| *** yamahata_ has quit IRC | 00:01 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:03 | |
| *** Nachi has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:03 | |
| *** beagles_backl8r is now known as beagles | 00:04 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 00:06 | |
| *** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting | 00:07 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 00:12 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:12 | |
| *** garyTh has quit IRC | 00:15 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 00:16 | |
| *** dkehn has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:22 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:27 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 00:36 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:38 | |
| *** hartsocks has quit IRC | 00:43 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 00:43 | |
| *** stevebaker_ has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:48 | |
| *** stevebaker has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:48 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 00:56 | |
| *** stevemar has quit IRC | 00:57 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:58 | |
| *** cody-somerville has quit IRC | 01:00 | |
| *** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:00 | |
| *** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:00 | |
| *** stevebaker has quit IRC | 01:01 | |
| *** cody-somerville_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:02 | |
| *** lifeless has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:02 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:03 | |
| *** cody-somerville_ has quit IRC | 01:03 | |
| *** cody-somerville has quit IRC | 01:03 | |
| *** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:03 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 01:07 | |
| *** pcm__ has quit IRC | 01:07 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 01:07 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
| *** litong has quit IRC | 01:08 | |
| *** stevebaker has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:09 | |
| *** zb has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:12 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 01:16 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 01:24 | |
| *** stevebaker has quit IRC | 01:28 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 01:30 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 01:31 | |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:33 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 01:36 | |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:37 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:38 | |
| *** stevebaker has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:39 | |
| *** anniec_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:40 | |
| *** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:41 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 01:41 | |
| *** anniec_ is now known as anniec | 01:41 | |
| *** Nachi has quit IRC | 01:44 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:45 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 01:46 | |
| *** terry7 has quit IRC | 01:47 | |
| *** shang_ has quit IRC | 01:57 | |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:58 | |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:07 | |
| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:08 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 02:09 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:11 | |
| *** Sukhdev has quit IRC | 02:13 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 02:16 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 02:25 | |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has quit IRC | 02:27 | |
| *** hyunsun has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:27 | |
| *** dtroyer has left #openstack-meeting | 02:35 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 02:37 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:41 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 02:45 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:45 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 02:46 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:53 | |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 02:53 | |
| *** vkmc has quit IRC | 02:57 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:59 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:09 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 03:15 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 03:18 | |
| *** sacharya has left #openstack-meeting | 03:20 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:26 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:27 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 03:40 | |
| *** mgiles has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:42 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 03:43 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:43 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:45 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 03:50 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:50 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 03:51 | |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:05 | |
| *** hyunsun has quit IRC | 04:11 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 04:13 | |
| *** yuanz has quit IRC | 04:17 | |
| *** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:21 | |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 04:23 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** martine has quit IRC | 04:28 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:31 | |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 04:34 | |
| *** anniec has quit IRC | 04:34 | |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:42 | |
| *** ewindisch has quit IRC | 04:43 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 04:45 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:45 | |
| *** johnpur has quit IRC | 04:46 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 04:47 | |
| *** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:48 | |
| *** Yada has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:48 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 04:49 | |
| *** Yada has quit IRC | 04:51 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 04:53 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:53 | |
| *** ewindisch has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:57 | |
| *** ewindisch has quit IRC | 05:00 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:04 | |
| *** mgiles has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** maoy has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 05:16 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:17 | |
| *** ladquin has quit IRC | 05:18 | |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:19 | |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:24 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:27 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:30 | |
| *** reed has quit IRC | 05:41 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:42 | |
| *** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:47 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 05:47 | |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 05:48 | |
| *** PhilDay has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:49 | |
| *** Guest46684 has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:51 | |
| *** PhilDay has quit IRC | 05:51 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 05:51 | |
| *** philday has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:52 | |
| *** philday has quit IRC | 05:53 | |
| *** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:53 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 05:53 | |
| *** PhilDay has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:54 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:54 | |
| *** topol has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:55 | |
| *** Mandell_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:57 | |
| *** topol has quit IRC | 06:00 | |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 06:00 | |
| *** kebray has quit IRC | 06:10 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 06:12 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:13 | |
| *** topol has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:20 | |
| *** topol has quit IRC | 06:25 | |
| *** cdub_ has quit IRC | 06:26 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:29 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:31 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:31 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 06:35 | |
| *** PhilDay has quit IRC | 06:35 | |
| *** flaper87 has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:41 | |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 06:41 | |
| *** gongysh has quit IRC | 06:47 | |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 06:47 | |
| *** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:50 | |
| *** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:54 | |
| *** jhenner has quit IRC | 07:11 | |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:13 | |
| *** psedlak has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:18 | |
| *** Mandell_ has quit IRC | 07:19 | |
| *** ndipanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:19 | |
| *** kirankv has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:24 | |
| *** marun has quit IRC | 07:27 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:40 | |
| *** jhenner has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:56 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:01 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 08:02 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:03 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:04 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy has quit IRC | 08:06 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:08 | |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 08:09 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:11 | |
| *** evilroots has quit IRC | 08:14 | |
| *** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:16 | |
| *** evilroots has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:26 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 08:27 | |
| *** evilroots has quit IRC | 08:34 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 08:35 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:36 | |
| *** evilroots has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:38 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:46 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:50 | |
| *** afazekas has quit IRC | 08:58 | |
| *** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:02 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy1 is now known as johnthetubaguy | 09:15 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 09:39 | |
| *** afazekas has quit IRC | 09:46 | |
| *** afazekas has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:48 | |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 09:51 | |
| *** timello has quit IRC | 09:52 | |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 09:57 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:59 | |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 10:02 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 10:05 | |
| *** timello has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:05 | |
| *** kirankv has quit IRC | 10:10 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:11 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:16 | |
| *** tomoe_ has quit IRC | 10:21 | |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 10:28 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:30 | |
| *** kiall has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:40 | |
| *** zhuadl has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:45 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:54 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:01 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:08 | |
| *** rmk has quit IRC | 11:10 | |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 11:13 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:25 | |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 11:27 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:29 | |
| *** pcm__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:43 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:44 | |
| *** chbrian has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:44 | |
| *** chbrian has quit IRC | 11:44 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:44 | |
| *** HenryG has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:47 | |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 11:55 | |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:56 | |
| *** radez_g0n3 is now known as radez | 12:03 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 12:06 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:08 | |
| *** topol has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:12 | |
| *** martine has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:16 | |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:18 | |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 12:19 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 12:19 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 12:19 | |
| *** jang has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:20 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:21 | |
| *** shengjie_ has left #openstack-meeting | 12:24 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:25 | |
| *** ijw1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:26 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 12:29 | |
| *** Guest46684 has quit IRC | 12:31 | |
| *** dhellmann is now known as dhellmann-away | 12:36 | |
| *** timello has quit IRC | 12:46 | |
| *** timello has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:47 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:51 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:57 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 12:57 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 12:59 | |
| *** matiu has quit IRC | 13:01 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:01 | |
| *** BobBall has quit IRC | 13:04 | |
| *** psedlak has quit IRC | 13:07 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 13:07 | |
| *** litong has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:14 | |
| *** zb is now known as zaneb | 13:14 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:15 | |
| *** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:16 | |
| *** tomoe_ has quit IRC | 13:16 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 13:21 | |
| *** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:21 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 13:24 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:27 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:31 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 13:32 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:35 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:37 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 13:39 | |
| *** stevemar has quit IRC | 13:40 | |
| *** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:41 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:41 | |
| *** stevemar has quit IRC | 13:44 | |
| *** stevemar has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:44 | |
| *** fnaval has quit IRC | 13:46 | |
| *** woodspa has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:46 | |
| *** PhilDay has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:48 | |
| *** woodspa has quit IRC | 13:49 | |
| *** ivasev has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:49 | |
| *** markpeek has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:50 | |
| *** zhuadl has quit IRC | 13:50 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 13:52 | |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 13:55 | |
| *** gongysh has quit IRC | 14:00 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:09 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 14:11 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:11 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:14 | |
| *** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:16 | |
| *** topol has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** maoy has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:17 | |
| *** amyt has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:18 | |
| *** ashwini has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:20 | |
| *** fnaval has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:22 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:24 | |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 14:25 | |
| *** spzala has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:26 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:32 | |
| *** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:32 | |
| *** johnpur has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:34 | |
| *** dtroyer has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:34 | |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:41 | |
| *** blamar has quit IRC | 14:46 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:47 | |
| *** blamar has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:48 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:50 | |
| *** topol has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:51 | |
| *** luis_fdez has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:55 | |
| *** jgallard has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:55 | |
| *** pnavarro has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:55 | |
| *** rerngvit has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:59 | |
| rerngvit | hello | 15:00 |
|---|---|---|
| n0ano | #startmeeting scheduler | 15:00 |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 15:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 15:00:17 2013 UTC. The chair is n0ano. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'scheduler' | 15:00 |
| garyk | hi | 15:00 |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:00 | |
| rerngvit | hi | 15:00 |
| n0ano | Show of hands, who's here for the scheduler meeting? | 15:00 |
| n0ano | o/ | 15:00 |
| garyk | ack | 15:00 |
| jgallard | \o | 15:00 |
| rerngvit | +1 | 15:00 |
| PhilDay | Phil Day | 15:00 |
| *** Mandell has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| * glikson here | 15:01 | |
| alaski | o/ | 15:01 |
| toanster | here | 15:01 |
| *** senhuang has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:01 | |
| PhilDay | I'm at a conference so may have to bail out early | 15:01 |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 15:01 | |
| senhuang | Hello! | 15:01 |
| rerngvit | hi all :) | 15:01 |
| n0ano | PhilDay, NP, I have a dentist appointment right after myself | 15:02 |
| PhilDay | Ouch | 15:02 |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:02 | |
| n0ano | :-( | 15:02 |
| n0ano | OK, let's begin | 15:02 |
| *** hanrahat has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:02 | |
| n0ano | As I said in the email agenda, I want to go through all the items at least once before we circle back for more detail on the earlier ones | 15:03 |
| n0ano | #topic whole host allocation capability | 15:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "whole host allocation capability (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:03 | |
| n0ano | I don't claim to understand this one, is there anyone here to drive this? | 15:03 |
| PhilDay | I wrote up and filed the BP on that yesterday (based on the feedback from the summit) | 15:03 |
| PhilDay | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/whole-host-allocation | 15:03 |
| *** ociuhandu is now known as ociuhandu_ | 15:04 | |
| n0ano | PhilDay, cool, is the BP sufficient or are there issues you want to bring up now | 15:04 |
| PhilDay | This isn't really a scheduler change in the same sense that the other are - its more akin to exposing host aggregates to users | 15:04 |
| alaski | I'm also interested in this one, though I don't have a lot to add to the bp right now | 15:04 |
| n0ano | we can always study the BP and come back later. | 15:04 |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 15:05 | |
| *** ociuhandu_ is now known as ociuhandu | 15:05 | |
| PhilDay | That would be fine - I'm happ[y to field questions once you've had a chance to read it - probably best done in the mailing list | 15:05 |
| PhilDay | I've asked russell to target it for H3 | 15:06 |
| johnthetubaguy | +1 | 15:06 |
| n0ano | not hearing much discussion so let's study the BP and respond on the mailing list or another IRC meeting | 15:06 |
| PhilDay | works fo rme | 15:06 |
| johnthetubaguy | +1 | 15:06 |
| alaski | sounds good. The only thing that comes to mind right now is could we also achieve it with specialized flavors | 15:06 |
| alaski | but offline is fine | 15:06 |
| PhilDay | I think its othogonal to flavors | 15:06 |
| *** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 15:07 | |
| n0ano | #topic coexistence of different schedulers | 15:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "coexistence of different schedulers (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:07 | |
| *** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:07 | |
| n0ano | so, curious about this one, how is this different from the plugin filters/weighters that we have now? | 15:07 |
| PhilDay | I think the idea is that you could have, for example, different stacks of filters for different users | 15:08 |
| rerngvit | or for different flavors | 15:09 |
| PhilDay | So if you build this on top of the whole host allocation (i.e have a filter config spefic to an aggregate) then you get another step towards private clouds within a cloud | 15:09 |
| n0ano | implication being that schedulers are a runtime selection rather than a startup configuration issue | 15:09 |
| rerngvit | I'm posting the ether pad here for reference (https://etherpad.openstack.org/HavanaMultipleSchedulers) | 15:09 |
| ogelbukh | multiple schedulers is confusing name for this feature, in my opinion | 15:10 |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 15:10 | |
| glikson | yep, the idea is to have multiple configurations of FilterScheduler, or even different drivers | 15:10 |
| senhuang | n0ano: you are absolutely right | 15:10 |
| glikson | configured for different host aggregates | 15:10 |
| *** ijw1 has quit IRC | 15:10 | |
| *** haleyb has left #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:10 | |
| senhuang | glikson: maybe we should call it dynamically loaded scheduler/filtering | 15:10 |
| n0ano | I'm concerned that this would be a `major` code change, has anyone looked at what it would take to implement this? | 15:11 |
| ogelbukh | is it possible to give admin user ability to specify filters list as a scheduler hint? | 15:11 |
| PhilDay | So do you see this as multipel schedulers running on different queues (i.e a fairly static set) or something much more dynamic ? | 15:11 |
| n0ano | also, is there really a call for this feature or are we doing something just becuase we `can` do something | 15:11 |
| glikson | well, there are multiple options to implement it.. | 15:11 |
| glikson | I guess I will can defer it to next week -- will be more ready to elaborate on options and dilemmas | 15:12 |
| glikson | n0ano: sure, there are several use-cases involving pools with different hardware and/or workloads | 15:13 |
| PhilDay | I can see a number of use cases - would like to think about it being perhaps an aggregate specific scheduler - since that seems liek a good abstraction | 15:13 |
| *** kpavel has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:13 | |
| glikson | Phil: yep | 15:13 |
| PhilDay | Should we also consider this as allowing combined bare metal & Hypervisor systems - of is bare metal moving out of Nova now ? | 15:14 |
| *** jamespage_ has quit IRC | 15:14 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:14 | |
| *** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:14 | |
| n0ano | PhilDay, I would think that bare metal would the orthogonal to this, not sure there's an impact | 15:15 |
| rerngvit | PhilDay: could you elaborate a bit more what you mean by "combined bare metal & Hypervisor"? | 15:15 |
| glikson | n0ano: I suggest to postpone the discussion to next week -- hope to have next level of design details by then | 15:15 |
| PhilDay | +1 | 15:15 |
| n0ano | OK, I think we've touched a never an everyone's interested, let's postpone discusion till we've all had a chance to study the etherpad | 15:16 |
| n0ano | clearly a good are to explore, let's just do it later | 15:16 |
| n0ano | #topic rack aware scheduling | 15:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "rack aware scheduling (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:16 | |
| *** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:17 | |
| *** BobBall has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:17 | |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 15:17 | |
| garyk | i am not sure who proposed this. in quantum we would like to propose a network proximity api | 15:17 |
