participate to inclubated projects meetings rather than the other way around | 21:59 |
| ttx | it's getting harder to fit in one hour | 21:59 |
| ttx | #action ttx to look into ways to fit all projects in the release meeting | 22:00 |
| eglynn_ | good to have the incubated projects involved at the big boy's table tho' | 22:00 |
| eglynn_ | (IMO) | 22:00 |
| ttx | yeah, maybe we hsould just say the meeting lasts 75 min | 22:01 |
| eglynn_ | yep, that could work | 22:01 |
| ttx | ok well, not this time | 22:01 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 22:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 6 22:01:51 2012 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-06-21.03.html | 22:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-06-21.03.txt | 22:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2012/project.2012-11-06-21.03.log.html | 22:01 |
| notmyname | ttx: the reality is that the only person that needs the full 75 minutes is you. the independent project updates aren't as important | 22:01 |
| *** gabrielhurley has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| ttx | thanks everyone | 22:01 |
| *** Vek has left #openstack-meeting | 22:02 | |
| notmyname | ttx: a schedule for each project may allow more organized discussions, even if it all takes 75-90 minutes cumulatively | 22:02 |
| ttx | notmyname: yes, hat's true. maybe reorganize so that the common stuff is scheduled more at the start than at the end | 22:02 |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 22:03 | |
| ttx | oh, you mean, swift at 21:15 UTC etc ? | 22:03 |
| notmyname | IOW, eg, 10 minues common, 10 minutes keystone, 5 minutes swift, 20 minutes nova, etc | 22:03 |
| notmyname | ya, exactly | 22:03 |
| notmyname | and whatever works | 22:03 |
| ttx | that's a good idea. Kinda not good for me because this meeting is late, but... | 22:03 |
| notmyname | the disadvantage is being flexible over time and on different weeks depending what's going on in the project | 22:03 |
| ttx | It's still valuable that i.e. keystone PTL can raise a question during Nova's time | 22:04 |
| ttx | but that doesn't really prevent that | 22:04 |
| notmyname | agreed | 22:04 |
| ttx | I'll think a bit more about it | 22:05 |
| ttx | but we can't double the number of projects and still have the same ole meeting :) | 22:05 |
| *** patelna has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:05 | |
| notmyname | indeed | 22:06 |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 22:08 | |
| *** Mr_T has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:10 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 22:12 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:13 | |
| *** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC | 22:14 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:14 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 22:15 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:17 | |
| *** gatuus has quit IRC | 22:18 | |
| *** shardy is now known as shardy_afk | 22:18 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:20 | |
| *** heckj has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| *** tgall_foo has quit IRC | 22:24 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 22:26 | |
| *** metral has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:28 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:40 | |
| *** mtreinish has quit IRC | 22:42 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 22:46 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** samkottler is now known as samkottler|out | 22:51 | |
| *** john5223 has quit IRC | 22:57 | |
| *** Gordonz has quit IRC | 23:00 | |
| *** metral has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 23:02 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 23:09 | |
| *** littleidea has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** littleidea has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:18 | |
| *** annegentle__ has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** s0mik has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** tgall_foo has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:37 | |
| *** s0mik has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:38 | |
| *** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:40 | |
| *** mnewby_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:41 | |
| *** maurosr has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:47 | |
| *** tgall_foo has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
| *** jrodom has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:52 | |
| *** maurosr has quit IRC | 23:53 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!