| n0ano | this is another one of those - can this be handled by the current flavor / extra_specs mechanism | 15:17 |
| PhilDay | That was one of mine as well - I haven't done any more on this as I wasn't sure how it fitted in with some of the bigger scheems for defining sets of instances for scheduling | 15:17 |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 15:17 | |
| *** winston-d has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:18 | |
| senhuang | PhilDay: it could be one use case of group-scheduling | 15:18 |
| PhilDay | Not sure you can so it by flavours - you need to add information to each host about its physical / network localicty | 15:18 |
| PhilDay | Right - group-scheduling would cover it. | 15:18 |
| senhuang | PhilDay: so is it more about how to get the "rack" information from hosts? | 15:19 |
| n0ano | PhilDay, note topic 1 (extending data in host state), add the localicity to that and then use current filtering techniques on that new data | 15:19 |
| garyk | senhuang: PhilDay: does a host have metadata? if so the rack "id" could be stored and used... | 15:19 |
| PhilDay | What I was propsoign going into the summit was something pretty simple - add a "rack" property to each host, and then write a filter to exploit that | 15:19 |
| senhuang | garyk: okay. then we can add a policy for group-api that says "same-rack" | 15:20 |
| jgallard | is it possible to use availabilty zone for that? one availability zone = 1 rack (1 datacenter = multiple availability zones) | 15:20 |
| PhilDay | hosts don't really have meta today - they have capabilities but that's more of a binary (like do I have a GPU) | 15:20 |
| garyk | senhuang: yes, sounds good | 15:20 |
| PhilDay | I wouldn't want to overlay AZ | 15:20 |
| PhilDay | that has a very specific meaning | 15:20 |
| garyk | PhilDay: ok, understtod | 15:21 |
| jgallard | PhilDay, ok, thanks | 15:21 |
| PhilDay | https://etherpad.openstack.org/HavanaNovaRackAwareScheduling | 15:21 |
| n0ano | still sounds like something that can be handled by some of the proposals to make the scheduler more extensible | 15:22 |
| PhilDay | So we could still do something very simple that just covers my basic use case, but if group-scheculing is going to land in H then that would be a superset of my iodea | 15:22 |
| glikson | we are working on another proposal to extend the notion of zones to also cover things like racks | 15:22 |
| garyk | PhilDay: glikson i think that the group scheduluing can cover this. | 15:23 |
| jgallard | glikson, do you have some links on that work? | 15:23 |
| PhilDay | n0ano: agreed - I suggest we shelve for now and see how those other ideas pan out. | 15:23 |
| senhuang | garyk: PhilDay: +1 | 15:23 |
| glikson | i.e., allow hierarchy of zones, for availability or other purposes, and surface it to the user | 15:23 |
| glikson | https://etherpad.openstack.org/HavanaTopologyAwarePlacement | 15:23 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:23 | |
| n0ano | PhilDay, then we'll let you monitor the other proposals and raise a flag if they don't provide the support you're looking for | 15:23 |
| jgallard | glikson, thanks! | 15:23 |
| PhilDay | We can always revisist later if some of the bigger ideas don;t come through. I could do with havign basic rack aware scheduling by the end of H | 15:24 |
| n0ano | OK, moving on | 15:24 |
| n0ano | #topic list scheduler hints via API | 15:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "list scheduler hints via API (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:24 | |
| *** jamespage_ has quit IRC | 15:24 | |
| *** reed has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:25 | |
| n0ano | anyone care to expand? | 15:25 |
| PhilDay | Wroet up the BP for this yesterday as well: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/scheduler-hints-api | 15:25 |
| n0ano | PhilDay, busy bee yesterday :-) | 15:25 |
| PhilDay | Basically its about exposing the scheduler config to users so that they can tell which hints will be supported and which ignored (based on the config). At the moment its just a black box | 15:26 |
| PhilDay | and hints for filters not configured would be silenlty ignored. | 15:26 |
| n0ano | what exactly do you mean by `hint` | 15:26 |
| rerngvit | is this one somewhat overlap with the topology placement glikson just mention? or kind of a superset of? | 15:27 |
| alaski | I'm in favor of it. Slightly related to this I just thought it may be a good idea to be able to set policies on those hints | 15:27 |
| PhilDay | the shceduler_hints options passed into server create | 15:27 |
| PhilDay | Policies would be good - but that's anew topci I think | 15:27 |
| alaski | agreed | 15:27 |
| PhilDay | a new topic ;-( | 15:27 |
| PhilDay | (My typing is crap today) | 15:28 |
| n0ano | if that's being passed into the scheduler by the users create call wouldn't the user know this info already? | 15:28 |
| rnirmal | +1 for exposing supported hints.. n0ano it's not available right now | 15:28 |
| PhilDay | The user can't tell if the system they are takign to has that | 15:28 |
| PhilDay | filter configured or not. | 15:28 |
| n0ano | aah, the user asks for it but the system may not provide it, in that case I'm in favor | 15:29 |
| *** kebray has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:29 | |
| PhilDay | Exactly | 15:29 |
| rerngvit | like you request for a vegetarian food in a party | 15:29 |
| n0ano | although it is a hint and there's never a guaranteee that a hint will be honored | 15:29 |
| rerngvit | organizer may or may not provide it | 15:30 |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 15:30 | |
| n0ano | rerngvit, but, again, you don't know that it's not available util you ask for it and don't get it. | 15:30 |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 15:30 | |
| rerngvit | yep, there also should be a special response for this. | 15:30 |
| n0ano | by providing this API are we implicitly guranteeing that `these hints will be honored'? | 15:31 |
| senhuang | plus: you don't know whether you get it or not | 15:31 |
| PhilDay | If its an affinity hint it can be hard to tell if its eign ignored or not - you might still get what you ask for but by chance | 15:31 |
| glikson | +1 to support API to query scheduler hints | 15:31 |
| PhilDay | Most of the 'hints' are implemented as filters today, so you either get them or not | 15:31 |
| alaski | n0ano: I don't think so. But that raises the question of whether there should be another concept to encapsulate "fail if not honored" | 15:31 |
| glikson | PhilDay: have you thought how to implement it? | 15:32 |
| n0ano | alaski, indeed | 15:32 |
| PhilDay | if you want it to really be a hint then ity needs to be in the weighting function, | 15:32 |
| n0ano | PhilDay, good point, I see rampant confusion between what a filter is as opposed to a weight | 15:33 |
| senhuang | PhilDay: then you need to expose what attributes are available for weighing | 15:33 |
| PhilDay | I was thinking of having teh API rpc to the scheduler, and for each filter to have a method that returns details of its supported hints - so a simple iteration through the configured filters and weighers | 15:33 |
| glikson | PhilDay: e.g., would a driver just declare which hints it supports? | 15:33 |
| PhilDay | Since filters and weighers are sublcasses it should be fairly easy to add it | 15:33 |
| rerngvit | agree. Seems a possible implementation to me. | 15:34 |
| glikson | yep, in FilterScheduler you could potentially delegate it to individual filters/weights.. | 15:35 |
| PhilDay | Just becomes an API extension then | 15:35 |
| PhilDay | I think only the filter scheduler supports hints - I hadn't really thought about any of the others | 15:35 |
| *** hartsocks has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:35 | |
| glikson | PhilDay: whould it "live" under "servers", as an action? | 15:36 |
| n0ano | haven't looked at the issue but sounds like hints need to be extend to the weights also | 15:36 |
| PhilDay | Yep - I think both filters and weights would need to support the "decribe_hints()" method, and teh scheduler could iterate over both lists | 15:36 |
| rerngvit | I think so. It should be in both filters and weights. | 15:37 |
| senhuang | +1 | 15:37 |
| n0ano | assuming this is some sort of new, inherited class that should be fairly simple | 15:37 |
| n0ano | OK, my take is everyone seems to agree this is a good idea, mainly it's implementation details | 15:38 |
| PhilDay | glikson: not sure about a server action - isn;t that for actions on a specific instance. ? This is more of a system capability thing - a bit like listing suported flavours | 15:38 |
| PhilDay | I asked Russell to mark the BP for H2 | 15:38 |
| rerngvit | #agree | 15:38 |
| glikson | I wonder whether this has anything to do with "help" command in CLI.. essentially this is related to invocation syntax? | 15:39 |
| PhilDay | Should be exposed by teh CLI fo rsure | 15:39 |
| PhilDay | moving on ? | 15:40 |
| n0ano | PhilDay, took the words out of my keyboard :-) | 15:40 |
| n0ano | #topic host directory service | 15:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "host directory service (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:40 | |
| n0ano | I have no clue what this one is | 15:41 |
| russellb | PhilDay: i'll look over these blueprints and get them updated today | 15:41 |
| garyk | i am sorry but i need to leave. hopefully the groups/ensembles will be discussed. senhuang and glikson have the details. thanks | 15:42 |
| n0ano | garyk, tnx, unlikely we'll get to those today, should cover them next week tho | 15:42 |
| *** rmk has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
| n0ano | no one want to talk about host directory service? | 15:43 |
| n0ano | OK, moving on | 15:43 |
| n0ano | #topic future of the scheduler | 15:44 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "future of the scheduler (Meeting topic: scheduler)" | 15:44 | |
| alaski | This is mine | 15:44 |
| n0ano | alaski, I think this is your issue, yes? | 15:44 |
| alaski | The start of it is https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/query-scheduler | 15:44 |
| alaski | Essentially modifying the scheduler to return hosts that can be scheduled to, rather than pass requests on itself | 15:44 |
| senhuang | alaski: i like this idea | 15:45 |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:45 | |
| PhilDay | Is this related to the work that Josh from Y! was talking about - sort of orchestartion within conductor ? | 15:45 |
| senhuang | it clarifies the workflow and separate the complexity of work flow management from resource placement | 15:45 |
| alaski | PhilDay: it is a part of that | 15:45 |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:46 | |
| n0ano | given that I see the scheduler's job a finding appropriate hosts I don't care who actually sends the requests to those hosts, I have no problems with this idea | 15:46 |
| glikson | alaski: so, essentially you will have only "select_hosts" in scheduler rpc API, and all the schedule_* will go to conductor, or something like that? | 15:46 |
| alaski | The reason I called this "future of scheduler" is that long term I would like to discuss how we can handle cross service scheduling, but I think there's pleny of work before that | 15:47 |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 15:47 | |
| alaski | glikson: yes, most likely conductor | 15:47 |
| senhuang | alaski: we have a proposal covered part of that | 15:47 |
| n0ano | glikson, hopefully, whoever `called` the scheduler is the one who `does` the scheduling | 15:47 |
| senhuang | alaski: part of the cross service scheduling | 15:47 |
| johnthetubaguy | it will help the orchestration work | 15:47 |
| johnthetubaguy | too | 15:47 |
| glikson | +1 | 15:47 |
| PhilDay | So the scheduler basically becomes an information service on suitable hosts, | 15:48 |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 15:48 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:48 | |
| alaski | PhilDay: that's how I see it, and I think that eventually leads into cross service stuff | 15:49 |
| senhuang | some orchestrator/work flow manager asks/calls the scheduler for the suitable hosts for creation/resizing | 15:49 |
| senhuang | alaski: +1. this should be helpful for the unified resource placement blue print | 15:49 |
| alaski | Cool. It should really simplify retries, orchestration, and unify some code paths I think | 15:50 |
| *** dabo has quit IRC | 15:50 | |
| rerngvit | I have one question though. If the actual scheduling moves somewhere else other than the scheduler. How can the scheduler return an answer then? | 15:50 |
| PhilDay | I don't have a problem with the concept - I guess it needs that new central state management / orcestration bit to land first or at the same time | 15:50 |
| rerngvit | it would requires a scheduler to query other services for states, is this correct? or I misunderstand something? | 15:51 |
| alaski | PhilDay: the initial idea is to put this into conductor, and start building that up for state management | 15:51 |
| johnthetubaguy | we already have a similar code path to this in the live-migrate retry logic inside the scheduler, I was thinking of moving to conductor, its kinda similar | 15:51 |
| johnthetubaguy | alaski: +1 | 15:51 |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:51 | |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 15:51 | |
| *** dabo has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:51 | |
| alaski | rerngvit: it doesn't really change how the scheduler works now, except that instead of then making the rpc call to the compute it returns that to conductor to make the call | 15:52 |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:52 | |
| n0ano | rerngvit, not sure why the scheduler would have to query something, already the hosts send info to the scheduler, that wouldn't change. | 15:52 |
| PhilDay | Is there a general BP to cover creating the workflow piece in conductor (or heat or where ever its going) | 15:53 |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:53 | |
| senhuang | yep. it is something queries the scheduler for the selected host. | 15:53 |
| rerngvit | ok | 15:53 |
| senhuang | PhilDay: Joshua from Y! has a blueprint on structured state management | 15:53 |
| glikson | PhilDay: yes, Josh posted on the mailing list | 15:53 |
| johnthetubaguy | he restarted the orchestration meeting | 15:53 |
| PhilDay | seems like this needs to be part of that work then - I can't see it working on its own | 15:54 |
| alaski | PhilDay: I'm working with Josh a bit, he'll definitely be a part of it | 15:54 |
| johnthetubaguy | its related, for sure, I think the pull to conductor can be separate | 15:54 |
| glikson | I think the two are complimentary really.. you can either move things to conductor as is and then reoganize, or the other way around.. | 15:54 |
| johnthetubaguy | its the api -> conductor bit, then call out to scheduler and compute as required | 15:55 |
| PhilDay | I have to dash - but on #9 I wrote that BP up as well https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/network-bandwidth-entitlement | 15:55 |
| glikson | what might be a bit more tricky (for both) is the option when there is no real nova-conductor service.. | 15:55 |
| n0ano | well, I have to dash also, let's close here and pick up next week (moving to a new house, hopefully I'll have internet access then) | 15:56 |
| PhilDay | We have some code for this, but it needs a bit of work to re-base it etc. It's pretty much the peer of the cup_entitilement BP | 15:56 |
| PhilDay | Ok, Bye | 15:56 |
| senhuang | next time, i suggest we pick up from #9 | 15:56 |
| *** koolhead17 has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:56 | |
| johnthetubaguy | glikson: indeed, it means the api gets a bit heavy from the local calls, but maybe thats acceptable | 15:56 |
| PhilDay | good meeting guys | 15:56 |
| rerngvit | ok see you then. | 15:56 |
| n0ano | tnx everyone | 15:56 |
| n0ano | #endmeeting | 15:56 |
| *** PhilDay has quit IRC | 15:56 | |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 15:56 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 15:56:39 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:56 |
| *** rerngvit has left #openstack-meeting | 15:56 | |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-05-07-15.00.html | 15:56 |
| jgallard | thanks | 15:56 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-05-07-15.00.txt | 15:56 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/scheduler/2013/scheduler.2013-05-07-15.00.log.html | 15:56 |
| glikson | I wonder whether there will be conucrrency issues with long-running operations (like live migrations) | 15:57 |
| *** winston-d has quit IRC | 15:57 | |
| *** jgallard has quit IRC | 15:58 | |
| alaski | sorry, ducked out real quick. | 15:59 |
| johnthetubaguy | its kinda finished I guess, we can always chat on openstack-nova | 15:59 |
| alaski | glikson: I'm looking at running the localmode conductor in a greenthread from the api side when the service isn't available. | 15:59 |
| alaski | johnthetubaguy: fair point | 16:00 |
| primeministerp | ociuhandu: hi tavi | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: hi pedro | 16:01 |
| ociuhandu | primeministerp: hello | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | i know alex is on his way to the office | 16:01 |
| ociuhandu | hi all | 16:01 |
| pnavarro | hi all ! | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | we'll start in a couple minutes | 16:01 |
| primeministerp | luis_fdez: hi luis | 16:01 |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:01 | |
| primeministerp | and poof | 16:02 |
| alexpilotti | hey there | 16:02 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: perfect timing | 16:02 |
| primeministerp | #startmeeting hyper-v | 16:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 16:02:31 2013 UTC. The chair is primeministerp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 16:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 16:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: hyper-v)" | 16:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'hyper_v' | 16:02 |
| primeministerp | so let's begin | 16:02 |
| *** senhuang has quit IRC | 16:02 | |
| primeministerp | I guess a good place to start is next steps post summit | 16:03 |
| primeministerp | where we currently are in that process | 16:03 |
| primeministerp | what is priority after the design session | 16:03 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: would you like to start? | 16:04 |
| *** kpavel_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:04 | |
| alexpilotti | sure | 16:04 |
| primeministerp | kpavel_: hi there | 16:04 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: or is there something else we should address prior? | 16:05 |
| alexpilotti | quite a lot coming for Havana | 16:05 |
| primeministerp | let's start at the top priority | 16:05 |
| primeministerp | wmiv2 | 16:05 |
| alexpilotti | we got a lot of requests about how to handle clustering to begin with | 16:05 |
| alexpilotti | most Windows workloads are based on the assumption that the HA is handled by the OS | 16:06 |
| primeministerp | from a "hyper-v cluster" as a compute node perspective | 16:06 |
| *** kpavel has quit IRC | 16:06 | |
| *** kpavel_ is now known as kpavel | 16:06 | |
| alexpilotti | we need to support a Hyper-V windows cluster as a compute node | 16:06 |
| alexpilotti | we can use an approach similar to what vsphere took | 16:07 |
| primeministerp | but use the hyper-v/cluster api's as the access point | 16:07 |
| primeministerp | to that functionality | 16:07 |
| alexpilotti | yep | 16:07 |
| primeministerp | just to confirm | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | teh idea is that the cluster is seen as a single compute node | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | but Nova will be able to get data about each individual host | 16:08 |
| primeministerp | and the best part is hyper-v clustering features ship w/ the free hyper-v server | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | yep | 16:08 |
| alexpilotti | the only thing is that we'll need a DC | 16:09 |
| primeministerp | we already do need one for live migration | 16:09 |
| alexpilotti | in order to have a 100% free solution | 16:09 |
| primeministerp | then samba4 | 16:09 |
| alexpilotti | we can try to see how Samba4 works | 16:09 |
| alexpilotti | yep :-) | 16:09 |
| alexpilotti | I tried w a beta a few months ago | 16:10 |
| primeministerp | I have some people to reach out to if we have issues | 16:10 |
| alexpilotti | and I had issues with Kerberos delegation | 16:10 |
| primeministerp | from the samba side of the things | 16:10 |
| alexpilotti | that'd be great | 16:10 |
| alexpilotti | on the API perspective | 16:10 |
| primeministerp | well on the samba perspective | 16:10 |
| primeministerp | and on the api perspective | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | Windows has some higher level Powershell API | 16:11 |
| primeministerp | and i can dig internally to see | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | sorry, I was starting a new sentence :-) | 16:11 |
| primeministerp | what is available for the cluster api interfaces | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | so we have Powershell and COM low level interfaces | 16:11 |
| primeministerp | and documentation | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | MS is suggesting Powershell, but it's a useless overhead for us | 16:11 |
| alexpilotti | so I'd go with COM | 16:12 |
| alexpilotti | depending on the level of PINTA, to say so :-) | 16:12 |
| * primeministerp silently agrees | 16:12 | |
| primeministerp | we don't need additional overhead | 16:12 |
| alexpilotti | We still have to target this one, but Havana-2 is a good target IMO | 16:12 |
| alexpilotti | BTW Havana-1 is behind the corner (ca 1 month) | 16:13 |
| primeministerp | wtf | 16:13 |
| alexpilotti | well, next month is June :-) | 16:13 |
| primeministerp | yes it is | 16:13 |
| alexpilotti | let me see if I find the deadline scheduling | 16:13 |
| alexpilotti | so I expect Havana-2 in July | 16:14 |
| alexpilotti | and Havana-3 in August | 16:14 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:14 | |
| alexpilotti | lst year we started working end July / begin August | 16:14 |
| alexpilotti | in time for Folsom-3 | 16:14 |
| alexpilotti | so it makes sense (unfortunately)! :-) | 16:14 |
| primeministerp | I'm not sure but i thought I heard something about releases shifting dates slightly | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | but I coudld be wrong | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | anyway | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | so | 16:15 |
| alexpilotti | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Havana_Release_Schedule | 16:15 |
| alexpilotti | here it is | 16:15 |
| primeministerp | thx | 16:16 |
| alexpilotti | even worse, May 30th | 16:16 |
| primeministerp | heh | 16:16 |
| alexpilotti | but the good news is that the final one is after the summer ;-) | 16:16 |
| alexpilotti | which means that the Gods decided not to **** up our summer this time :-D | 16:16 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: and we're not trying to get code resurrected ;) | 16:17 |
| primeministerp | so moving on | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | lol ;-) | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | ok | 16:17 |
| primeministerp | past cluster | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | V2 | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | WMI | 16:17 |
| primeministerp | yes | 16:17 |
| primeministerp | that's the big one | 16:17 |
| alexpilotti | the Grizzly refactoring gives us a great start | 16:18 |
| alexpilotti | all the code is well layered | 16:18 |
| alexpilotti | meaning that we have to add the V2 "utils" classes | 16:18 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 16:19 | |
| alexpilotti | and a factory that will allocate the right one based on the OS | 16:19 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: to deal w/ backward compatibality | 16:19 |
| alexpilotti | V1 on 2008R2 (legacy, soon unsupported) | 16:19 |
| alexpilotti | and V2 for 2012 and above | 16:19 |
| alexpilotti | the testing will be way easier, as all the rest of the code will be untouched | 16:20 |
| primeministerp | *nod* | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | anyway it'll still be a long work | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | that blocks the next step (VHDX stupport) | 16:20 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: we need to followup on win-next | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | cool | 16:20 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: we'll i | 16:20 |
| alexpilotti | I'd schedule WMIV2 for Havana-1 | 16:21 |
| alexpilotti | in order to unlock the rest | 16:21 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: sounds good to me | 16:21 |
| alexpilotti | Questions or should we go on? | 16:21 |
| *** hanrahat has quit IRC | 16:21 | |
| primeministerp | sounds good | 16:21 |
| primeministerp | move on | 16:21 |
| pnavarro | +1 | 16:22 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: quantum | 16:22 |
| pnavarro | NVGRE ! NVGRE ! | 16:22 |
| alexpilotti | There's something more than NVGRE coming ;-) | 16:23 |
| alexpilotti | but we have to wait a few days to get a final confirmation | 16:23 |
| primeministerp | let's just say we're finalizing details | 16:23 |
| alexpilotti | NVGRE is still in the list, but priority would be shifted quite a bit down to say so | 16:23 |
| primeministerp | yes | 16:24 |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 16:24 | |
| alexpilotti | on QUantum we need anyway the Agent support in our plugin | 16:24 |
| primeministerp | so let's hold till next week on that discussion so we can confirm/deny | 16:24 |
| alexpilotti | I mean, the new Agent API. I was trying to sneak them in for G3 | 16:24 |
| *** ayoung has quit IRC | 16:25 | |
| alexpilotti | but Quantum was frozen already | 16:25 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: H3 | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | G3 | 16:25 |
| primeministerp | o | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | in march | 16:25 |
| primeministerp | gotcha | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | so the work is mostly done | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | I just need to retarget the patchset | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | there are a gazillion BP on Quantum | 16:25 |
| alexpilotti | one of them is related to merge all the agents in one | 16:26 |
| primeministerp | i would imagine | 16:26 |
| alexpilotti | *the plugins, sorry | 16:26 |
| alexpilotti | most plugins are very similar: OVS, LinuxBridge, Hyper-V, etc | 16:26 |
| alexpilotti | so a refactoring makes definitely sense | 16:26 |
| primeministerp | and from release perspective? | 16:27 |
| primeministerp | on refactor work | 16:27 |
| alexpilotti | I suggest to postpone the Quantum discussion to the next meeting, hopefully we'll have more details to disclose | 16:28 |
| alexpilotti | what do you think primeministerp? | 16:28 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: yes | 16:28 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: quantum/networking discussion until we get appropriate confirmation | 16:29 |
| primeministerp | er postpone | 16:29 |
| primeministerp | are you including the VHDX work in the WMIV2 migration? | 16:30 |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 16:30 | |
| *** davidhadas has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
| alexpilotti | sure | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:30 |
| alexpilotti | ops, no :-) | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | I didn't think it was | 16:30 |
| primeministerp | wmi v2 first | 16:30 |
| alexpilotti | WMIV2 "unlocks" the VHDX badge :-) | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | vhdx after that is complete | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | yes | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | +200 mana | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | for hyper-v | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | ;) | 16:31 |
| alexpilotti | so right after we are done with V2 VHDX support is fairly fast to achieve | 16:31 |
| alexpilotti | so H2 is definitely a good target | 16:31 |
| primeministerp | good | 16:32 |
| *** marun has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:32 | |
| primeministerp | fibre channel support? | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | next? | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | sure | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | if i can have san and hba's | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | FC dependes largely on HP's lab stuff | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | cool | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | so I have both in my lab already | 16:32 |
| alexpilotti | as soon as we have a lab set up we can start developing | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | I just need to connect | 16:32 |
| primeministerp | it together | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | I can see if i can cobble it so we have something | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | to start | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | if interested | 16:33 |
| alexpilotti | it's gonna be a bigger PINTA compared with iSCSI | 16:33 |
| *** hemnafk is now known as hemna | 16:33 | |
| primeministerp | i would imagine | 16:33 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: anything to add on FC? | 16:33 |
| primeministerp | well | 16:34 |
| primeministerp | priority over that work would possibly be AD/Keystone work | 16:34 |
| primeministerp | ? | 16:35 |
| primeministerp | sorry that was a question | 16:35 |
| *** davidhadas has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:36 | |
| *** PeTe___ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:37 | |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: we'll continue then | 16:37 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: think people are nodding off | 16:37 |
| primeministerp | ;) | 16:37 |
| alexpilotti | oki, sorry about that | 16:38 |
| alexpilotti | :-) | 16:38 |
| primeministerp | np | 16:38 |
| primeministerp | so take aways | 16:38 |
| alexpilotti | AD / keystone sure | 16:38 |
| primeministerp | let's focus on the H1 | 16:38 |
| primeministerp | milestones | 16:38 |
| alexpilotti | I'd like to hear Cern opinion | 16:38 |
| primeministerp | luis_fdez: ping | 16:38 |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:39 | |
| primeministerp | it's late over there | 16:39 |
| primeministerp | let's finish up, then | 16:39 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: ^ | 16:39 |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| alexpilotti | oki, let's move on | 16:39 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: so that's a good start | 16:40 |
| alexpilotti | We're going to set up the BPs | 16:40 |
| primeministerp | yes | 16:40 |
| alexpilotti | there's quite a lot of work as usual | 16:40 |
| primeministerp | as usual | 16:40 |
| alexpilotti | ah, there's that annoying bug on cinder-volume to fix | 16:40 |
| primeministerp | pnavarro: ^ | 16:40 |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 16:40 | |
| alexpilotti | the eventlet stuff | 16:40 |
| alexpilotti | I got a guy writing me about that | 16:41 |
| primeministerp | can you cc me on the thread | 16:41 |
| primeministerp | if possible | 16:41 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: would you like to sync about it and also talk about the Havana stuff that you'd like to work on? | 16:41 |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 16:42 | |
| alexpilotti | ok, no ping from pnavarro :-) | 16:44 |
| pnavarro | sorry al | 16:44 |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:44 | |
| pnavarro | alex | 16:44 |
| pnavarro | I was on phone | 16:44 |
| alexpilotti | np :-) | 16:44 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: ^^ | 16:44 |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 16:44 | |
| pnavarro | so, about cinder, yes, there are some fixes to do | 16:45 |
| pnavarro | and the tests should be refactored to follow the other projects | 16:46 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: +1 | 16:46 |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:46 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 16:46 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:46 | |
| alexpilotti | is there any specific area you'd like to work on for Havana? | 16:46 |
| pnavarro | I'd like to add the missing features copy image to volume, volume to image | 16:47 |
| alexpilotti | cool | 16:47 |
| alexpilotti | ociuhandu told me that image to volume works already | 16:47 |
| alexpilotti | as far as I remember | 16:47 |
| pnavarro | mmm | 16:47 |
| alexpilotti | but I have to recheck this | 16:48 |
| pnavarro | in the driver there are NotImplement | 16:48 |
| pnavarro | I can help in nova gaps, for example, ephemeral | 16:48 |
| alexpilotti | cool, that's great | 16:48 |
| ociuhandu | alexpilotti: have to check that, was a bit ago and have to go through the things to refresh the short memory buffer | 16:49 |
| *** kpavel has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| alexpilotti | the list of new features / BPs we started here is still uncomplete | 16:49 |
| *** jhenner has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| alexpilotti | ociuhandu: could be that it was simply related to the Linux driver on devstack? | 16:49 |
| pnavarro | Fibre channel would be cool too | 16:49 |
| alexpilotti | ociuhandu: and not to the WIndows one and my braincells just mixed them up? | 16:50 |
| alexpilotti | pnavarro: cool! | 16:50 |
| alexpilotti | since we are running late my 2c are on continuing the list of BPs next week | 16:51 |
| alexpilotti | as we still have quite a lot of stuff in the list from the design summit | 16:51 |
| alexpilotti | and from what we discussed today there's definitely enough to work for a while :-) | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | sounds good | 16:52 |
| alexpilotti | but if you guys prefer we can go on now | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | alexpilotti: we have a meeting in a few mintues | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | er minutes | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | that we should just get over | 16:52 |
| alexpilotti | yep | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | perfect | 16:52 |
| primeministerp | then let's continue this discussion next week | 16:52 |
| alexpilotti | cool | 16:52 |
| *** afazekas has quit IRC | 16:53 | |
| primeministerp | ok | 16:53 |
| *** Nachi has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:53 | |
| primeministerp | closing meeting | 16:53 |
| primeministerp | thanks everyone | 16:54 |
| primeministerp | #endmeeting | 16:54 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 16:54 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 16:54:04 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:54 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-05-07-16.02.html | 16:54 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-05-07-16.02.txt | 16:54 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/hyper_v/2013/hyper_v.2013-05-07-16.02.log.html | 16:54 |
| ociuhandu | alexpilotti: i tested it on linux, afaik | 16:54 |
| alexpilotti | ociuhandu: ok, makes sense | 16:54 |
| *** rnirmal_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:56 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| *** Haneef has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:58 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** rnirmal_ is now known as rnirmal | 16:59 | |
| *** mrunge has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** terry7 has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:59 | |
| *** garyk has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:00 | |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 17:03 | |
| *** chuck_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:07 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** glikson has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:08 | |
| *** martine_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:09 | |
| *** kirankv has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:10 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 17:10 | |
| *** pnavarro has quit IRC | 17:10 | |
| *** martine has quit IRC | 17:11 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:11 | |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:16 | |
| *** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:19 | |
| *** jog0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:22 | |
| *** ayoung has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:22 | |
| *** llu_linux has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:22 | |
| *** llu has quit IRC | 17:23 | |
| *** mkollaro has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:26 | |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 17:28 | |
| *** chuck_ has quit IRC | 17:34 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:44 | |
| *** saurabhs has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:44 | |
| *** kirankv has quit IRC | 17:50 | |
| *** dwaite has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:51 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy has quit IRC | 17:52 | |
| *** Nachi has quit IRC | 17:52 | |
| *** hub_cap has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:53 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:54 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:54 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 17:58 | |
| *** Nachi has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:58 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:58 | |
| *** mrunge has quit IRC | 17:59 | |
| stevemar | ahoy | 18:00 |
| ayoung | KEYSTONERS! | 18:00 |
| spzala | Hello! | 18:00 |
| stevemar | thats us! | 18:00 |
| gyee | \o | 18:00 |
| dolphm | #startmeeting keystone | 18:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 18:00:52 2013 UTC. The chair is dolphm. 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 changes topic to " (Meeting topic: keystone)" | 18:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'keystone' | 18:00 |
| topol | Hello | 18:01 |
| *** bknudson has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| *** fabio has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:01 | |
| dolphm | #topic High priority bugs or immediate issues? | 18:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "High priority bugs or immediate issues? (Meeting topic: keystone)" | 18:01 | |
| dolphm | (other than stable/grizzly stuff, which is on the agenda for last) | 18:01 |
| ayoung | dolphm, Well, the gate is now fixed | 18:02 |
| dolphm | ayoung: bknudson: thanks! ^ | 18:02 |
| ayoung | IPv6 and the memcached fixes are in | 18:02 |
| dolphm | ayoung: what was the memcache fix? | 18:02 |
| *** jbartels_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, dolphm blackout one version of it | 18:02 |
| *** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| dolphm | oh the 1.51 thing | 18:02 |
| ayoung | dolphm, the fix was done by putting a later version onto the mirrors | 18:02 |
| *** jog0_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:02 | |
| *** jog0 has quit IRC | 18:02 | |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 18:02 | |
| *** jog0_ is now known as jog0 | 18:02 | |
| bknudson | hi | 18:02 |
| *** alexpilotti_ is now known as alexpilotti | 18:02 | |
| *** dwaite has quit IRC | 18:03 | |
| *** atiwari has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:03 | |
| *** imsplitbit has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:04 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, the only high bug I was aware of was the LDAP domain issue | 18:04 |
| fabio | Anvil4Me~! | 18:04 |
| *** dwaite has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:04 | |
| simo | fabio: nice pw :) | 18:04 |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 18:04 | |
| gyee | ha | 18:04 |
| fabio | sorry wrong window :-) | 18:05 |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 18:05 | |
| dolphm | ayoung: cool | 18:05 |
| ayoung | dolphm, this one is the one we are going with, right? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28197/ | 18:05 |
| dolphm | i'd like the ldappers to decide that | 18:05 |
| dolphm | but that's on the agenda in a minute | 18:05 |
| ayoung | cool | 18:05 |
| *** ivasev has quit IRC | 18:05 | |
| dolphm | or we can just skip to it.. | 18:05 |
| dolphm | #topic stable/grizzly 2013.1.1 release and the default domain in LDAP | 18:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "stable/grizzly 2013.1.1 release and the default domain in LDAP (Meeting topic: keystone)" | 18:06 | |
| dolphm | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2013-May/000611.html | 18:06 |
| dolphm | stable/grizzly is happening this week | 18:06 |
| ayoung | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting | 18:06 |
| dolphm | i asked that keystone 2013.1.1 be held until we get a default domain fix together for ldap | 18:06 |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:06 | |
| dolphm | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1168726 | 18:06 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 1168726 in keystone/grizzly "default_domain_id breaks the ability to map keystone to ldap" [Critical,In progress] | 18:07 |
| ayoung | dolphm, I actually mentioned that to apevec as well | 18:07 |
| dolphm | so, *a* fix needs to merge ASAP if we're going to do a backport of anything at all | 18:07 |
| topol | dolphm, whats the review number | 18:07 |
| ayoung | topol, gyee please look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28197/ | 18:07 |
| bknudson | I'll review it this afternoon. | 18:07 |
| dolphm | and to re-iterate, my proposed solution is backporting a feature-cut (multi-domain support for ldap) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28197/ | 18:07 |
| dolphm | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28197/ | 18:08 |
| ayoung | dolphm, I endorce this approach | 18:08 |
| ayoung | endorse | 18:08 |
| topol | dolphm, I endorse as well | 18:08 |
| dolphm | topol: sooner the better | 18:08 |
| bknudson | I was able to work around it earlier, just added a domain entry | 18:08 |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 18:08 | |
| topol | I will review right after this meeting | 18:08 |
| ayoung | bknudson, yes, but it breaks other things that way | 18:08 |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:08 | |
| dolphm | bknudson: yeah, jcannava confirmed you could work around it post-config as well | 18:08 |
| ayoung | bknudson, if LDAP is read only, there is no field available for domain | 18:09 |
| bknudson | I thought it was businessCategory | 18:09 |
| gyee | :) | 18:09 |
| topol | yes, but breaks our read only | 18:09 |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:09 | |
| topol | bknudson, mixing two different things | 18:09 |
| topol | its not the businessCategory mapping; its the need for a default domain or even horizon pukes | 18:10 |
| ayoung | dolphm, yeah, I don't think your fix is going to be sufficient | 18:10 |
| ayoung | we need to remove businessCategory and the domain field or we still have a broken LDAP | 18:10 |
| ayoung | was it spzala 's fix that did that? | 18:10 |
| dolphm | ayoung: explain? | 18:11 |
| dolphm | ayoung: from config? | 18:11 |
| ayoung | dolphm, no, the user and projects objects | 18:11 |
| topol | Can't you put the domain mapping to businessCategory on the ignore list? | 18:11 |
| *** kpavel has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:11 | |
| dolphm | user_domain_id_attribute? | 18:11 |
| *** nachi_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:11 | |
| *** nachi__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:11 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:11 | |
| topol | for groups, etc | 18:12 |
| ayoung | dolphm, right | 18:12 |
| bknudson | so every user in LDAP should be in the default domain | 18:12 |
| ayoung | I thought I saw a patch that removed it | 18:12 |
| ayoung | bknudson, for now, yes | 18:12 |
| topol | ayoung, why cant that just be fixed via config? | 18:12 |
| bknudson | looks like dolphm's patch does that. | 18:12 |
| bknudson | e.g., get_user() calls self._set_default_domain() on it. | 18:13 |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:13 | |
| bknudson | so if you were using businessCategory for your domain id, it'd get wiped out. | 18:14 |
| ayoung | bknudson, yes | 18:15 |
| dolphm | wiped out or ignored? | 18:15 |
| *** PeTe____ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:15 | |
| bknudson | _set_default_domain is going to overwrite whatever domain_id is in the ref and replace it with the default domain_id. | 18:15 |
| topol | bknudosn, but what happens with user_domain_id_attribute? | 18:16 |
| bknudson | I don't see user_domain_id being wiped out | 18:17 |
| dolphm | bknudson: that's how the function behaves, but i don't think it will be overriding anything in the real world? | 18:17 |
| topol | exactly | 18:17 |
| ayoung | topol, OK, I think you are right. We cannot safely remove it. We need to set attribute_ignore on it | 18:17 |
| topol | ayoung. yes, exactly | 18:17 |
| topol | and that can be done via config | 18:17 |
| bknudson | if domain_id attribute is ignored, does Keystone set user_domain_id to the default domain_id? | 18:18 |
| *** PeTe___ has quit IRC | 18:18 | |
| ayoung | topol, so dolphm's patch should probably check for that value instead of blanket removing the domain. | 18:18 |
| topol | in ldap in wont set it at all | 18:18 |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:18 | |
| * ayoung not happy with domain_attribute, but oh well | 18:19 | |
| bknudson | how is a client going to know what the default domain id is? | 18:19 |
| dolphm | hmm, i need to update docstrings | 18:19 |
| *** adjohn_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:19 | |
| dolphm | erm, so create_user, for example, should be validating that the default domain was specified, and then remove the domain_id attribute before handing off to ldap | 18:20 |
| dolphm | i'm not doing that second part atm | 18:20 |
| ayoung | dolphm, it can be done another way | 18:20 |
| ayoung | there is a field called attrbute_ignore. | 18:20 |
| ayoung | I'll link | 18:20 |
| dolphm | ayoung: why not fix it now? | 18:20 |
| topol | thats in the config | 18:21 |
| bknudson | I'd think you want to send the domain_id, and let ldap ignore it or not. | 18:21 |
| topol | and thats how we handle attributes that may or may not map to ldap depending on the schema | 18:21 |
| ayoung | https://github.com/openstack/keystone/blob/master/keystone/common/ldap/core.py#L251 | 18:21 |
| dolphm | if you've already deployed against ldap/ad with a real domain object, you shouldn't have to change config to use 2013.1.1 | 18:21 |
| topol | bknudson, AGREED! | 18:21 |
| dolphm | if that's the case, then this is unbackportable | 18:21 |
| ayoung | dolphm, what if some grizzly early adopter started using LDAP with domains | 18:22 |
| topol | dolphm, two cases, one they let the domain map two busiensscategory or their equivalent or they use ignore | 18:22 |
| dolphm | ayoung: that's the case i'm referring to which i'd like to handle gracefully | 18:22 |
| topol | if you keep the ability to map to businesscatgory or equivalent you shouldnt break anyone | 18:23 |
| *** adjohn has quit IRC | 18:23 | |
| topol | and then others can use the attribute ignore if they have readonly and it doesnt map | 18:23 |
| bknudson | and don't wipe out the domain_id if LDAP returns it. | 18:23 |
| dolphm | topol: two users: one has already deployed keystone 2013.1 against ldap/ad and created a domain object, and the other is on folsom, both are migrating to 2013.1.1 | 18:23 |
| dolphm | and read-only users are currently stuck on folsom | 18:24 |
| *** PeTe____ has quit IRC | 18:24 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, so if default_domain is set, and 'user_attribute_ignore' is set... | 18:24 |
| dolphm | dosaboy: default_domain what? | 18:24 |
| topol | so you create a default domain, correct? | 18:24 |
| bknudson | it's not created, it's virtual | 18:24 |
| topol | that has an id attribute, correct? | 18:25 |
| bknudson | the virtual domain has it's id set to the default_domain_id | 18:25 |
| topol | K, so worst case that value gets shoved into businessCategory or equivalent (if they mapped it) | 18:26 |
| topol | or they can choose to add to the ignore list for a read only ldap with no domain equivalent | 18:26 |
| bknudson | I think that's what you'd want. If they ignored it then it doesn't go anywhere. | 18:26 |
| topol | make sense? | 18:26 |
| bknudson | so this patch seems to be doing "too much" | 18:26 |
| topol | and we dont end up taking away the businessCategory mapping if someone is already using it | 18:27 |
| *** dwaite has quit IRC | 18:27 | |
| *** PeTe__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:27 | |
| ayoung | topol, it needs to be added to the ignore list for all objects | 18:28 |
| ayoung | user, group, project at least... | 18:28 |
| bknudson | ayoung: you mean by default? | 18:29 |
| *** epende has quit IRC | 18:29 | |
| dolphm | i'm still lost on why we shouldn't just be stripping the domain_id attribute from all refs on create() | 18:29 |
| topol | dolphm, you were scared someone was using it. you will break them | 18:29 |
| ayoung | every single one of the assignments, too | 18:30 |
| *** dwaite has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:30 | |
| topol | or you can take it away and see if anyone screams... | 18:30 |
| *** llu_linux has quit IRC | 18:30 | |
| ayoung | bknudson, yes, by default | 18:30 |
| ayoung | bknudson, one of the probles is that we don't have an upgrade script for LDAP, so we have no way of knowing. | 18:31 |
| *** llu_linux has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:31 | |
| bknudson | ayoung: that sounds like a better solution to me. | 18:31 |
| ayoung | So it needs to be well documented | 18:31 |
| ayoung | bknudson, we need a read only default domain as well, I think | 18:31 |
| ayoung | and I don;'t know what will happen if we just attribute ignore it | 18:32 |
| bknudson | I like the read-only default domain. | 18:32 |
| ayoung | can the daomin field be blank? | 18:32 |
| ayoung | I suspect not | 18:32 |
| dolphm | ayoung: where? | 18:32 |
| topol | should we just pull it now and hope no one became dependent on it? | 18:32 |
| ayoung | topol, have you tested this? | 18:32 |
| *** anniec has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:32 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 18:32 | |
| topol | I have not tested dolphms patch and not tested making it ignore | 18:32 |
| ayoung | topol, if you are going to suggest that we "just" do the attribute ignore, you need to, at a minimum, confirm it works. I don;t think it will | 18:33 |
| dolphm | topol: not if we can't handle it gracefully, but i don't understand why we would be breaking them by ignoring it (unless they've already deployed multi-domain, you mean?) | 18:33 |
| topol | dolphm, that was the fear. Im not sure its realistic | 18:33 |
| ayoung | dolphm, of the two cases, I think breaking LDAP for 99% of the users is a worse sin than breaking the early adopter that is using LDA domains | 18:34 |
| dolphm | we need to ping the operators list on this | 18:34 |
| ayoung | but we a damned either way | 18:34 |
| topol | I rather do death or glory, pull it completely out and feel comfortable we know the code is solid. | 18:34 |
| topol | ayoung, I agree | 18:34 |
| dolphm | ayoung: unfortunately i agree | 18:34 |
| dolphm | ayoung: that's a good way to word it, i might steal that | 18:35 |
| topol | cause frankly its the direction we are heading one domain per ldap so we break them now or break them later when they really are dependent on it | 18:35 |
| bknudson | The bug was reported by spzala... but I don't think that's because a customer complained. | 18:35 |
| spzala | no | 18:35 |
| topol | we found it doing a poc | 18:35 |
| spzala | i found it via helping internal team | 18:35 |
| ayoung | actually, I also reported it, as I found it broken when doing a basic LDAP install for the FreeIPA presentation | 18:36 |
| bknudson | ok, just making sure that we had a good reason to backport to grizzly. | 18:36 |
| ayoung | If we leave the domain attribute there, it needs to be completely ignorable | 18:36 |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 18:36 | |
| topol | ayoung, what scary is the combinations we will have to debug if we leave it as an ignorable option or not... | 18:37 |
| *** shang has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:37 | |
| dolphm | ayoung: can you be more specific? "there" and "ignorable" | 18:37 |
| ayoung | topol, agreed. I am in favor of yanking it whole hog | 18:37 |
| bknudson | isn't it already ignorable? | 18:37 |
| ayoung | bknudson, I doubt it | 18:37 |
| topol | we end up having to support two yucky options for a long time | 18:37 |
| ayoung | bknudson, ignored just means not persisted to the DB | 18:37 |
| topol | ie. not put into ldap | 18:37 |
| ayoung | but if the code depends on that value, we have to do something nasty like populate it from config if the LDAP server is not providing it. HOrrible option | 18:38 |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 18:38 | |
| ayoung | it needs to go | 18:38 |
| topol | if we get shot either way I rather be shot by the .00001% that already depend on multiple domains for an ldap | 18:38 |
| bknudson | we already do that for domain_id in identity v2. | 18:38 |
| ayoung | I don;t think we have a choice | 18:38 |
| ayoung | bknudson, will that work for V3? | 18:38 |
| bknudson | This seems pretty similar | 18:38 |
| * ayoung doubts it, but would like someone to test | 18:39 | |
| topol | I agree with ayoung. If we pull it now we have maybe one person yell at us | 18:39 |
| ayoung | JOe Savak | 18:39 |
| topol | We wait a year we could really get stuck | 18:39 |
| simo | you should not hardcode LDAP queries, and just have defaults that can be changed and replacement variables | 18:40 |
| simo | then a good default configuration taht defines the stuff the way you want it for default | 18:40 |
| simo | look at postfix support for LDAP if you need inspiration | 18:40 |
| topol | ayoung, problem with Joe is he hates us now a little or hates us later (when fully dependent on it) a ton | 18:41 |
| ayoung | simo, agreed, but there are only limits to what we can do right now | 18:41 |
| simo | ayoung: right now you need a sane if simpler code | 18:41 |
| ayoung | the domain support was not well thought out in the context of LDAP, and needs to be rolled back. | 18:42 |
| topol | big picture is we dont want to support multiple domains in a single ldap. We either break the bad news to Joe now or later. But either way he will be upset | 18:42 |
| simo | topol: I think you should not make that decision but for the short term it certainly is better to have less options than have broken ones | 18:42 |
| bknudson | I'm sure Joe isn't impressed by how multiple domains is implemented today. | 18:43 |
| *** ladquin has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:43 | |
| ayoung | topol, eventually, we can do it via multiple subtrees, just not today | 18:43 |
| *** novas0x2a|laptop has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:43 | |
| ayoung | OK, dolphm what do we need to do to make this happen, besides rewrite the patch? | 18:43 |
| topol | simo, problem is right now it really is broken. Need some time to do it right | 18:43 |
| topol | ayoung, agreed | 18:43 |
| ayoung | topol, are you going to complete the rewrite? | 18:44 |
| dolphm | ayoung: i'm not sure i understand the changes i'd need to make, so i'd prefer someone else to volunteer to pick it up? | 18:44 |
| ayoung | and by you, I mean spzala, of course | 18:44 |
| topol | ayoung, rewrite of dolphs patch? | 18:44 |
| dolphm | or i need a mean code review to get me going | 18:44 |
| dwaite | my opinion - it would be better to have the default LDAP integration be as simple and maintainable as possible, even if that means additional functionality plugged in via contributed code | 18:44 |
| ayoung | topol, either that or continue on with spzala 's but removing the domains attribute as well as making sure the domain API is not broken for LDAP | 18:45 |
| topol | sahdev will help dolphm in any way he wants | 18:45 |
| dolphm | i'm not sure why jsavak would care ahead of havana | 18:45 |
| spzala | spzala: topol, yes | 18:45 |
| ayoung | want to #action that? | 18:46 |
| topol | sahdev likes dolphs approach | 18:46 |
| dolphm | then there's no #action | 18:46 |
| spzala | I like dolph's approach. as far as I know, domain support for ldap, wasn't complete....so for example, when you create user with domain_id attribute, there was no domain created and user was added to that domain. So how would it break anything? | 18:46 |
| ayoung | No | 18:47 |
| ayoung | that is not sufficient | 18:47 |
| ayoung | necessary yes | 18:47 |
| gyee | like that, if it never works, then its not a bug :) | 18:47 |
| ayoung | but we need to make sure that if the domain attribute remains, it can be ignored | 18:47 |
| dolphm | ayoung: be careful about backportability | 18:47 |
| dolphm | i'd like to just ignore it 100% | 18:47 |
| bknudson | who decides backportability? | 18:48 |
| ayoung | dolphm, someone needs to confirm it works. | 18:48 |
| dolphm | stable maintenance team | 18:48 |
| topol | dolphm, was your code on a path to ignore it? | 18:48 |
| ayoung | I doubt that is the case | 18:48 |
| bknudson | I've seen reviews in stable where they just say the change is too bit. | 18:48 |
| bknudson | too big. | 18:48 |
| dolphm | bknudson: +1 | 18:48 |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 18:49 | |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 18:49 | |
| bknudson | I think they would reject dolphm's patch, but I'm just guessing. | 18:49 |
| ayoung | I think we have a broken impl, even with dolph's patch | 18:49 |
| ayoung | suspect | 18:49 |
| dolphm | bknudson: i wouldn't be surprised, but stakeholders need to beg either way | 18:49 |
| bknudson | probably broken even without dolphm's patch, too. | 18:50 |
| ayoung | I'll confirm | 18:50 |
| dolphm | ayoung: can you propose a follow up fix? | 18:50 |
| topol | sahdev's original pathc was much smaller | 18:50 |
| bknudson | what was the original patch? | 18:50 |
| topol | wasnt pretty but small and got the job done | 18:50 |
| bknudson | is this the one to add domain with keystone-manage? | 18:50 |
| spzala | topol: my patch was to return a default domain (virtual one) if one is not created | 18:50 |
| ayoung | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/27364/ | 18:51 |
| *** ryanpetr_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:51 | |
| spzala | ayoung: thanks | 18:51 |
| bknudson | it failed jenkins so no one looked at it. | 18:51 |
| ayoung | spzala, what does that do if there is no attribute available to map to the domain id? | 18:51 |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:52 | |
| topol | bknudson, that was a jenkins bug I believe | 18:52 |
| spzala | ayoung: the patch was on providing our conceptual domain | 18:52 |
| spzala | bknudson: yes, that was due to 'token' bug | 18:53 |
| spzala | that failed jenkins for many patches | 18:53 |
| topol | what if sahdev ran his patch and did a fullr egression with domain_id_atrribute being ignored? | 18:53 |
| dolphm | so, 8 minutes left... we need a strong consensus to backport anything here... if we don't have a consensus, i'd recommend that we leave stable/grizzly broken and think about how to move stable/folsom deployments to havana, or even publish a "fixed" driver outside of the openstack release cycle that those users can pick up | 18:54 |
| *** koolhead17 has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| *** ryanpetrello has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| ayoung | dolphm, I say to let spzala take it and run with it | 18:54 |
| ayoung | and I will be involved on the approach | 18:55 |
| spzala | ayoung: go with my patch? with ignore attribute? | 18:55 |
| ayoung | spzala, yes plus you need to set the attribute to something that doesn exist. busineesssCatagory might not even be there on the back end | 18:55 |
| topol | ayoung doesnt exist is guarenteed to break. I dont understand | 18:56 |
| ayoung | dolphm, we'll let you know shortly if this is going to work | 18:56 |
| ayoung | topol, then we need to go further...lets just agree to work on it for now. | 18:56 |
| spzala | ayoung: thanks. hmmm... I didn't get it either | 18:56 |
| bknudson | I think we're at least headed to not backporting this for the stable/grizzly 2013.1.1 | 18:56 |
| dolphm | i'd also suggest considering splitting the ldap driver into drivers that serve more specific use cases, so serving one specific use case is much less likely to break others moving forward | 18:57 |
| topol | ayoung, I just dont understand what you mean | 18:57 |
| simo | dolphm: as part of https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/MessageSecurity I need a key server and I am starting with building one in keystone, I have a couple of q.s about that, you think there is time ? | 18:57 |
| ayoung | topol, that is fine, I can explain later...we have 3 minutes left in the meeting | 18:57 |
| bknudson | a read-only LDAP driver would be nice. | 18:57 |
| morganfainberg | dolphm: pluggable LDAP drivers? | 18:57 |
| dolphm | simo: yes, i have an opinion... contribute to https://github.com/cloudkeep/barbican | 18:58 |
| bknudson | morganfainberg: the LDAP driver is a plugin. | 18:58 |
| simo | dolphm: unrelated | 18:58 |
| morganfainberg | bknudson: oh right. ugh. i came into this a bit late, brain is not 100%, sorry. | 18:58 |
| morganfainberg | 100% firing yet* | 18:58 |
| dolphm | morganfainberg: multiple ldap drivers | 18:58 |
| morganfainberg | dolphm: right, makes sense. | 18:58 |
| dolphm | like ldap.ReadOnlyDriver, etc | 18:59 |
| ayoung | simo, dolphm lets move this discussion to #openstack-dev. We are not going to finish it here and now | 18:59 |
| topol | sahdev will investigate and will try fulll regression with domain_id_atrtribute ignored and will report back. patch will be small. and then others folks call whether it meets backporting guidleines | 18:59 |
| simo | dolphm: but if you feel strongly I can see | 18:59 |
| *** PeTe__ has quit IRC | 18:59 | |
| dolphm | #endmeeting | 18:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 18:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 18:59:13 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-05-07-18.00.html | 18:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-05-07-18.00.txt | 18:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2013/keystone.2013-05-07-18.00.log.html | 18:59 |
| dolphm | #success | 18:59 |
| clarkb | o/ | 18:59 |
| * fungi takes a bow | 19:00 | |
| *** zaro has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| *** PeTeT has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| jeblair | any other infra people? | 19:00 |
| *** bknudson has left #openstack-meeting | 19:00 | |
| *** fabio has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| jeblair | mordred: there's a topic on the agenda that is dear to you... | 19:00 |
| clarkb | I really need to learn to read the agenda first... | 19:00 |
| jeblair | anyone should feel free to write it too. :) | 19:01 |
| zaro | yo! | 19:01 |
| *** jlk has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| jlk | o/ | 19:01 |
| *** olaph has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:01 | |
| *** ijw has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| jeblair | #startmeeting infra | 19:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 19:02:09 2013 UTC. The chair is jeblair. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 19:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 19:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:02 | |
| olaph | o/ | 19:02 |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'infra' | 19:02 |
| jeblair | #topic bugs | 19:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "bugs (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:02 | |
| jeblair | (i'm going to abuse my position as chair to insert a topic not currently on the agenda) | 19:03 |
| fungi | abuse away | 19:03 |
| jeblair | this is a PSA to remind people to use launchpad bugs for infra tasks | 19:03 |
| jeblair | i think we were a bit lax about that last cycle (all of us, me too) | 19:03 |
| clarkb | we were. ++ to pleia for forcing us to do bug days | 19:04 |
| jeblair | especially as we're trying it easier for others to get involved, i think keeping up with bug status is important | 19:04 |
| jeblair | yes, much thanks to pleia for that; we'd be in a much worse position otherwise | 19:04 |
| jlk | +1 to that | 19:04 |
| jlk | us new folks have to know where to find work that needs to be done | 19:04 |
| fungi | i couldn't agree more. definitely going to strive to improve on that as my new cycle resolution | 19:04 |
| *** atiwari has quit IRC | 19:05 | |
| jeblair | so anyway, please take a minute and make sure that things you're working on have bugs assigned to you, and things you aren't working on don't. :) | 19:05 |
| jeblair | btw, i think we have started doing a better job with low-hanging-fruit tags | 19:05 |
| anteaya | o/ | 19:06 |
| jeblair | so hopefully that will be an effective way for new people to pick up fairly independent tasks | 19:06 |
| *** danwent has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| jeblair | any other thoughts on that? | 19:06 |
| clarkb | I think we should try and make the bugday thing frequent and scheduled in advance | 19:06 |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:06 | |
| jlk | oh something that is also missing | 19:06 |
| fungi | seconded | 19:06 |
| jlk | a document to outline proper bug workflow | 19:07 |
| jlk | maybe that exists somewhere? | 19:07 |
| jeblair | clarkb: +1; how often? line up with milestones? | 19:07 |
| jlk | I just took a guess at what to do | 19:07 |
| *** sandywalsh has quit IRC | 19:07 | |
| clarkb | jeblair: I was thinking once a month. lining up with milestones might be hard as we end up being very busy around milestone time it seems like | 19:07 |
| jeblair | jlk: no, but i think i need to write a 'how to contribute to openstack-infra' doc | 19:07 |
| jeblair | jlk: i should assign a bug to myself for that. :) | 19:08 |
| fungi | lining up between milestones ;) | 19:08 |
| clarkb | but any schedule that is consistent and doesn't allow us to put it off would be good | 19:08 |
| clarkb | and maybe we cycle responsibility for driving it so that pleia doesn't have to do it each time | 19:08 |
| spzala | bknudson: yes, if it exist then use it.. if not, then use virtual default domain | 19:08 |
| spzala | sorry, wrong chat box | 19:09 |
| jeblair | clarkb: want to mock up a calendar? | 19:09 |
| clarkb | jeblair: sure. I will submit a bug for it too :P | 19:09 |
| clarkb | #action clarkb to mock up infra bugday calendar | 19:09 |
| mordred | o/ | 19:10 |
| jeblair | jlk: basically, feel free to assign a bug to yourself when you decide to start working on something | 19:10 |
| jeblair | #topic actions from last meeting | 19:10 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "actions from last meeting (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:10 | |
| jeblair | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-04-30-19.03.html | 19:10 |
| jlk | jeblair: that's what I assumed. | 19:11 |
| jeblair | mordred: mordred set up per-provider apt mirrors (incl cloud archive) and magic puppet config to use them ? | 19:11 |
| jeblair | mordred: maybe you should just open a bug for that and let us know when there's something to start testing | 19:11 |
| mordred | jeblair: yes. I will do this | 19:12 |
| jeblair | clarkb: clarkb to ping markmc and sdague about move to testr | 19:12 |
| clarkb | I have not done that yet | 19:12 |
| jeblair | #action clarkb to ping markmc and sdague about move to testr | 19:12 |
| jeblair | i assume that's still a good idea. :) | 19:12 |
| clarkb | it is | 19:12 |
| clarkb | and it should be a higher priority of mine to get things in before milestone 1 if possible | 19:13 |
| clarkb | mordred did bring it up in the project meeting iirc | 19:13 |
| mordred | yeah. people are receptive to it | 19:13 |
| *** ryanpetr_ has quit IRC | 19:13 | |
| mordred | I think on my tdl is "open a bug about migrating everything and set up the per-project bug tasks" | 19:13 |
| jeblair | #topic oneiric server migrations | 19:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "oneiric server migrations (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:14 | |
| jeblair | so we moved lists and eavesdrop | 19:14 |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul|away | 19:14 | |
| *** vipul|away is now known as vipul | 19:14 | |
| jeblair | the continued avalanche of emails to os-dev seems to indicate that went okay | 19:14 |
| jeblair | and meetbot is answering hails so | 19:14 |
| jeblair | i guess that's that? | 19:15 |
| clarkb | we need to shutdown/delete the old servers at some point. Once we have done that the task is complete | 19:15 |
| clarkb | jeblair: not quite | 19:15 |
| fungi | a resounding success | 19:15 |
| clarkb | we need to delete the old servers (unless you already did that) and mirror26 needs to be swapped out for a centos slave | 19:15 |
| *** ryanpetrello has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:15 | |
| jeblair | reed: have you logged into the new lists.o.o? | 19:15 |
| fungi | i can take mirror26 as an action item | 19:16 |
| jeblair | reed: if not, let us know when you do so and if you have any objections to deleting the old server. | 19:16 |
| fungi | unless you wanted it, clarkb | 19:16 |
| clarkb | fungi: go for it | 19:16 |
| reed | jeblair, yes | 19:16 |
| fungi | #action fungi open a bug about replacing mirror26 and assign it to himself | 19:16 |
| reed | system restart required | 19:16 |
| jeblair | reed: ? | 19:16 |
| reed | just logged in, *** System restart required *** | 19:17 |
| jeblair | oh. the issue. :) | 19:17 |
| jeblair | i believe it actually was recently rebooted. | 19:17 |
| clarkb | it was rebooted on saturday before we updated DNS | 19:17 |
| clarkb | I guess that means that more updates have come in since then | 19:17 |
| jeblair | reed: anything missing from the move? or can we delete the old server? | 19:17 |
| * fungi is pretty sure our devstack slaves are the only servers we have which don't say "restart required" every time you log in | 19:18 | |
| *** stevemar has quit IRC | 19:18 | |
| reed | jeblair, how should I know if anything is missing? did anybody complain? | 19:18 |
| jeblair | reed: no, i think we have the archives and the lists seem to be working, so i don't see a reason | 19:19 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:19 | |
| jeblair | reed: but we didn't sync homedirs (i don't think) | 19:19 |
| reed | alright then, I don't think I have anything in the old server there anyway | 19:19 |
| jeblair | reed: so if your bitcoin wallet is on that server you should copy it. :) | 19:19 |
| clarkb | jeblair: I did not sync homedirs | 19:19 |
| reed | oh, my wallet! | 19:19 |
| mordred | jeblair already stole all of my bitcoins | 19:19 |
| jeblair | #action jeblair delete old lists and eavesdrop | 19:20 |
| reed | one of the cloud expense management systems allows you to request bitcoins for payments | 19:20 |
| *** sandywalsh has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:20 | |
| jeblair | we should charge bitcoins for rechecks | 19:20 |
| clarkb | ha | 19:20 |
| fungi | we should charge bugfixes for rechecks | 19:20 |
| jeblair | #topic jenkins slave operating systems | 19:20 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "jenkins slave operating systems (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:21 | |
| jeblair | my notes in the wiki say: current idea: test master and stable branches on latest lts+cloud archive at time of initial development | 19:21 |
| jeblair | and: open question: what to do with havana (currently testing on quantal -- "I" release would test on precise?) | 19:21 |
| mordred | there's an idea about having the ci system generate a bitcoin for each build, and then embed build id information into the bitcoin... | 19:21 |
| mordred | oh good. this topic again. my favorite :) | 19:21 |
| *** garyk has quit IRC | 19:22 | |
| clarkb | jeblair: I have thought about it a bit over the last week and I think that testing havana on quantal then "I" on precise is silly | 19:22 |
| jeblair | clarkb: yes, that sounds silly to me too. | 19:22 |
| *** mkollaro has quit IRC | 19:22 | |
| clarkb | it opens us to potential problems when we open I for dev | 19:22 |
| clarkb | and we may as well sink the cost now before quantal and precise have time to diverage | 19:23 |
| jeblair | so if we're going to stick with the plan of lts+cloud archive, then i think we should roll back our slaves to precise asap. | 19:23 |
| *** Nachi has quit IRC | 19:23 | |
| fungi | and the thought is that we'll be able to test the "j" release on the next lts? | 19:23 |
| clarkb | fungi: yes | 19:24 |
| mordred | lts+cloud archive ++ | 19:24 |
| mordred | at least until it causes some unforeseen problem | 19:24 |
| fungi | makes sense. i can spin up a new farm of precise slaves then. most of the old ones were rackspace legacy and needed rebuilding anyway | 19:24 |
| mordred | I believe zul and Daviey indicated they didn't think tracking depends in that order would be a problem | 19:25 |
| *** dwaite has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| clarkb | jeblair: I assume we want to run it by the TC first? | 19:25 |
| clarkb | but I agree that sooner is better than later | 19:25 |
| fungi | the tc agenda is probably long since closed for today's meeting. do we need to see about getting something in for next week with them? | 19:25 |
| mordred | honestly, I don't the TC will want to be bothered with it (gut feeling, based on previous times I've asked things) | 19:26 |
| jeblair | yes, why don't we do it, and just let them know | 19:26 |
| mordred | it doesn't change much in terms of developer experience, since we're still hacking on pypi | 19:26 |
| jlk | don't make it a question | 19:26 |
| fungi | fair enough | 19:26 |
| jlk | make it a "hey we're doing this thing, thought you'd like to know" | 19:26 |
| jeblair | if they feel strongly about it, we can certainly open the discussion (and i would _love_ new ideas about how to solve the problem. :) | 19:26 |
| jeblair | mordred: you want to be the messenger? | 19:27 |
| mordred | jeblair: sure | 19:27 |
| mordred | I believe we'll be talking soon | 19:27 |
| jeblair | #action mordred inform TC of current testing plans | 19:27 |
| jeblair | #agreed drop quantal slaves in favor of precise+cloud archive | 19:28 |
| fungi | #action fungi open bug about spinning up new precise slaves, then do it | 19:28 |
| jeblair | any baremetal updates this week? | 19:28 |
| mordred | not to my knowledge | 19:28 |
| jeblair | #topic open discussion | 19:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: infra)" | 19:29 | |
| fungi | oh, while we're talking about slave servers, rackspace says the packet loss on mirror27 is due to another customer on that compute node | 19:29 |
| jeblair | fungi: ! | 19:29 |
| mordred | fwiw, I'm almost done screwing with hacking to add support for per-project local checks | 19:29 |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul|away | 19:29 | |
| mordred | as a result, I'd like to say "pep8 is a terrible code base" | 19:29 |
| clarkb | fungi: we should DoS them in return :P | 19:29 |
| fungi | they offered to migrate us to another compute node, but it will involve downtime. should i just build another instead? | 19:29 |
| jeblair | fungi: want to spin up a replacement mirror27? istr that we have had long-running problems with that one? | 19:29 |
| anteaya | alias opix="open and fix" #usage I'll opix a bug for that | 19:29 |
| fungi | heh | 19:30 |
| *** mrodden has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:30 | |
| *** Haneef has quit IRC | 19:30 | |
| jlk | that's the cloud way right? problem server? spin up a new one! | 19:30 |
| jlk | (or 10) | 19:30 |
| jeblair | mordred: i agree. :) | 19:30 |
| fungi | yeah, i'll just do replacements for both mirrors in that case | 19:30 |
| jeblair | fungi: +1 | 19:30 |
| clarkb | do we need to spend more time troubleshooting static.o.o problems/ | 19:30 |
| fungi | oh? | 19:31 |
| clarkb | sounds like we were happy calling it a network issue | 19:31 |
| fungi | oh, the ipv6 ssh thing? | 19:31 |
| clarkb | are we still happy with that as the most recent pypi.o.o failure? | 19:31 |
| fungi | ahh, that, yes | 19:31 |
| clarkb | fungi: no pip couldn't fetch 5 packages from static.o.o the other day | 19:31 |
| fungi | right | 19:31 |
| jeblair | clarkb: i just re-ran the logstash query with no additional hits | 19:31 |
| fungi | that's what prompted me to open the ticket. i strongly suspect it was the packet loss getting worse than usual | 19:32 |
| clarkb | fungi: I see | 19:32 |
| fungi | i'd seen it off and on in the past, but never to the point of impacting tests (afaik) | 19:32 |
| mordred | so - possibly a can of worms - but based off of "jlk | that's the cloud way right? problem server? spin up a new one!" | 19:32 |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 19:32 | |
| jeblair | fungi: though i believe the mirror packet loss is mirror27 <-> static, wheras the test timeouts were slave <-> static... | 19:33 |
| mordred | should we spend _any_ time thinking about ways we can make some of our longer-lived services more cloud-y? | 19:33 |
| mordred | for easier "oh, just add another mirror to the pool and kill the ugly one" like our slaves are | 19:33 |
| fungi | mmm, right. i keep forgetting static is what actually serves the mirrors | 19:33 |
| clarkb | mordred: are you going to make heat work for us? | 19:34 |
| fungi | so then no, that was not necessarily related | 19:34 |
| clarkb | because I would be onboard with that :) | 19:34 |
| jlk | mordred: fyi we're struggling with that internally too, w/ our openstack control stuff in cloud, treating them more "cloudy" whatever that means. | 19:34 |
| mordred | jlk: yeah, I mean - it's easier for services that are actually intended for it - like our slave pool | 19:35 |
| mordred | otoh - jenkins, you know? | 19:35 |
| jlk | yup | 19:35 |
| jeblair | mordred: as they present problems, sure, but not necessarily go fixing things that aren't broke. | 19:35 |
| jlk | yeah, this are harder questions | 19:35 |
| mordred | jeblair: good point | 19:35 |
| jlk | jeblair: +1 | 19:35 |
| jeblair | mordred: we are making jenkins more cloudy -- zuul/gearman... | 19:35 |
| jlk | does gearman have an easy way to promote to master? | 19:35 |
| * mordred used floating ip's on hp cloud the other day to support creating/deleting the same thing over and over again while testing - but having the dns point to the floating ip | 19:36 | |
| jeblair | jlk: no, gearman and zuul will be (co-located) SPOFs | 19:36 |
| mordred | jlk: gearman doesn't have a master/slave concept | 19:36 |
| clarkb | mordred: yeah I intend on trying floating ips at some point | 19:36 |
| mordred | clarkb: it worked VERY well and made me happy | 19:36 |
| * ttx waves | 19:36 | |
| mordred | jeblair: doesn't gearman have support for multi-master operation-ish something? | 19:36 |
| *** redthrux has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:36 | |
| *** jcru has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:36 | |
| jlk | gear man job server(s) | 19:36 |
| clarkb | mordred: I think it does, but if zuul is already a spof... | 19:37 |
| mordred | ttx: I am tasked with communicating a change in our jenkins slave strategy to the TC - do I need an agenda item? | 19:37 |
| mordred | clarkb: good point | 19:37 |
| jeblair | mordred, jlk: yeah, actually you can just use multiple gearman masters | 19:37 |
| jeblair | mordred, jlk: and have all the clients and workers talk to all of the masters | 19:37 |
| jlk | so yes, you can have multiple in a active/active mod | 19:37 |
| mordred | so once gearman is in, then our only spofs will be gerrit/zuul | 19:37 |
| jlk | but as stated, doesn't solve zuul | 19:37 |
| jeblair | mordred, jlk: however, we'll probably just run one on the zuul server. because zuul spof. | 19:37 |
| mordred | yeah | 19:37 |
| ttx | mordred: you can probably use the open discussion area at the end. If it's more significant should be posted to -dev and linked to -tc to get a proper topic on the agenda | 19:37 |
| ttx | (of next week)Ã | 19:38 |
| *** danwent has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:38 | |
| mordred | ttx: it's not. I don't think anyone will actually care of have an opinion - but information is good | 19:38 |
| *** grapex has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:38 | |
| ttx | mordred: will try to give you one minute at the end -- busy agenda | 19:38 |
| anteaya | jeblair: can I take a turn? | 19:39 |
| *** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:39 | |
| *** matiu has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:39 | |
| jeblair | anteaya: the floor is yours | 19:39 |
| anteaya | thanks | 19:39 |
| anteaya | sorry I haven't been around much lately, figuring out the new job and all | 19:40 |
| *** markmcclain has left #openstack-meeting | 19:40 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:40 | |
| anteaya | hoping to get back to the things I was working on like the openstackwatch url patch | 19:40 |
| anteaya | but if something I said I would do is important, pluck if from my hands and carry on | 19:40 |
| anteaya | and thanks | 19:40 |
| jeblair | anteaya: thank you, and i hope the new job is going well. | 19:41 |
| anteaya | :D thank jeblair it is | 19:41 |
| anteaya | like most new jobs I have to get in there and do stuff for a while to figure out what I should be doing | 19:41 |
| anteaya | getting there though | 19:42 |
| jeblair | anteaya: we do need to sync up with you about donating devstack nodes. should i email someone? | 19:42 |
| anteaya | hmmm, I was hoping I would have them by now | 19:43 |
| anteaya | when I was in Montreal last week I met with all the people I thought I needed to meet with | 19:43 |
| anteaya | and was under the impression there were no impediments | 19:43 |
| anteaya | thought I would have the account by now | 19:43 |
| anteaya | you are welcome to email the thread I started to inquire | 19:43 |
| anteaya | though it will probably be me that replies | 19:44 |
| jeblair | anteaya: ok, will do. and if you need us to sign up with a jenkins@openstack.org email address or something, we can do that. | 19:44 |
| anteaya | let's do that, let's use the official channels and see what happens | 19:44 |
| anteaya | I don't think so, I got the -infra core emails from mordred last week | 19:44 |
| anteaya | so I don't think I need more emails | 19:44 |
| *** markmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:45 | |
| anteaya | email the thread, I'll forward it around, maybe that will help things | 19:45 |
| anteaya | and thanks | 19:45 |
| jeblair | thank you | 19:45 |
| jeblair | i'm continuing to hack away at zuul+gearman | 19:45 |
| anteaya | fun times | 19:46 |
| jeblair | right before this meeting, i had 5 of it's functional tests working | 19:46 |
| fungi | oh, on the centos py26 unit test front, dprince indicated yesterday that he thought finalizing the remaining nova stable backports by thursday was doable (when oneiric's support expires) | 19:46 |
| fungi | dprince, still the case? | 19:46 |
| jeblair | i'm hoping i can have a patchset that passes tests soon. | 19:46 |
| clarkb | jeblair: nice | 19:46 |
| anteaya | yay for passing tests | 19:46 |
| clarkb | I have a series of changes up that makes the jenkins log pusher stuff for logstash more properly daemon like | 19:47 |
| zaro | i'm figuring out how to integrate WIP with gerrit 2.6 configs. | 19:47 |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| clarkb | I think that what I currently have is enough to start transitioning back to importing more logs and working to normalize the log formats. But I will probably push that down the stack while I sort out testr | 19:48 |
| dprince | fungi: for grizzly we need the one branch in and we are set. | 19:48 |
| fungi | dprince: any hope for folsom? | 19:48 |
| dprince | fungi: for folsom I think centos6 may be a lost cause. | 19:48 |
| fungi | ugh | 19:48 |
| jeblair | clarkb: what are you doing with testr? | 19:48 |
| fungi | 'twould be sad if we could test stable/folsom for everything except nova on centos | 19:49 |
| jeblair | dprince, fungi: hrm, that means we have no supported python2.6 test for folsom nova | 19:49 |
| dprince | fungi: it looks like it could be several things (more than 2 or 3) that would need to get backported to fix all that stuff. | 19:49 |
| clarkb | jeblair: motivating people like sdague and markmc to push everyone else along :) | 19:49 |
| fungi | leaves us maintaining special nova-folsom test slaves running some other os as of yet undetermined | 19:49 |
| clarkb | jeblair: I don't intend on doing much implementation myself this time around | 19:49 |
| jeblair | clarkb: +1 | 19:50 |
| *** beraldo has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:50 | |
| sdague | oh no, what did I do wrong? :) | 19:50 |
| clarkb | sdague: nothing :) | 19:50 |
| dprince | jeblair: the centos work can be done. but I'm not convinced it is worth the effort. | 19:50 |
| markmc | jeblair, I'm fine with dropping 2.6 testing on stable/folsom - there should be pretty much nothing happening there now | 19:50 |
| fungi | i'll start to look into debian slaves for nova/folsom unit tests i guess? | 19:51 |
| jeblair | options for testing nova on python2.6 on folsom: a) backport fixes and test on centos; b) drop tests; c) use debian | 19:51 |
| markmc | (b) or we'll get (a) done somehow IMHO | 19:51 |
| mordred | I saw b. folsom came out before we made the current distro policy | 19:52 |
| fungi | oh, i prefer markmc's suggestion in that case. less work for me ;) | 19:52 |
| mordred | s/saw/say/ | 19:52 |
| clarkb | oh so I don't forget. | 19:52 |
| jeblair | okay. (b) is a one line change to zuul's config | 19:52 |
| clarkb | #action clarkb to get hpcloud az3 sorted out | 19:52 |
| *** adjohn_ has quit IRC | 19:52 | |
| * jlk has to drop off | 19:53 | |
| jeblair | #agreed drop python2.6 testing for nova on folsom | 19:53 |
| jeblair | jlk: thanks! | 19:53 |
| * mordred shoots folsom/python2.6 in the facehole | 19:53 | |
| fungi | #action fungi add change to disable nova py26 tests for folsom | 19:53 |
| fungi | i'll drop that on top of my oneiric->centos change and we can merge them together | 19:53 |
| *** shardy has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:54 | |
| jeblair | fungi: cool. oh, sorry, i think it's 2 lines. | 19:54 |
| fungi | jeblair: i'll find the extra electrons somewhere | 19:54 |
| jeblair | anything else? | 19:54 |
| *** datsun180b has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:55 | |
| *** SlickNik has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:55 | |
| olaph | hubcap | 19:56 |
| fungi | a merry tuesday to all! (excepting those for whom it may already be wednesday) | 19:56 |
| jeblair | thanks everyone! | 19:56 |
| jeblair | #endmeeting | 19:56 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 19:56 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 19:56:42 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:56 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-05-07-19.02.html | 19:56 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-05-07-19.02.txt | 19:56 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2013/infra.2013-05-07-19.02.log.html | 19:56 |
| *** robertmyers has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:57 | |
| *** beraldo has left #openstack-meeting | 19:59 | |
| vishy | hi! | 20:00 |
| mikal | Hello | 20:00 |
| ttx | Who is around for the TC meeting ? | 20:00 |
| devananda | o/ | 20:00 |
| shardy | o/ | 20:00 |
| markwash | o/ | 20:00 |
| *** pcm__ has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| russellb | o/ | 20:00 |
| *** gabrielhurley has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| cp16net | o/ | 20:00 |
| dolphm | o/ | 20:00 |
| datsun180b | o/ | 20:00 |
| mordred | o/ | 20:00 |
| SlickNik | o/ | 20:00 |
| *** john5223 has left #openstack-meeting | 20:00 | |
| ttx | markmc, annegentle, notmyname, jgriffith, gabrielhurley, markmcclain: around ? | 20:01 |
| gabrielhurley | \o | 20:01 |
| markmcclain | o/ | 20:01 |
| markmc | yep | 20:01 |
| ttx | we are on | 20:01 |
| ttx | I'll proxy jd__, per http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2013-May/000240.html and https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/TechnicalCommittee#Proxying | 20:01 |
| markmc | cripes that could almost be a full house | 20:01 |
| russellb | 11, 12 including proxy vote | 20:01 |
| grapex | o/ | 20:01 |
| ttx | #startmeeting tc | 20:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 20:01:39 2013 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 20:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 20:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 20:01 |
| ttx | Agenda is pretty busy, we'll see how far we manage to go today | 20:01 |
| ttx | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/TechnicalCommittee | 20:01 |
| hub_cap | we can keep reddwarf short ;) | 20:02 |
| ttx | #topic RedDwarf Application for Incubation | 20:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "RedDwarf Application for Incubation (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:02 | |
| ttx | speaking of which | 20:02 |
| ttx | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReddwarfAppliesForIncubation | 20:02 |
| hub_cap | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReddwarfUsingHeat | 20:02 |
| hub_cap | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28328/ | 20:02 |
| ttx | This is a continuation from last week discussion. | 20:02 |
| hub_cap | those were my homework items | 20:02 |
| *** armax has left #openstack-meeting | 20:02 | |
| ttx | hub_cap posted the Heat integration plan we requested, see above | 20:02 |
| hub_cap | the latter is a review showing the effort to get postgres into reddwarf | 20:02 |
| ttx | I haven't seen clearly new questions being raised on the public discussion | 20:03 |
| hub_cap | its not a full impl, but it _works_ ie i can create users/dbs | 20:03 |
| hub_cap | nope ttx and i updated w/ shardy comments about the refactor | 20:03 |
| ttx | hub_cap: I had one question. In this doc you mention that Heat integration would be optional as a first step... | 20:03 |
| hub_cap | sure ttx, let me splain | 20:03 |
| ttx | I think the benefit of using Heat is to avoid duplicating orchestration functionality, so if the code is still around in RedDwarf it's not so great | 20:03 |
| hub_cap | sure i agree | 20:03 |
| ttx | I'd definitely like to see the orchestration code dropped in RedDwarf before it graduates from incubation. | 20:03 |
| hub_cap | grad, yes | 20:03 |
| ttx | So if for any reason (n+1 deprecation ?) it's not doable in a few months, maybe it's a bit early to file for incubation ? | 20:04 |
| ttx | I see two options: (1) have it optional in a few months, file for incubation *then*, get visibility at summit, remove legacy during the I cycle and graduate to integrated for the J cycle | 20:04 |
| hub_cap | oh its doable | 20:04 |
| *** jbartels_ has quit IRC | 20:04 | |
| ttx | (2) have it optional real quick, remove legacy during the H cycle, and graduate to integrated for the I cycle | 20:04 |
| *** mdenny has quit IRC | 20:04 | |
| *** lglenden has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:04 | |
| hub_cap | the reason i mentioned optional was | 20:04 |
| hub_cap | but someone could stand up reddwarf right now, and point it to say, hp cloud, and not need to self install heat, or have hp cloud install heat | 20:05 |
| *** mdenny has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:05 | |
| hub_cap | ie, it works against a cloud _right now_ | 20:05 |
| * mordred likes the idea but doesn't necessarily think we need to expect them to have the work done before incubation - I think having a scope and a road map is quite fair and in keeping with past projects | 20:05 | |
| ttx | mordred: I'd just consider it a condition for graduation, personally | 20:05 |
| mordred | hub_cap: and I am a big fan of things not requiring all of the intra | 20:05 |
| mordred | ttx: ++ | 20:05 |
| markmc | hub_cap, is that a use case for the project, though? | 20:05 |
| dolphm | scope = RDaaS or simply RDBaaS? | 20:05 |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:05 | |
| dolphm | s/RDaaS/DBaas/ | 20:06 |
| markmc | hub_cap, would you not expect reddwarf and the cloud to be deployed together always? | 20:06 |
| hub_cap | thx markmc for elaborating | 20:06 |
| *** ayurchen has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:06 | |
| markmc | hub_cap, for clouds that don't have heat, heat would just be an impl detail of thm adding the reddwarf service? | 20:06 |
| russellb | and the cloud could have heat running internally and not necessary exposed to customers | 20:06 |
| hub_cap | yes markmc | 20:06 |
| russellb | yes, that. | 20:06 |
| markmc | cool | 20:06 |
| mordred | markmc: ++ | 20:06 |
| mordred | heat should hopefully soon be able to also run outside of a cloud | 20:07 |
| hub_cap | either they, could, or not, have heat and still get this puppy fired up | 20:07 |
| ttx | hub_cap: see dolph's question | 20:07 |
| *** adjohn has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:07 | |
| ttx | <dolphm> scope = DBaaS or simply RDBaaS? | 20:07 |
| vishy | markmc, hub_cap: it sounds like you could run reddwarf locally and have it use a public cloud? | 20:07 |
| vishy | is that correct? | 20:07 |
| hub_cap | sure, im not sure weve fully answered that, but last meeting i thought we decided RDBaaS was fine for _now_ | 20:07 |
| *** torandu_ has quit IRC | 20:07 | |
| hub_cap | vishy: correct, u dont have to own the cloud | 20:07 |
| hub_cap | so to speak | 20:07 |
| russellb | using heat doesn't change that though | 20:07 |
| russellb | in theory. | 20:07 |
| * mordred would like for our accepted scope to be RDBaaS and for increase in that to require further vote | 20:08 | |
| vishy | russellb: it would mean you would have to run heat locally as well | 20:08 |
| russellb | yes | 20:08 |
| dolphm | hub_cap: that was my impression from last meeting, i just wanted to double check today | 20:08 |
| hub_cap | im fine w/ RDBaaS for now | 20:08 |
| markwash | re scope, it makes sense to me to treat it as "DB Provisioning aaS" | 20:08 |
| * markmc is fine with RDBaaS scope too | 20:08 | |
| markwash | rather than focusing on relational vs non | 20:08 |
| hub_cap | i _do_ know we are going to be doing a cluster api | 20:08 |
| hub_cap | and that facilitates things like non RDB's | 20:08 |
| hub_cap | so it might fall in line quite well | 20:08 |
| vishy | seems like keeping the option to run without heat might be valuable until heat is ubiquitous in public clouds | 20:08 |
| markwash | vishy: +1 | 20:08 |
| mordred | vishy: if heat can also run locally easily too? | 20:09 |
| hub_cap | and if someone wants to make a NRDB, they shoud consider reddwarf as a viable option before going from scratch | 20:09 |
| shardy | vishy: unless it leads to lots of duplication and maintenance overhead.. | 20:09 |
| ttx | vishy: i'm a bit concerned with code duplication | 20:09 |
| russellb | same here | 20:09 |
| * mordred is pushing hard for non-colocated heat so that openstack-infra can start using it | 20:09 | |
| russellb | and ttx had a good point earlier around when heat becomes "the way it works", and how that affects the incubation timeline | 20:09 |
| shardy | mordred: I think (with some auth tweaks) heat could run locally too relatively easily | 20:09 |
| russellb | i'd like to explore that a bit more | 20:09 |
| mordred | shardy: I believe cody-somerville is working on it | 20:09 |
| ttx | vishy: someone would run Reddwarf+Heat outside of the cloud | 20:09 |
| vishy | mordred: I like the idea, I'm just thinking in terms of user adoption. It is nice if i could try it out without having to start up heat. | 20:10 |
| shardy | mordred: IIRC there's a patch up adding much of what we need right now | 20:10 |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 20:10 | |
| hub_cap | ttx thats def possible | 20:10 |
| shardy | mordred: yup, that's what I was referring to | 20:10 |
| mordred | vishy: ++ | 20:10 |
| hub_cap | they can run reddwarf w/o a cloud now | 20:10 |
| hub_cap | so, heat as a incubation graduation req? | 20:10 |
| russellb | and if so, what does the timeline look like for that? | 20:11 |
| ttx | I'd rather avoid us having to deprecate a feature, I've lived through enough project splits | 20:11 |
| markwash | can we really set rules for graduation requirements at this point? that would be putting constraints on future TC decisions that I don't think we have the power to make | 20:11 |
| russellb | possible in H timeframe? | 20:11 |
| hub_cap | russellb: def | 20:11 |
| dolphm | markwash: i think that would be for the future tc to overrule? | 20:11 |
| mordred | I think markwash makes a good point - I think requirement is a bit strong | 20:11 |
| hub_cap | ttx: sure, one Q, is heat a required openstack service at this point? id hate to say u _have_ to have heat but heat is optional | 20:11 |
| mikal | markwash: I agree. We should note it and let the future TC decide. | 20:11 |
| markmc | markwash, it's totally reasonable to say "here's the things we think you'll need to graduate" | 20:12 |
| ttx | markwash: not requirement. Direction. | 20:12 |
| russellb | markwash: i think it's fair to set the roadmap for what we expect during incubation, even if that could change | 20:12 |
| markwash | markmc: +1, direction, not req | 20:12 |
| mordred | ++ | 20:12 |
| dolphm | markwash: +1 | 20:12 |
| dolphm | markmc: * | 20:12 |
| russellb | but honestly, if we expect to keep the old way around, this whole pushing to use heat thing seems like a waste | 20:12 |
| russellb | what's the point if that's not going to be *the* way to do it | 20:12 |
| ttx | hub_cap: no service is required. But for example, I don't think Nova should have its own image service, when we have Glance | 20:13 |
| hub_cap | so its just a matter of heat/optional, and id say we make heat default, and those who have alrady deployed w/o heat, can use the legacy code | 20:13 |
| hub_cap | ttx: sure but do u think that no user shoudl use nova if they have heat? | 20:13 |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 20:13 | |
| russellb | but the legacy code goes away when? | 20:13 |
| markmc | agree with russellb on two impls being pointless | 20:13 |
| ttx | hub_cap: err... not sure I understand that question | 20:13 |
| markmc | long term | 20:13 |
| ttx | heat uses nova | 20:14 |
| russellb | either the legacy code is on its way out asap, or the heat idea is scrapped | 20:14 |
| russellb | imo | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | ttx: heh what i mean is that reddwarf is a user of nova | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | russellb: why is that? heat is the long term vision | 20:14 |
| shardy | hub_cap: it's not just nova though, you're orchestrating clusters of instances, post-install customization, managing dependencies, potentially supporting scale-out etc, etc | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | i sure as hell dont want to write clustering code :) | 20:14 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 20:14 | |
| shardy | all of which we already do | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | for things like just what shardy said :D | 20:14 |
| russellb | hub_cap: ok, so you see the legacy code being removed then. | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | def russellb | 20:14 |
| hub_cap | it wont be around forever heck no :) | 20:14 |
| russellb | on what timeline? | 20:14 |
| russellb | guess, not commitment | 20:15 |
| ttx | hub_cap: hmmm... I see what you mean. i guess it's valid to directly address nova for a very basic scenario | 20:15 |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:15 | |
| hub_cap | russellb: i was hoping to have yall help me w/ that | 20:15 |
| hub_cap | im not sure how deprecating features, so to speak, works | 20:15 |
| russellb | ok | 20:15 |
| hub_cap | n+1? or _for_ graduation? | 20:15 |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 20:15 | |
| hub_cap | i thnk those are the valid answers but i dont know whats best overall | 20:15 |
| russellb | well ideally at this point in the process we wouldn't have to worry so much about the cost of deprecation .... :( | 20:15 |
| ttx | hub_cap: my understanding is that you're covering more than just a basic scenario, and duplicating a lot of functionality from Heat | 20:16 |
| hub_cap | ttx: as of now its only the basic | 20:16 |
| hub_cap | single instance | 20:16 |
| markmc | s/deprecating features/deprecating legacy implementation/ :) | 20:16 |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:16 | |
| russellb | markmc: mhm | 20:16 |
| mordred | markmc: ++ | 20:16 |
| russellb | as a project in incubation, i honestly don't think you should have to worry about deprecation cycles | 20:17 |
| hub_cap | ah ic | 20:17 |
| hub_cap | that makes sense | 20:17 |
| russellb | ... ideally, anyway. | 20:17 |
| gabrielhurley | Even with proper deprecation I don't see it as a huge problem to mark as deprecated for the H release, ptentially graduate to Integrated in I and actually remove the code during that cycle... | 20:17 |
| hub_cap | im fine w/ that gabrielhurley that was my hope | 20:17 |
| hub_cap | we can make heat default for all installs | 20:17 |
| gabrielhurley | anyone who's new to RD in the H release should know better than to start using something that's already deprecated ;-) | 20:17 |
| ttx | russellb: +1 | 20:17 |
| shardy | hub_cap: if you currenlty only support single instance, I'd be interested to see a comparison of functionality wrt our RDS nested stack resource | 20:17 |
| ttx | yes, mark deprecated in H is fine | 20:18 |
| shardy | may be a good starting point for your integration w/heat | 20:18 |
| hub_cap | shardy: does the nested stack do backups/restores/etc? | 20:18 |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:18 | |
| hub_cap | we are working on replication now too, so this is really the ideal time to start integrating heat | 20:18 |
| ttx | More questions before we vote ? | 20:18 |
| hub_cap | cuz we will need master/slave VERY soon :) | 20:18 |
| shardy | hub_cap: Not currently, no, that kind of matrix is what I'm interested in discovering | 20:18 |
| * mordred moves that we vote | 20:18 | |
| hub_cap | shardy: we should def chat then after | 20:18 |
| shardy | hub_cap: may be stuff we need to add to support your use-case etc | 20:19 |
| * hub_cap moves out of the way | 20:19 | |
| ttx | raise you hand if you still have questions | 20:19 |
| ttx | your* | 20:19 |
| mordred | wait - we don't have to make motions to vote here... so nice and civilized... | 20:19 |
| hub_cap | shardy: def. id love to work together on it | 20:19 |
| jgriffith | mordred: I move we vote | 20:19 |
| mordred | jgriffith: I second! | 20:19 |
| shardy | hub_cap: sounds good :) | 20:19 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 20:19 | |
| ttx | No more questions, setting up vote | 20:20 |
| ttx | #startvote Approve RedDwarf for Incubation? yes, no, abstain | 20:20 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: Approve RedDwarf for Incubation? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:20 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:20 |
| hub_cap | sweet! didnt know that existed | 20:20 |
| dolphm | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| shardy | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| mordred | hub_cap: we're fancy around here | 20:20 |
| mordred | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| jgriffith | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| mikal | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| ttx | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| markmcclain | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| vishy | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| annegentle | #vote yes | 20:20 |
| markwash | I #vote yes even without the requirements of deprecating non heat approaches | 20:20 |
| ttx | markwash: that won't count. | 20:21 |
| mordred | :) | 20:21 |
| gabrielhurley | #vote yes | 20:21 |
| mordred | ok. we're not that fancy | 20:21 |
| markwash | just wanted to let people know | 20:21 |
| markwash | #vote yes | 20:21 |
| jgriffith | haha | 20:21 |
| jeblair | but we accept patches | 20:21 |
| markmc | #vote yes | 20:21 |
| dolphm | mordred: i'll file a bug | 20:21 |
| *** jrodom has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:21 | |
| SlickNik | heh | 20:21 |
| ttx | 30 more seconds | 20:21 |
| *** mkollaro has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:21 | |
| russellb | #vote yes | 20:21 |
| jgriffith | markwash: care to vote officially? | 20:21 |
| vishy | he did | 20:22 |
| dolphm | jgriffith: he did | 20:22 |
| jgriffith | doh | 20:22 |
| jgriffith | nm | 20:22 |
| ttx | #endvote | 20:22 |
| jgriffith | sorry.. just saw it | 20:22 |
| openstack | Voted on "Approve RedDwarf for Incubation?" Results are | 20:22 |
| openstack | yes (13): markmc, ttx, vishy, shardy, annegentle, russellb, jgriffith, mikal, mordred, gabrielhurley, dolphm, markwash, markmcclain | 20:22 |
| hub_cap | wow | 20:22 |
| hub_cap | thx so much guys | 20:22 |
| * russellb considered abstain because of the movement in the heat area ... but taking leap of faith that it'll work out. | 20:22 | |
| ttx | Awesome, congrats guys | 20:22 |
| imsplitbit | :-) | 20:22 |
| hub_cap | russellb: i dont blame ya | 20:22 |
| ttx | russellb: we can vote them out of the island if they misbehave | 20:22 |
| hub_cap | its on the top of my list of todos | 20:22 |
| gabrielhurley | I also considered abstaining on questions of scope of openstack, but I want to use red dwarf myself, so.... | 20:22 |
| SlickNik | thanks for the faith, russellb. | 20:22 |
| russellb | ttx: ok, cool :) | 20:22 |
| mordred | ttx: wait - there's an island? | 20:22 |
| *** senhuang has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:22 | |
| hub_cap | hah ttx, who was the idol? | 20:22 |
| * ttx votes mordred for today | 20:22 | |
| hub_cap | *err has | 20:22 |
| * markmc leaping of faith too :) | 20:22 | |
| ttx | #topic Ironic / Baremetal split - Nova scope evolution | 20:22 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Ironic / Baremetal split - Nova scope evolution (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:22 | |
| ttx | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BaremetalSplitRationale | 20:23 |
| ttx | This is the first part of the discussion about splitting the baremetal-specific code from Nova into its own project | 20:23 |
| markwash | we should steal the name Ironic for the I release | 20:23 |
| ttx | We must first decide that this code doesn't belong in Nova anymore | 20:23 |
| russellb | +1 | 20:23 |
| ttx | Which, I think, is a no-brainer since we didn't really decide to have it in in the first place, and the Nova crew seems to agree to remove it | 20:23 |
| markwash | +10 fwiw | 20:23 |
| ttx | Questions ? | 20:23 |
| markmc | definitely think this has a lot of potential for use outside of nova | 20:23 |
| dolphm | Ironic is an awesomely relevant project name #notaquestion | 20:24 |
| gabrielhurley | My biggest question is "how much code will be duplicated?" (I get that this makes the remaining code simpler, but still worry about another copy-and-paste of Nova's source) | 20:24 |
| ttx | (second part of the discussion will be about the incubation of the separate project) | 20:24 |
| mikal | markmc: I wanted "incarceration" for that release | 20:24 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: maybe that belongs to the second part ? | 20:24 |
| gabrielhurley | :;shrug:: | 20:24 |
| russellb | hoping we'll have the nova code removed asap | 20:25 |
| *** topol has quit IRC | 20:25 | |
| russellb | so that there's no duplication | 20:25 |
| mikal | baremetal is very different from other virt drivers | 20:25 |
| mikal | Own DB etc | 20:25 |
| mikal | I think it belongs elsewhere | 20:25 |
| devananda | gabrielhurley: i've been digging into that over the weekend. short answer is: a lot, unless ironic starts fresh w.r.t. api, service, etc. | 20:25 |
| gabrielhurley | russellb: there must be some... it wouldn't be *in* nova if it didn't rely on *any* nova code currently | 20:25 |
| mordred | ++ | 20:25 |
| *** murkk has quit IRC | 20:25 | |
| gabrielhurley | devananda: that's more what I expected to hear ;-) | 20:25 |
| markmc | russellb, think gabrielhurley means the service infrastructure and such | 20:25 |
| mordred | the virt driver itself that will talk to ironic will still be in the nova tree though, right?> | 20:25 |
| markmc | russellb, as opposed to the legacy virt driver | 20:25 |
| russellb | ah yes, like cinder... | 20:25 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah | 20:25 |
| markmc | yes, like cinder :) | 20:25 |
| devananda | besides api and service, it relies on nova/virt/disk for file injection, which i want to abandon anyway | 20:26 |
| markwash | gabrielhurley: is this "bad" duplication or just "use cases for oslo" duplication? | 20:26 |
| gabrielhurley | the copy-paste snowballing of problems/flaws/bugs makes me a sad panda. | 20:26 |
| markmc | think it's going to be much more different from nova than cinder was | 20:26 |
| mordred | I thnk there's going to be some of both | 20:26 |
| gabrielhurley | markmc: can you elaborate? | 20:26 |
| markmc | gabrielhurley, no scheduler e.g. | 20:26 |
| devananda | it's _very_ different code from nova. | 20:26 |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 20:26 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 20:26 | |
| ttx | Ready to vote on the Nova scope reduction ? | 20:27 |
| gabrielhurley | sure | 20:27 |
| markmc | quick q | 20:27 |
| markmc | will the legacy virt driver be feature frozen | 20:27 |
| markmc | during H? | 20:27 |
| ttx | markmc: I suppose | 20:27 |
| devananda | markmc: fwiw, I would like it to be, except for bug fixes | 20:28 |
| devananda | there are several open BPs | 20:28 |
| markmc | devananda, cool | 20:28 |
| ttx | ok, ready to vote on the first part ? | 20:28 |
| devananda | one in particular will have a big impact in terms of simplifying deployment of the baremetal driver in nova | 20:28 |
| *** SlickNik has left #openstack-meeting | 20:28 | |
| mikal | There are a few security caveats too | 20:28 |
| devananda | mikal: i dont think those are any different in vs. out of nova? | 20:28 |
| *** eglynn has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:29 | |
| jgriffith | so stupid point of clarification, that means we're voting to skip incubation correct? | 20:29 |
| ttx | jgriffith: no | 20:29 |
| mikal | devananda: sure, but I don't want a nova freeze stopping us from fixing / documenting them | 20:29 |
| russellb | no | 20:29 |
| jgriffith | ttx: then how can we say "no features on existing code for" | 20:29 |
| ttx | jgriffith: just voting on removing baremetal code from Nova's scope for the moment. More at next topic | 20:29 |
| jgriffith | K | 20:29 |
| ttx | we don't say that, YET | 20:29 |
| jgriffith | k... I'll be patient | 20:29 |
| ttx | #startvote Agree on long-term removal of baremetal code from Nova's scope? yes, no, abstain | 20:30 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: Agree on long-term removal of baremetal code from Nova's scope? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:30 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:30 |
| markwash | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| russellb | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| mordred | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| mikal | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| jgriffith | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| gabrielhurley | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| ttx | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| shardy | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| markmcclain | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| ttx | 30 more seconds | 20:30 |
| markmc | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| *** vipul|away is now known as vipul | 20:30 | |
| annegentle | #vote yes | 20:30 |
| markmc | (yes when ironic is ready I guess) | 20:30 |
| markmc | we're not reducing the scope really until the legacy driver is removed | 20:30 |
| * markmc shrugs | 20:30 | |
| ttx | #endvote | 20:30 |
| openstack | Voted on "Agree on long-term removal of baremetal code from Nova's scope?" Results are | 20:30 |
| openstack | yes (11): markmc, ttx, shardy, annegentle, russellb, jgriffith, mikal, mordred, gabrielhurley, markwash, markmcclain | 20:30 |
| ttx | #topic Ironic / Baremetal split - Incubation request | 20:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Ironic / Baremetal split - Incubation request (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:31 | |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:31 | |
| russellb | markmc: agreeing on direction to reduce scope, i guess | 20:31 |
| ttx | This is the second part of the project split decision... create a project from Nova baremetal code and accept that new "Ironic" project into Incubation | 20:31 |
| ttx | The idea being that Ironic could make a first drop by Havana release and we'd mark baremetal code deprecated in Nova in Havana... | 20:31 |
| markmc | russellb, yeah - we could change our minds if Ironic fails is my point, I think | 20:31 |
| markmc | russellb, (unlikely, but ...) | 20:31 |
| ttx | Then if everything goes well have the code removed and Ironic integrated during the I cycle | 20:31 |
| russellb | fair enough | 20:31 |
| ttx | Fire questions | 20:31 |
| mordred | ttx: makes sense to me | 20:31 |
| ttx | My main question would be... is this code OpenStack-specific ? Should it become an OpenStack integrated project rather than, say, a generic Python library ? | 20:31 |
| markmc | is glance OpenStack specific? keystone? | 20:32 |
| devananda | ttx: swift is an openstack project, but aiui can be deployed separately. how is this different? | 20:32 |
| markmc | IMHO this is as OpenStack specific as anything else | 20:32 |
| mordred | I believe that the reason I've been arguing that it's openstack and not just generic - is that I thin there are potentially several services who might want to integrate with its apis | 20:32 |
| russellb | i look at it like as something in the openstack brand, that may or may not be used in combination with openstack services | 20:32 |
| jgriffith | mordred: +1 | 20:32 |
| ttx | No, I mean... if this is generally useful to more than just openstack... | 20:32 |
| markwash | plus it adds IMHO a key piece to OpenStack | 20:32 |
| devananda | so far we def want interaction between ironic and nova, cinder, and quantum | 20:32 |
| mordred | for instance - a pan-project scheduler might want to talk to the baremetal service for information about rack locality | 20:33 |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| jgriffith | ttx: I think your point is fine as well | 20:33 |
| markwash | devananda: not glance )-; | 20:33 |
| jgriffith | ttx: in other words it can be useful stand-alone | 20:33 |
| jgriffith | nothing wrong with that | 20:33 |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| devananda | markwash: actually, yes, glance too! | 20:33 |
| ttx | mordred: ok, makes sense | 20:33 |
| mordred | glance is generally useful outside of openstack :) canonical run a public one for people to get their images from | 20:33 |
| *** senhuang has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| mordred | oh. I read markwash's comment wrong :) | 20:34 |
| * mordred shuts up | 20:34 | |
| vishy | mordred: it includes a rest api as well | 20:34 |
| markmc | vishy, Ironic will have a REST API | 20:34 |
| vishy | right which makes it more of a project than a library imo | 20:34 |
| markmc | ah, ok | 20:34 |
| ttx | vishy: agreed. | 20:34 |
| markmc | yes | 20:34 |
| ttx | Other questions ? | 20:35 |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 20:35 | |
| devananda | so i have a question for folks -- in splitting ironic, should i aim to preserve as much code from nova as possible, or start fresh so the result is less bloated? and does that affect incubation in any way? | 20:35 |
| markwash | russellb: +1 to OS brand #notaquestion | 20:35 |
| mordred | I believe you should do things cleanly if it's possible and doesn't kill you | 20:36 |
| ttx | devananda: since we do a deprecation cycle, you have some room for cleanup | 20:36 |
| mordred | but I do not believe that's in scope for us here really | 20:36 |
| gabrielhurley | mordred++ | 20:36 |
| markwash | I agree with mordred, but that would really be your call | 20:36 |
| devananda | ack.good to know that doesn't affect incubation | 20:36 |
| markmc | you can ask us for opinions as the 18 wise people of openstack | 20:37 |
| russellb | just be aware of the time impact | 20:37 |
| gabrielhurley | the less snowballing the better. this is a chance for cleaning house. but as everyone said, not a requirement. | 20:37 |
| *** PeTeT has quit IRC | 20:37 | |
| markmc | but you probably know best :) | 20:37 |
| russellb | like, look at how long it has taken to get quantum up to where we can make it the default, vs cinder | 20:37 |
| ttx | devananda: if you want to hit the incubation targets to get integrated in I you'll have to produce working code very fast... so the "doesn't kill you" remark from mordred applies | 20:37 |
| devananda | ack | 20:38 |
| russellb | yes, that :) | 20:38 |
| ttx | worst case scenario, you do one more cycle as incubated, not so much of a big deal | 20:38 |
| devananda | right. | 20:38 |
| vishy | the cinder approach is definitely faster | 20:38 |
| markmc | ttx, well, it would be another cycle of the baremetal driver being feature frozen | 20:38 |
| vishy | but it delays adding new features for a long time | 20:38 |
| devananda | cinder approach = ? | 20:39 |
| vishy | nova -> cinder transition was pretty painless (much less painless than nova -> quantum) | 20:39 |
| russellb | reusing code as much as possible, as opposed to starting over | 20:39 |
| markwash | but quantum has lots of context that could influence that | 20:39 |
| vishy | russellb: yes, also replicating the api directly | 20:39 |
| jgriffith | devananda: I'm happy to share my thoughts offline if you're interested | 20:40 |
| ttx | devananda: so you can refactor a bit, but would be better to reuse as much as you can so that you iterate faster | 20:40 |
| vishy | and just adding a python-*client wrapper to talk to the same apis exposed via rest | 20:40 |
| vishy | with no change at all to the backend | 20:40 |
| jgriffith | but yes, copy out of nova and modify was a life saver for me | 20:40 |
| devananda | jgriffith: thanks, will def take you up on that after this meeting | 20:40 |
| markmc | the Nova API probably wouldn't make much sense as a starting point for Ironic? | 20:40 |
| mordred | devananda and I worked on a hybrid split - which involved git filter-branch on the nova tree to pull out the existing baremetal code, but leaving the other bits out | 20:40 |
| vishy | but that meant 6 months of no changes to the first six months of cinder essentially | 20:40 |
| ttx | More questions ? | 20:40 |
| markmcclain | yeah.. we made a bunch of changes which is why moved at a different pace | 20:40 |
| devananda | ttx: no more q from me | 20:41 |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:41 | |
| russellb | excuse me, not quantum, the project formerly known as quantum | 20:41 |
| ttx | Everyone ready to vote ? | 20:41 |
| markmc | russellb, still known as quantum | 20:41 |
| mikal | I am | 20:41 |
| * jgriffith moves we vote | 20:41 | |
| markmc | russellb, soon to be formerly known as quantum :) | 20:41 |
| gabrielhurley | OpenStack Networking | 20:41 |
| markmc | gabrielhurley, nope | 20:42 |
| mordred | mutnauq! | 20:42 |
| markmc | quebec! | 20:42 |
| gabrielhurley | I still vote we rename it "quality" | 20:42 |
| markmc | that works | 20:42 |
| markwash | markmc: lol! | 20:42 |
| gabrielhurley | starts with Q, same number of letters... Quality! | 20:42 |
| ttx | #startvote Approve Ironic for Incubation? yes, no, abstain | 20:42 |
| openstack | Begin voting on: Approve Ironic for Incubation? Valid vote options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:42 |
| openstack | Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. | 20:42 |
| markmc | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| russellb | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| mordred | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| * markmcclain is still accepting name nominations | 20:42 | |
| mikal | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| dolphm | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| markmcclain | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| gabrielhurley | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| jgriffith | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| shardy | #vote yest | 20:42 |
| openstack | shardy: yest is not a valid option. Valid options are yes, no, abstain. | 20:42 |
| markwash | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| ttx | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| gabrielhurley | lol | 20:42 |
| shardy | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| mordred | haahahaha | 20:42 |
| shardy | oops | 20:42 |
| vishy | #vote yes | 20:42 |
| ttx | 30 more seconds | 20:42 |
| ttx | #endvote | 20:43 |
| *** cp16net is now known as cp16net|away | 20:43 | |
| openstack | Voted on "Approve Ironic for Incubation?" Results are | 20:43 |
| openstack | yes (12): markmc, ttx, vishy, shardy, russellb, jgriffith, mikal, mordred, gabrielhurley, dolphm, markwash, markmcclain | 20:43 |
| ttx | devananda: congrats! | 20:43 |
| gabrielhurley | we're a very agreeable bunch today | 20:43 |
| ttx | yay process! | 20:43 |
| devananda | thanks! :) | 20:43 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: that's because we rae missing the devil's advocate member | 20:43 |
| gabrielhurley | lol | 20:43 |
| jgriffith | haha | 20:43 |
| russellb | devananda: make it happen! go go go! | 20:43 |
| markmc | zero no votes or abstains so far? | 20:43 |
| *** olaph has left #openstack-meeting | 20:44 | |
| * markmc is sure devananda feels suitably empowered now :) | 20:44 | |
| ttx | markmc: that's what I call managed lazy consensus | 20:44 |
| ttx | #topic Discussion: API version discovery | 20:44 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Discussion: API version discovery (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:44 | |
| gabrielhurley | yay! | 20:44 |
| ttx | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/2013-May/000223.html | 20:44 |
| ttx | This is preliminary discussion on API version discovery | 20:44 |
| markmc | #vote yes | 20:44 |
| ttx | Personally I'm not sure this needs formal TC blessing, unless things get ugly at individual project-level | 20:44 |
| russellb | lulz. | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | I cleaned things up into a nice reST document for y'all | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | https://gist.github.com/gabrielhurley/5499434 | 20:44 |
| markmc | oh, no vote yet? | 20:44 |
| jgriffith | haha | 20:44 |
| annegentle | I was agreeable too but missed the vote :) | 20:44 |
| ttx | But I guess we can still discuss it :) | 20:44 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: care to introduce the topic ? | 20:44 |
| annegentle | sowwy | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | yep yep | 20:44 |
| gabrielhurley | so | 20:44 |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 20:44 | |
| gabrielhurley | short version | 20:45 |
| ttx | We were less agreeable last week, poor jgriffith | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | We now have a Keystone v2 and v3 API, Glance, v1 and v2, and a Nova v2 and soon-to-be v3 | 20:45 |
| gabrielhurley | people want to use these | 20:45 |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| gabrielhurley | people want to use these across various clouds | 20:45 |
| * jgriffith 's head stil hurts | 20:45 | |
| gabrielhurley | and use multiple versions within the same cloud | 20:45 |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| *** PeTeT has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:45 | |
| gabrielhurley | that means we need to start dealing with the issues of how to let consumers of these APIs (clients, Horizon, etc.) understand what versions are available, what capabilities (extensions, etc.) are deployed for each version, and more | 20:46 |
| gabrielhurley | short version of the proposed fix (see gist, ML thread, and etherpad for long version) | 20:46 |
| gabrielhurley | : | 20:46 |
| mordred | gabrielhurley: I am in favor of things that sensibly let me consume multiple clouds | 20:47 |
| annegentle | is an extension always a capability? | 20:47 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: Any reason to believe there would be resistance to this ? | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | Move the Keystone service catalog towards solely providing root service endpoints and let the clients/consumers do the work of interpreting a (standardized) "discovery" response from GET / | 20:47 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: nope, everyone's been very positive so far | 20:47 |
| mordred | gabrielhurley: as long as it doesn't mean a) tons of branching logic in my consumer code because b) we're tending towards Least Common Denominator in some way | 20:48 |
| dolphm | annegentle: extensions can provide multiple capabilities, i believe | 20:48 |
| gabrielhurley | and consensus has formed around most of the ideas in the latest revision of the proposal | 20:48 |
| mordred | but I don't think that's what you're proposing | 20:48 |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:48 | |
| gabrielhurley | but it is a huge cross-project effort to impement, hence TC involvement | 20:48 |
| mordred | ++ | 20:48 |
| annegentle | gabrielhurley: it seems like a huge doc effort as well? | 20:48 |
| gabrielhurley | annegentle: see https://gist.github.com/gabrielhurley/5499434#extensions-vs-capabilities for "extension" vs. "capability | 20:48 |
| gabrielhurley | annegentle: when I said "cross-project" I meant it ;-) | 20:49 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: we can bless it, but I'm not sure we can mandate it | 20:49 |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:49 | |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: it's a fine line. if one project opts out the whole thing breaks | 20:49 |
| vishy | gabrielhurley: so the idea is that we continue to provide /extensions for the existing apis and add /capabilities for new apis? | 20:49 |
| annegentle | gabrielhurley: so most projects keep /extensions but add /capabilities? (I did read the doc and still had Qs) | 20:49 |
| dolphm | ttx: can we mandate that projects return a proper 300 response with an expected format? | 20:49 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: correct | 20:49 |
| vishy | gabrielhurley: it seems like we need a standard format for the capabilites resource as well | 20:49 |
| * annegentle thinks like a vish | 20:49 | |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: would be good to engage with all PTLs and check they are all OK with that | 20:49 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: correct, we do. I recommend versioning that response as well, in case we need to tweak it over time. | 20:50 |
| markwash | I'm a little "meh" about capabilities being described exclusively as endpoint-level details | 20:50 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: I have gotten feedback from more than half of them | 20:50 |
| gabrielhurley | but I can try and pin down the rest | 20:50 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: but yes, we can weigh in and say it's a very good idea | 20:50 |
| *** saurabhs has quit IRC | 20:50 | |
| markwash | seems like capabilities could be finer grained | 20:50 |
| annegentle | if we don't version extensions now, how do we version capabilities? | 20:50 |
| gabrielhurley | markwash: care to elaborate? | 20:50 |
| gabrielhurley | annegentle: simply saying to version the response format | 20:50 |
| markwash | gabrielhurley: I'll probably just muddy the waters | 20:50 |
| markwash | gabrielhurley: and the granularity probably isn't a TC level issue | 20:51 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: basically, if one project doesn't like it, I'm not sure we have a lot of ways to enforce it, apart from threatening to remove them from the integrated release. | 20:51 |
| gabrielhurley | interpretation of that data is a larger problem | 20:51 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: hopefully it won't come to that | 20:51 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: so consensus would be a much better way to get to it | 20:51 |
| gabrielhurley | and I don't think it will | 20:51 |
| dolphm | annegentle: capabilities are versioned along with the API version, i think? GET /<version>/capabilities | 20:51 |
| *** saurabhs has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:51 | |
| gabrielhurley | dolphm: most likely yes | 20:51 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: and I don't want our "blessing" to look like a mandate and cause some allergic reaction | 20:51 |
| ttx | where there shouldn't be any | 20:52 |
| notmyname | gabrielhurley: dolphm: I'd like something other than that (since that breaks existing swift clusters) | 20:52 |
| mordred | ttx: ++ | 20:52 |
| vishy | gabrielhurley: it seems like we need multiple capabilities | 20:52 |
| vishy | the global one saying which endpoints are hittable | 20:52 |
| vishy | then some way of exposing schema for the endpoints | 20:52 |
| vishy | for example if i have an extension that adds a parameter to a response | 20:53 |
| vishy | sticking it in the global capabilities list seems odd | 20:53 |
| gabrielhurley | notmyname: I switched it to /<version>/capabilities at your suggestion since you were already using "extensions" in a valid way... or did I misunderstand your comment? | 20:53 |
| notmyname | vishy: sounds like the rfc2616 OPTIONS verb ;-) | 20:53 |
| vishy | notmyname: yeah something like that | 20:53 |
| notmyname | gabrielhurley: not important for the tc meeting. we can discuss later, if you wnat | 20:54 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: I'm not convinced that a /capabilties is actually useful... it'd have to describe all the capabilties for all the versions | 20:54 |
| gabrielhurley | I was proposing GET / gets you endpoint discovery for supported versions | 20:54 |
| vishy | sorry i didn't mean /capabilities | 20:54 |
| gabrielhurley | and /<version>/capabilties describes what's possible for that version | 20:54 |
| vishy | i mean that /version/capabilities could respond with all of the endpoints for that version | 20:54 |
| annegentle | dolphm: gabrielhurley: but an extension's definition can change release to release (underlying release, not API release)? Is that why we'd use capabilities? | 20:54 |
| vishy | but sticking extra params there seems a bit messy | 20:54 |
| dolphm | gabrielhurley: does /capabilities need to be in scope here? | 20:54 |
| ttx | 5 minutes left, and there are two more things I wanted to raise -- can we move this discussion to the ML and follow the result at the next meeting ? | 20:55 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: oh, I see, you're talking specifically about multi-endpoint | 20:55 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 20:55 | |
| ttx | I think Gabriel needs to track down the remaining PTLs | 20:55 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: I don't think that's a good thing to try and solve now since we can't agree on that in Keystone anway | 20:55 |
| vishy | gabrielhurley: no sorry endpoint is a bad word. i mean all of the paths that are reachable | 20:55 |
| gabrielhurley | dolphm: only because the standardization is helpful and related | 20:55 |
| dolphm | gabrielhurley: agree, but it seems like a second step | 20:55 |
| gabrielhurley | vishy: gotcha. we can discuss more later | 20:55 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: will do | 20:55 |
| ttx | I think you got the ball rolling here | 20:56 |
| gabrielhurley | yep | 20:56 |
| ttx | we'll definitely track this in future meetings | 20:56 |
| ttx | #topic Discussion: I naming candidates | 20:56 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Discussion: I naming candidates (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:56 | |
| ttx | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNaming#.22I.22_release_cycle_naming | 20:56 |
| ttx | The only suggestion which strictly fits in the current guidelines is "Ili". | 20:56 |
| annegentle | I like Ili | 20:56 |
| ttx | So I propose that we slightly extend the rules to accept street names in Hong-Kong, which should add a few options | 20:56 |
| gabrielhurley | short and to the point | 20:56 |
| ttx | or we can just accept Ili. | 20:56 |
| gabrielhurley | what are the other options? | 20:57 |
| dolphm | what about Ichang violates guidelines? | 20:57 |
| hub_cap | i was hoping for innermongolia :/ | 20:57 |
| vishy | no one suggested Imperial :( | 20:57 |
| gabrielhurley | hub_cap: lol | 20:57 |
| dolphm | ( ili is my first choice, after icehouse ;) | 20:57 |
| ttx | The rules are rather strict, and Ichang is a bit borderline | 20:57 |
| russellb | Influenza? | 20:57 |
| gabrielhurley | -1 | 20:57 |
| russellb | sorry. | 20:57 |
| annegentle | oh like Grizzly followed the rules | 20:57 |
| mikal | russellb: ! | 20:57 |
| ttx | Is that OK for everyone ? (extending to street names to have 3-4 candidates total) | 20:57 |
| vishy | is it ili or illi ? | 20:57 |
| gabrielhurley | Bear Flag Revolt! | 20:57 |
| jgriffith | annegentle: haha | 20:57 |
| dolphm | #vote yes | 20:57 |
| ttx | I'll take that as a YES | 20:58 |
| gabrielhurley | lol | 20:58 |
| mikal | Yeah, works for me | 20:58 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 20:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: tc)" | 20:58 | |
| ttx | mordred: you had a communication to make ? | 20:58 |
| mordred | ttx: yup. thanks | 20:58 |
| mordred | fwiw... openstack-infra is going to change how we're running tests on stuff | 20:58 |
| ttx | mordred: told ya I'd save one minute for you | 20:58 |
| mordred | we believe we're still in compliance with the python support decision | 20:58 |
| mordred | but based on canonical dropping support for non-LTS releases to 9 months, we're now planning on running 2.7 tests on LTS+cloud archive | 20:59 |
| mordred | and not attempting to run test slaves on latest ubuntu | 20:59 |
| mordred | basically, nobody should notice | 20:59 |
| mordred | but we thought we'd mention | 20:59 |
| *** Vek has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:59 | |
| *** jlk has left #openstack-meeting | 20:59 | |
| mordred | also, for background, we have actually NEVER moved to the latest ubuntu as soon as it comes out in the CI system | 21:00 |
| russellb | seems reasonable. | 21:00 |
| reed | Sooner than later we should start talking about the Design session in Hong Kong: need to make sure that we have successful design summit there, which means make sure all relevant people are able to travel there and the ones that can't, can still join the conversations | 21:00 |
| mordred | reed: +1000 | 21:00 |
| mordred | also - I names | 21:00 |
| mordred | :) | 21:00 |
| russellb | i'm very concerned about the number of people that won't be able to make it from the US (or elsewhere) because of budget | 21:01 |
| ttx | annndd | 21:01 |
| ttx | we are out of time | 21:01 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 21:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 21:01:18 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-05-07-20.01.html | 21:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-05-07-20.01.txt | 21:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2013/tc.2013-05-07-20.01.log.html | 21:01 |
| russellb | next! | 21:01 |
| reed | yeah! | 21:01 |
| ttx | markmc, dolphm, notmyname, markwash, jgriffith, russellb, shardy, gabrielhurley, markmcclain: still around ? | 21:01 |
| russellb | yes. | 21:01 |
| ttx | Anyone from Ceilometer to replace jd__ ? | 21:01 |
| markmc | yes | 21:01 |
| markmcclain | o/ | 21:01 |
| shardy | yup | 21:01 |
| markwash | yes | 21:01 |
| dolphm | o/ | 21:01 |
| notmyname | o/ | 21:01 |
| jgriffith | o/ | 21:02 |
| gabrielhurley | \o | 21:02 |
| ttx | #startmeeting project | 21:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 21:02:16 2013 UTC. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:02 | |
| *** jbresnah has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'project' | 21:02 |
| ttx | #link http://wiki.openstack.org/Meetings/ProjectMeeting | 21:02 |
| *** grapex has left #openstack-meeting | 21:02 | |
| ttx | Three weeks away from havana-1, let's see what those Havana roadmaps look like, and look into more details in havana-1 plans | 21:02 |
| ttx | #topic General stuff | 21:02 |
| eglynn | ttx: I'm here for jd__ | 21:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "General stuff (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:02 | |
| ttx | eglynn: awesome | 21:02 |
| ttx | Grizzly doc was released last week | 21:02 |
| ttx | apevec: around ? | 21:02 |
| *** cp16net|away is now known as cp16net | 21:03 | |
| ttx | markmc: no apevec, any idea on how is 2013.1.1 looking so far ? | 21:03 |
| *** robertmyers has left #openstack-meeting | 21:04 | |
| markmc | ttx, not since http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-April/007273.html | 21:04 |
| markmc | ttx, but apevec is running the show :) | 21:04 |
| markmc | #link 2012.2.4 call for testing: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-April/007273.html | 21:04 |
| ttx | so there are stable/grizzly branches frozen and candidate tarballs out... ready for publication on Thursday | 21:04 |
| markmc | doh | 21:05 |
| * markmc totally mixed up | 21:05 | |
| markmc | wasn't there a call for testing last week? | 21:05 |
| *** jbartels_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:05 | |
| russellb | all my grizzly patches getting -2'd now! </3 | 21:05 |
| ttx | There /might/ be a security issue to include in it, need to talk to apevec (but you heard nothing) | 21:05 |
| ttx | annegentle, jeblair/mordred, sdague/davidkranz: News from Docs/Infra/QA teams ? | 21:05 |
| markmc | #link 2013.1.1 call for testing - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-May/008585.html | 21:05 |
| * annegentle thinks | 21:05 | |
| mordred | ttx: I just told the TC - but we'll be using LTS+Cloud Archive for testing things instead of "latest ubuntu" | 21:06 |
| annegentle | Doc team meeting next Tuesday (morning for me, who knows for you) | 21:06 |
| mordred | we do not believe it will make a noticable difference, since most of our depends come from PyPI | 21:06 |
| annegentle | We have a stable/grizzly branch now for openstack-manuals | 21:06 |
| ttx | Anything else to mention before we go per-project ? | 21:06 |
| sdague | ttx: nothing major here | 21:07 |
| ttx | #topic Oslo status | 21:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Oslo status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:07 | |
| ttx | markmc: hi again | 21:07 |
| *** mattray has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:07 | |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/havana | 21:07 |
| markmc | howdy stranger | 21:07 |
| ttx | General Havana plan looks good. | 21:07 |
| markmc | I tidied up more bps today | 21:07 |
| ttx | I don't see any new library publication in that plan, is that intentional ? | 21:08 |
| markmc | good point | 21:08 |
| markmc | nothing concrete at the moment | 21:08 |
| ttx | NOTHING escapes me | 21:08 |
| markmc | the messaging work is probably not going to be ready for release in this cycle | 21:08 |
| markmc | I'd love to do e.g. oslo.rootwrap in this release | 21:08 |
| markmc | but you're hesitant | 21:08 |
| ttx | indeed, want to decide on the python snippet exec stuff first | 21:09 |
| markmc | also pbr and hacking may fall under oslo during this release | 21:09 |
| markmc | if monty and I figure that out | 21:09 |
| markmc | or not | 21:09 |
| ttx | but converging quantum-rootwrap takes all my rootwrap time | 21:09 |
| ttx | Looking into havana-1 now: | 21:09 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/oslo/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:09 |
| ttx | Good progress, nothing to add | 21:09 |
| markmc | ok | 21:09 |
| markmc | the delayed translation stuff needs looking at | 21:09 |
| markmc | the current patch is stalled | 21:09 |
| * markmc hoping to dig tomorrow | 21:09 | |
| markmc | the message security stuff is optimistic for h-1 | 21:10 |
| markmc | but simo is making great progress, has reviews up | 21:10 |
| ttx | markmc: OK, you can mark blocked stuff blocked if you want to raise alarms | 21:10 |
| markmc | we might get the oslo stuff in by then | 21:10 |
| markmc | common client library I haven't looked at yet | 21:10 |
| ttx | markmc: Anything more to add ? | 21:10 |
| markmc | nope | 21:10 |
| ttx | Questions about Oslo ? | 21:10 |
| ttx | #topic Keystone status | 21:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Keystone status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:11 | |
| dolphm | o/ | 21:11 |
| ttx | dolphm: o/ | 21:11 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/havana | 21:11 |
| simo | markmc: I have new patches to push btw, split into one more generic util and 2 rpc sepcific | 21:11 |
| ttx | dolphm: Looks good too. | 21:11 |
| markmc | simo, great | 21:11 |
| simo | and working on a Key server which hopefully dolphm will adopt in keystone :) | 21:11 |
| ttx | dolphm: You mentioned x509 external auth at the summit... is that for havana ? | 21:11 |
| dolphm | ttx: yes, that's scoped in pluggable-remote-user | 21:12 |
| ttx | ah, ok | 21:12 |
| dolphm | which i currently have targeted to havana-m3, but it could move up, and it shouldn't be too much work | 21:12 |
| *** mattray has quit IRC | 21:12 | |
| ttx | Havana-1 plan is at https://launchpad.net/keystone/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:12 |
| ttx | Looks good to me | 21:13 |
| *** litong has quit IRC | 21:13 | |
| ttx | dolphm: if your roadmap is mostly set, you could fire a "Havana plans" email to the list, with the big themes. I know people appreciated those when we did them in Grizzly | 21:13 |
| dolphm | ttx: absolutely | 21:13 |
| ttx | Anything more about Keystone ? | 21:13 |
| dolphm | regarding bug 1168726 having a backport to 2013.1.1 ... | 21:14 |
| uvirtbot | Launchpad bug 1168726 in keystone/grizzly "default_domain_id breaks the ability to map keystone to ldap" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1168726 | 21:14 |
| dolphm | we still haven't come to a consensus around a solution that is realistically backportable, so while the conversation continues, we've pinged the openstack user's list for feedback on our 2 proposed solutions | 21:14 |
| dolphm | as-is, stable/grizzly is broken for ldap/AD deployments that are not allowed to modify/add to their schema | 21:15 |
| ttx | dolphm: you'll have to see with apevec if the fix can make it to that snapshot. Otherwise it will be in the next one, not a big deal | 21:15 |
| dolphm | ttx: thanks, that's it | 21:15 |
| ttx | dolphm: he /might/ be willing to delay one day or two if that's what it takes... | 21:16 |
| ttx | #topic Ceilometer status | 21:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Ceilometer status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:16 | |
| ttx | eglynn: o/ | 21:16 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/havana | 21:16 |
| eglynn | havana BPs are drafted and almost all assigned: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/havana | 21:16 |
| eglynn | highest priority BP not yet taken is hbase-related https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/hbase-metadata-query | 21:16 |
| ttx | 42 blueprints, impressive | 21:16 |
| *** Mandell has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| eglynn | (not a tier-1 DB for us yet) | 21:17 |
| eglynn | but I expect shengjie min will take it | 21:17 |
| ttx | eglynn: Hmm... "Essential" means that we can't release Havana without that feature being in, which leads to me being a pain tracking progress for that specific blueprint | 21:17 |
| eglynn | (I'll speak to him about tmrw, he's in my TZ) | 21:17 |
| *** morganfainberg has left #openstack-meeting | 21:17 | |
| *** morganfainberg has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:17 | |
| eglynn | yes, it seems over-prioritized to me also | 21:17 |
| ttx | eglynn: Could you explain why sqlalchemy-metadata-query and hbase-metadata-query are "Essential" to the success of the Havana release ? | 21:17 |
| eglynn | I would argue the case that maybe reflects the view of individual contributors | 21:17 |
| ttx | eglynn: ok, so maybe downgrade to High | 21:17 |
| eglynn | (with an interest in those features) | 21:18 |
| eglynn | ttx: yep, agreed, will do | 21:18 |
| eglynn | otherwise we're in good shape for h1 | 21:18 |
| ttx | My next remark is that it would be great to have a bit more milestone targets set so that we know when features are expected to hit | 21:18 |
| ttx | In particular alarm-api sounds pretty advanced at this point | 21:18 |
| eglynn | ttx: yes, we'll look at assigning to individual milestones this week | 21:18 |
| ttx | Otherwise looks good... Looking into havana-1 plan now | 21:19 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/ceilometer/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:19 |
| ttx | Looks fine and in good progress to me | 21:19 |
| ttx | eglynn: anything you wanted to mention ? | 21:19 |
| eglynn | yep, warm fuzzies on all the h1 work ... nothing further from me | 21:19 |
| ttx | Questions on Ceilometer ? | 21:19 |
| ttx | #topic Swift status | 21:20 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Swift status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:20 | |
| notmyname | hi | 21:20 |
| ttx | notmyname: o/ | 21:20 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.8.1 | 21:20 |
| ttx | Is the status on this page accurate ? | 21:20 |
| ttx | multi-region and proxy-affinity-writes look started to me :) | 21:20 |
| notmyname | hmm..conf.d configs has been merged, but isn't there | 21:20 |
| *** anteaya has quit IRC | 21:20 | |
| notmyname | ya, multi-region was mostly done in the grizzly release | 21:21 |
| notmyname | it's a meta-task for the few backend ones | 21:21 |
| ttx | hmm, got disconnected, reasking | 21:21 |
| notmyname | marked as "good progress" | 21:21 |
| ttx | Still no ETA for 1.8.1 release ? | 21:21 |
| notmyname | no, I don't have a date for 1.8.1 at this time | 21:21 |
| ttx | OK, anything you wanted to raise ? | 21:22 |
| notmyname | 2 things | 21:22 |
| notmyname | 1) reviews are getting longish again | 21:22 |
| notmyname | we need people to review (including myself /confession) | 21:23 |
| notmyname | 2) https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Swift/API is WIP for swift api definitions | 21:23 |
| *** anteaya has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:23 | |
| *** anteaya has quit IRC | 21:23 | |
| ttx | notmyname: how has the team meeting been going so far ? usually a good thing to start building team spirit and reviewers motivation | 21:23 |
| notmyname | team meetings are fine. we probably had our best one ever this week | 21:24 |
| ttx | ok... Questions on Swift ? | 21:24 |
| *** anteaya has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:25 | |
| ttx | #help Swift reviewers to review more ! | 21:25 |
| ttx | #topic Glance status | 21:25 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Glance status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:25 | |
| ttx | markwash: o/ | 21:25 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/havana | 21:25 |
| markwash | ahoyhoy | 21:25 |
| * ttx cleans up superseded bp | 21:26 | |
| markwash | ah, thanks! | 21:26 |
| ttx | A bit more milestone targeting cannot hurt, otherwise looks good | 21:26 |
| ttx | During the summit you explored rolling DB migrations... I don't see that in any blueprint yet ? | 21:26 |
| * markwash struggles | 21:26 | |
| markwash | the rolling db migrations task really needs an example migration | 21:27 |
| markwash | but none of our immediate plans are calling for migrations | 21:27 |
| markwash | fortunately, I've been in communication with mike perez about making some progress towards this goal in cinder as well during havana | 21:27 |
| ttx | markwash: fair enough :) | 21:27 |
| ttx | Looking into havana-1 plans @ https://launchpad.net/glance/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:27 |
| ttx | LGTM | 21:28 |
| markwash | since we have only 3 weeks left, some of that will probably slide | 21:28 |
| markwash | there has been some design discussion investment over the past weeks | 21:28 |
| markwash | I expect it will pay off in the later milestones | 21:28 |
| ttx | markwash: you can also push a "havana plans" email to the -dev list | 21:28 |
| ttx | Anything more on Glance ? | 21:28 |
| markwash | yes, should be in a position to do that, but maybe not until next week | 21:29 |
| ttx | no hurry, so far only Swift did one | 21:29 |
| markwash | not frome me | 21:29 |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 21:29 | |
| ttx | #topic Quantum status | 21:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Quantum status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:29 | |
| ttx | markmcclain: hi! | 21:29 |
| markmcclain | hi | 21:29 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/havana | 21:29 |
| ttx | wow, lots of recent activity there | 21:30 |
| markmcclain | yep :) | 21:30 |
| *** martine_ has quit IRC | 21:30 | |
| ttx | Result looks good | 21:30 |
| ttx | markmcclain: seeing the end of the tunnel ? | 21:30 |
| markmcclain | for naming? yes.. will submit a list of name for vetting | 21:31 |
| ttx | oh no, for the havana roadmapping | 21:31 |
| hub_cap | heh naming is harder than roadmapping | 21:32 |
| markmcclain | for roadmap yes.. this is the bulk of what the team has agreed on | 21:32 |
| ttx | Looking at the havana-1 plan @ https://launchpad.net/quantum/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:32 |
| *** dtroyer has left #openstack-meeting | 21:32 | |
| markmcclain | I'm a little concerned about the amount of proposed work and the time remaining… told the team yesterday that we should retarget items to later milestones | 21:33 |
| ttx | looks like good progress overall, ambitious goals (24 blueprints) | 21:33 |
| ttx | yes, we can look into that in the next meetings | 21:34 |
| ttx | Anything else on Quantum ? | 21:34 |
| markmcclain | not from me | 21:34 |
| *** dtroyer has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:34 | |
| ttx | markmcclain: feel free to send that "roadmap" email to -dev too :) | 21:34 |
| ttx | #topic Cinder status | 21:34 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Cinder status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:34 | |
| ttx | jgriffith: o/ | 21:34 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/havana | 21:34 |
| markmcclain | ttx: will do | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | o/ | 21:35 |
| ttx | jgriffith: Could you set priority on those 3 Undefined blueprints ? | 21:35 |
| ttx | Also there are still 4 proposed @ https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/havana/+setgoals | 21:35 |
| ttx | Otherwise the list is in pretty good shape! | 21:35 |
| jgriffith | K... I'll take care of those items | 21:36 |
| ttx | Looking into https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/havana-1 now | 21:36 |
| ttx | Looks good to me, although a bit late, if that status is accurate | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | Yeah, serious time crunch coming up | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | but I think we're going to make it | 21:36 |
| jgriffith | will adjust next week if things don't look better | 21:36 |
| ttx | sure | 21:37 |
| ttx | Anything more in Cinder ? | 21:37 |
| jgriffith | nope | 21:37 |
| ttx | #topic Nova status | 21:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:37 | |
| ttx | jgriffith: thx! | 21:37 |
| ttx | russellb: o/ | 21:37 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/havana | 21:37 |
| russellb | hi | 21:37 |
| ttx | Still looking good :) | 21:37 |
| russellb | this is list is as complete as it can be at this point | 21:37 |
| russellb | i'm sure we'll have more trickle in over time, as usual ... | 21:38 |
| russellb | havana-1 is overly ambitious, but we have a lot of optimistic devs :) | 21:38 |
| ttx | yes, there are always changes... the trick is to overcome the pile-up of new bleprints | 21:38 |
| ttx | At the summit there were talks about addressing feature gaps in Cells... couldn't find a blueprint about that | 21:38 |
| russellb | yeah, it's not there | 21:39 |
| russellb | i didn't put anything on here that doesn't have someone committed to doing it | 21:39 |
| russellb | there are probably 100 other open blueprints not on this list | 21:39 |
| ttx | sounds good to me | 21:39 |
| ttx | just making sure it wasn't overlooked | 21:39 |
| ttx | #link https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:39 |
| russellb | well, not overlooked, just ... nobody stepping up | 21:39 |
| ttx | 35 blueprints is certainly ambitious :) | 21:40 |
| russellb | i still owe a roadmap post/email | 21:40 |
| russellb | yeah, 35 is half of the list | 21:40 |
| ttx | db-enforce-unique-keys (High) depends on db-api-tests (Low) -- should I bump db-api-tests to High ? | 21:40 |
| russellb | yes | 21:40 |
| ttx | (was wondering if that one was not actually already completed) | 21:40 |
| ttx | bumping | 21:41 |
| russellb | it's probably getting close, has been being worked on in a bunch of small steps | 21:41 |
| ttx | "baby steps", would markmc say | 21:41 |
| russellb | yup | 21:41 |
| *** radez is now known as radez_g0n3 | 21:41 | |
| ttx | Looks like we'll have some deferring work to do once those optimistic devs meet reality :) | 21:42 |
| ttx | Otherwise looks good to me | 21:42 |
| ttx | Any question on Nova ? | 21:42 |
| russellb | thanks! | 21:42 |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| ttx | #topic Heat status | 21:42 |
| russellb | it would have been worse | 21:42 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Heat status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:42 | |
| shardy | o/ | 21:42 |
| russellb | i foced a lot of deferrals already | 21:42 |
| * russellb shuts up | 21:42 | |
| ttx | shardy: hi | 21:42 |
| ttx | russellb: when will they learn? | 21:42 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/havana | 21:43 |
| ttx | shardy: Looks good, would be nice to generally have more milestone targets set | 21:43 |
| ttx | That's indicative and can be changed in the future... really helps to see if you're overcommitting on any given milestone | 21:43 |
| *** ashwini has quit IRC | 21:43 | |
| shardy | ttx: sure, still figuring out who's committed to doing what, quite a few new contributors arriving or promised | 21:43 |
| ttx | You also have one blueprint proposed @ https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/havana/+setgoals | 21:44 |
| * shardy looks | 21:44 | |
| *** rerngvit has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:44 | |
| shardy | accepted | 21:44 |
| ttx | Was also looking for the autoscaling API stuff... is there a blueprint covering it ? | 21:44 |
| shardy | ttx: not atm, I'm waiting to see if those requesting the features turn up with some dev resources | 21:45 |
| ttx | that's wise | 21:45 |
| ttx | volume-snapshots looks implemented to me ? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28054/ | 21:45 |
| *** rerngvit has left #openstack-meeting | 21:45 | |
| shardy | yep, I think the patch landed yesterday, or maybe today | 21:45 |
| ttx | will update | 21:45 |
| ttx | Your havana-1 plan @ https://launchpad.net/heat/+milestone/havana-1 looks good to me | 21:45 |
| *** jbartels_ has quit IRC | 21:46 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:46 | |
| ttx | (added volume-snapshots to h1 and marked it implemented) | 21:46 |
| shardy | thanks | 21:46 |
| ttx | Questions about Heat ? | 21:46 |
| ttx | shardy: can you look into those milestone targets before next week ? Will probably result in a few additions to the havana-1 plan | 21:47 |
| shardy | ttx: ok will do | 21:47 |
| ttx | #topic Horizon status | 21:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Horizon status (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:47 | |
| gabrielhurley | yo | 21:47 |
| ttx | shardy: thx! | 21:47 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: hey | 21:48 |
| ttx | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/havana | 21:48 |
| gabrielhurley | the plan hasn't changed since last week | 21:48 |
| *** rerngvit_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:48 | |
| gabrielhurley | but progress has been made | 21:48 |
| gabrielhurley | I think everything in H1 will land | 21:48 |
| *** rerngvit_ has quit IRC | 21:48 | |
| ttx | This is how I like it | 21:48 |
| gabrielhurley | me too | 21:48 |
| ttx | Looks good, as does your havana-1 plan @ https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/havana-1 | 21:48 |
| ttx | So it looks like we'll have around 300 blueprints targeted for Havana cycle | 21:49 |
| gabrielhurley | I think you mean 30 | 21:49 |
| gabrielhurley | oh | 21:49 |
| ttx | (total) | 21:49 |
| gabrielhurley | 300 across everyone | 21:49 |
| *** bradjones|away is now known as bradjones | 21:49 | |
| ttx | up from 233 completed in grizzly | 21:49 |
| *** dwcramer has quit IRC | 21:49 | |
| gabrielhurley | that's a heck of a lot of stuff | 21:49 |
| ttx | http://status.openstack.org/release | 21:50 |
| ttx | gabrielhurley: anything you wanted to mention ? | 21:50 |
| gabrielhurley | nope, stuff to discuss with the Horizon team specifically, but no concerns for the community at large. Good progress. | 21:50 |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 21:50 | |
| ttx | Rocking and rolling | 21:50 |
| gabrielhurley | always | 21:50 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 21:50 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: project)" | 21:50 | |
| gabrielhurley | ttx: shouldn't you do an "incubated projects" section again? | 21:51 |
| ttx | We'll probably open a topic for incubated projects here, next week | 21:51 |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 21:51 | |
| ttx | 10 projects was waayyy too easy | 21:51 |
| gabrielhurley | Just wanted to make sure we didn't short-change RedDwarf and Ironic ;-) | 21:51 |
| ttx | nah, I need to give them extra notice about it | 21:51 |
| ttx | they are busy drinking right now | 21:51 |
| ttx | anything else, anyone ? | 21:52 |
| ttx | hub_cap, devananda: around ? | 21:52 |
| gabrielhurley | is that gonna be the next hit slang? "man, I drank so much last night... I was Incubated!" | 21:52 |
| devananda | ttx: here | 21:53 |
| Vek | haha | 21:53 |
| hub_cap | hai | 21:53 |
| ttx | devananda: just wanted to mention, next week we'll add a topic to the meeting to cover incubation progress | 21:53 |
| ttx | hub_cap: ^ | 21:53 |
| hub_cap | great! id love some guidance | 21:53 |
| ttx | That's generally where we try to mentor you through things | 21:53 |
| hub_cap | can i have a big brother/ big sister? | 21:53 |
| hub_cap | :D | 21:53 |
| devananda | ttx: awesome! yes, will be much appreciated :) | 21:53 |
| ttx | hub_cap, devananda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PTLguide is a good start | 21:54 |
| *** saurabhs has quit IRC | 21:54 | |
| devananda | i've been reading that already | 21:54 |
| hub_cap | me2 | 21:54 |
| ttx | as is https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Cycle | 21:54 |
| *** SlickNik has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:55 | |
| hub_cap | ok thanks ttx will look @ that too | 21:55 |
| hub_cap | i think ive got things ironed out on LP but i prolly missed a checkbox here or there | 21:55 |
| ttx | ideally we switch to external release management (i.e. me handling your release) at the second or third milestone | 21:55 |
| *** esp1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| *** saurabhs has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:56 | |
| hub_cap | ttx: awesome more work for u! | 21:56 |
| ttx | time for the CI stuff to be aligned | 21:56 |
| ttx | That's about it for now :) | 21:56 |
| hub_cap | ill add that to the list of things i want to chat u up, and i think that id like to add devananda to that chat | 21:56 |
| ttx | All I can think of at this late hour | 21:56 |
| ttx | Maybe time for a quick question | 21:57 |
| hub_cap | sure, ive got ~6 items to ask u about in a few days | 21:57 |
| ttx | if you have any | 21:57 |
| hub_cap | naw dont want to occupy mroe time, im good for the next few days, business as usual | 21:57 |
| reed | is everybody going to ask.openstack.org to see if they can show off their knowledge answering questions? | 21:57 |
| hub_cap | the question i have are more open ended discussion type Qs | 21:57 |
| ttx | hub_cap: if you already have those questions, maybe email is the most efficient way to get to me (if you're in PST) | 21:57 |
| ttx | OK then... let's close this | 21:58 |
| hub_cap | ttx: ok should i email the entire tc list? | 21:58 |
| ttx | hub_cap: no, ask me | 21:58 |
| hub_cap | kk | 21:58 |
| *** eglynn has quit IRC | 21:58 | |
| hub_cap | thx again all | 21:58 |
| ttx | will redirect if needed | 21:58 |
| hub_cap | roger | 21:58 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 21:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 21:58 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 21:58:41 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 21:58 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-05-07-21.02.html | 21:58 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-05-07-21.02.txt | 21:58 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-05-07-21.02.log.html | 21:58 |
| *** Vek has left #openstack-meeting | 21:58 | |
| russellb | bam, within an hour! | 21:58 |
| russellb | nice work ttx | 21:58 |
| reed | yeah | 21:59 |
| devananda | hub_cap: ++ to sharing a list of questions. i'll prollythink of some over night | 21:59 |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 21:59 | |
| hub_cap | devananda: ill cc u most def | 21:59 |
| devananda | right now i'm going to focus on actually getting a separate code base with things in it that work :) | 22:00 |
| hub_cap | :P | 22:00 |
| ttx | hub_cap, devananda: we can do it as an open etherpad | 22:01 |
| gabrielhurley | ooookay, Horizon meeting time | 22:01 |
| ttx | hub_cap, devananda: might seed a wiki page about incubation Q&A | 22:01 |
| devananda | ++ | 22:01 |
| hub_cap | ttx: already thought of doing that | 22:01 |
| gabrielhurley | ttx, hub_cap, devananda: take it in another channel ;-) | 22:01 |
| hub_cap | sry gabrielhurley | 22:01 |
| hub_cap | :) | 22:01 |
| gabrielhurley | no worries | 22:01 |
| ttx | I'm HACKING YOUR CONFERENCE | 22:02 |
| gabrielhurley | hahahaha | 22:02 |
| gabrielhurley | well played | 22:02 |
| gabrielhurley | #startmeeting horizon | 22:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue May 7 22:02:27 2013 UTC. The chair is gabrielhurley. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: horizon)" | 22:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'horizon' | 22:02 |
| gabrielhurley | #topic overview | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "overview (Meeting topic: horizon)" | 22:02 | |
| gabrielhurley | Hello all | 22:02 |
| gabrielhurley | things are oving right along | 22:02 |
| lcheng | hello | 22:02 |
| david-lyle | Hello | 22:02 |
| bradjones | hey | 22:02 |
| jpich | hey | 22:03 |
| *** cdub_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:03 | |
| gabrielhurley | Basically, the overview looks like this: the Havana plan looks solid and stable, we're halfway through H1 and look to be on target, and that makes me happy as long as we keep it up. | 22:03 |
| gabrielhurley | everything else I've got is about blueprints | 22:04 |
| gabrielhurley | #topic blueprits and bugs | 22:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "blueprits and bugs (Meeting topic: horizon)" | 22:04 | |
| gabrielhurley | I'm gonna ignore the typo in that topic... ::sigh:: | 22:04 |
| *** hub_cap has left #openstack-meeting | 22:04 | |
| gabrielhurley | There are reviews up for both of the "essential" blueprints: | 22:04 |
| gabrielhurley | D3: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28362/ | 22:05 |
| gabrielhurley | and enabling keystone v3: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/27989/ | 22:05 |
| gabrielhurley | I intend to review the D3 one thoroughly in the next day or two | 22:05 |
| gabrielhurley | the Keystone one is from me and has some +1's but it needs core reviewer eyes on it asap | 22:06 |
| gabrielhurley | it's blocking work on several other blueprints | 22:06 |
| gabrielhurley | so it's the highest priority | 22:06 |
| gabrielhurley | as far as the actual blueprint for it (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/api-capability-detection) I'm going to split it into two pieces | 22:06 |
| gabrielhurley | one will be "enabling API version switching" which is what that review actually does | 22:07 |
| gabrielhurley | and the other will be for the larger question of version/capability detection via the APIs | 22:07 |
| gabrielhurley | I'm gonna do that because the latter has turned out to be a long-term process for the whole OpenStack community | 22:07 |
| gabrielhurley | you can see the current state of the proposal here: https://gist.github.com/gabrielhurley/5499434 | 22:08 |
| gabrielhurley | I'm gonna continue to carry that through the whole H cycle | 22:08 |
| gabrielhurley | So, to come back around, let's get reviews done on those two since they're the "essential" blueprints for the entire Havana cycle | 22:08 |
| gabrielhurley | that'll open up the ability to progress on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/admin-domain-crud https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/admin-role-crud https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/login-domain-support and https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/admin-group-crud | 22:09 |
| gabrielhurley | (basically all the Keystone v3 stuff for H1) | 22:09 |
| david-lyle | the other blocker for those is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/21942/ | 22:09 |
| david-lyle | python-keystoneclient support | 22:10 |
| gabrielhurley | good to know | 22:10 |
| gabrielhurley | I'll keep an eye on that one too | 22:10 |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| david-lyle | lin's been making good progress using that patch | 22:10 |
| gabrielhurley | so I see :-) | 22:10 |
| gabrielhurley | let's run through the other H1 blueprints real quick | 22:10 |
| *** cdub has quit IRC | 22:11 | |
| lcheng | Found some bugs on it already, added some comments on the review. | 22:11 |
| gabrielhurley | working down the list, I still need to follow up on the Heat UI | 22:11 |
| gabrielhurley | so that's on me | 22:11 |
| gabrielhurley | cody-somerville: you reassigned https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/dry-templates to Tatiana Mazur... happen to have an IRC handle there? | 22:12 |
| gabrielhurley | if not I can email to make sure of what's happening there | 22:12 |
| *** glikson has quit IRC | 22:12 | |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:13 | |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:13 | |
| *** esp1 has left #openstack-meeting | 22:13 | |
| gabrielhurley | Not a big deal. I'll follow up there too. | 22:13 |
| gabrielhurley | david-lyle: You've got https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/centralized-color-palette assigned to you. I assume you've been focused more on other areas like Keystone that're more preseeing. Any particular update to share? | 22:14 |
| gabrielhurley | s/preseeing/pressing | 22:14 |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:14 | |
| david-lyle | I started pulling out the pieces, but haven't gotten back to it yet. Shouldn't take too long to wrap up | 22:14 |
| *** saurabhs has left #openstack-meeting | 22:14 | |
| gabrielhurley | that's about what I figured. thanks. | 22:15 |
| gabrielhurley | It's also one that can slip if needed, but it's early in the cycle to think about that. | 22:15 |
| *** markmc has quit IRC | 22:15 | |
| lcheng | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/login-domain-support - will be probably be ready for review in a day or two. | 22:15 |
| gabrielhurley | awesome | 22:15 |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 22:16 | |
| gabrielhurley | it doesn't look like amotoki is around, so I won't linger on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-security-group | 22:16 |
| gabrielhurley | if anyone wants to say something about Quantum Security Groups feel free though | 22:16 |
| gabrielhurley | Per-project flavors... https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/define-flavor-for-project | 22:17 |
| gabrielhurley | the review expired. I'll contact the author and see about getting it updated. If not we should re-assign it and wrap it up. | 22:17 |
| *** cdub has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:18 | |
| gabrielhurley | lastly, password change(https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/change-user-passwords ) has a review which was recently updated: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/23901/ | 22:18 |
| gabrielhurley | that needs review too | 22:18 |
| *** kebray has quit IRC | 22:19 | |
| gabrielhurley | bradjones: you asked for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/network-quotas to be assigned to you | 22:19 |
| gabrielhurley | I went ahead and did that... thoughts on what milestone it should be in? (currently it's H3) | 22:19 |
| gabrielhurley | also, you'll obviously want to work closely with the Quantum team on that | 22:19 |
| bradjones | yeah I can begin working on it straight away so i'll take a look at how the API is looking at get back to you | 22:20 |
| gabrielhurley | awesome. just let me know. | 22:20 |
| bradjones | will do | 22:20 |
| gabrielhurley | quick notes on bugs: | 22:21 |
| david-lyle | I've also got the prelimary step of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/multiple-service-endpoints about ready for review, it's just a selector to pick the region the services are being managed for. Any feedback in the blueprint on the picker placement would be great. http://imgur.com/gIh8MFh | 22:21 |
| gabrielhurley | some interesting bugs crept into to the keystone API recently which got reported 4 or 5 times in differing forms | 22:21 |
| gabrielhurley | david-lyle: perhaps that'd be a good thing to reach out to the new OpenStack UX group for... | 22:22 |
| david-lyle | gabrielhurley: was unaware of the group, I will do that. Thanks | 22:22 |
| gabrielhurley | lemme find a link | 22:22 |
| gabrielhurley | it's surprisingly hard to google for | 22:23 |
| gabrielhurley | https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/100954512393463248122 | 22:23 |
| gabrielhurley | #action get that group more visiblity/discoverability | 22:24 |
| gabrielhurley | it's just getting started | 22:24 |
| gabrielhurley | so I'm interested to test the waters on having them weigh in on real UX questions | 22:24 |
| gabrielhurley | anyhow, interesting keystone bugs... mostly not our fault... will get resolutions in the future | 22:24 |
| gabrielhurley | #topic open discussion | 22:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: horizon)" | 22:24 | |
| gabrielhurley | everyone's being mighty quiet today... | 22:25 |
| gabrielhurley | here's your chance! | 22:25 |
| jpich | Question about backporting translations | 22:25 |
| jpich | I've hit this strange error in the unit tests after backporting -> http://paste.openstack.org/show/36915/ It looks like a mix of locales is being used in the error message. Curious to hear if anyone is familiar with this? | 22:26 |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:26 | |
| gabrielhurley | I can help a bit | 22:27 |
| gabrielhurley | that's what happens when there's a unicode character in an exception string that is naively printed by a tool like (in this case) nose | 22:27 |
| gabrielhurley | it can't print the real exception because it tries to convert the exception to an ascii string (stupid nose) and fails | 22:27 |
| gabrielhurley | fixing that is a lot harder because you have to figure out what the failure is | 22:28 |
| jpich | Wouldn't the tests still be run in English though? | 22:28 |
| cody-somerville | gabrielhurley: Hey. Sent you e-mail about that. | 22:28 |
| cody-somerville | gabrielhurley: She e-mailed me and asked to be assigned that bp. | 22:28 |
| gabrielhurley | the tests have unicode characters in the test data | 22:28 |
| gabrielhurley | I suggest tracing up the stack to somewhere in code under your control and wrapping that in a new try/except block and printing the error yourself so you can see what's happening | 22:29 |
| *** fnaval has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| jpich | I pasted the error below the test output in that paste | 22:29 |
| gabrielhurley | cody-somerville: yeah, I saw the email, just wanted to follow up to on timeline/expectations | 22:30 |
| gabrielhurley | jpich: oh... hmmmm | 22:30 |
| gabrielhurley | that is odd | 22:30 |
| gabrielhurley | okay, I'm not sure offhand | 22:30 |
| jpich | The only change is the po/mo files | 22:30 |
| jpich | Fair enough! I'll dig further | 22:30 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah, now I'm curious | 22:31 |
| jpich | Not looking good for getting it into the next stable release this way though | 22:31 |
| jpich | Cheers | 22:31 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah, they're pushing to get that out ASAP | 22:31 |
| gabrielhurley | if it goes into the next one so be it | 22:32 |
| gabrielhurley | better to figure out what's wrong | 22:32 |
| jpich | Yep | 22:32 |
| *** shang has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| gabrielhurley | anybody else? | 22:35 |
| vkmc | Is there something new regarding Keystone's trust API integration with Horizon? | 22:35 |
| *** maoy has quit IRC | 22:35 | |
| gabrielhurley | define "something new" | 22:35 |
| gabrielhurley | like, management of trusts? | 22:35 |
| gabrielhurley | or something else? | 22:36 |
| lcheng | Trust api has been pulled out of keystone before Grizzly release. Not sure what is the current state. | 22:36 |
| vkmc | Like if there is planned blueprint for it | 22:36 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah, that API is in flux currently, so we hadn't targeted anything for it | 22:36 |
| gabrielhurley | actually I don't think there's even an untargeted BP | 22:37 |
| gabrielhurley | hopefully that'll become clearer in H | 22:37 |
| gabrielhurley | I think having an open BP to track it would be good | 22:37 |
| gabrielhurley | we might want to land something later on (H3?) | 22:37 |
| gabrielhurley | it all depends on Keystone | 22:37 |
| *** jcru is now known as jcru|away | 22:37 | |
| vkmc | I see... I lost the track of it and wasn't sure which was the current state | 22:38 |
| vkmc | I'll keep an eye on Keystone then and see how is it managed | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | yeah. it's been messy | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | sounds good | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | good question though | 22:39 |
| jpich | Is there something else in Keystone v3 that could help with implementing tenant deletion differently? | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | not presentl | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | y | 22:39 |
| gabrielhurley | there's informal talk around improving cross-project event-driven behavior though | 22:40 |
| gabrielhurley | it's actually being driven by changes in Nova | 22:40 |
| vkmc | Thanks jpich, I didn't consider other choices heh | 22:40 |
| *** flaper87 has quit IRC | 22:40 | |
| gabrielhurley | we'll see where it goes over the next milestone or two | 22:40 |
| jpich | Interesting, ok | 22:41 |
| *** dolphm has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:41 | |
| jpich | vkmc: Always be in flux ;) | 22:41 |
| vkmc | Great :) | 22:41 |
| gabrielhurley | hehe | 22:41 |
| vkmc | jpich, Oh I try hehe | 22:42 |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 22:42 | |
| *** jcru|away is now known as jcru | 22:43 | |
| gabrielhurley | okay | 22:43 |
| gabrielhurley | I'm gonna call it here | 22:43 |
| gabrielhurley | have a great week folks! | 22:43 |
| gabrielhurley | review, review, review! | 22:43 |
| gabrielhurley | and thank you all as usual. | 22:43 |
| gabrielhurley | #endmeeting | 22:43 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack meetings || Development in #openstack-dev || Help in #openstack" | 22:43 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue May 7 22:43:55 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:43 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-05-07-22.02.html | 22:43 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-05-07-22.02.txt | 22:43 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/horizon/2013/horizon.2013-05-07-22.02.log.html | 22:44 |
| jpich | Thanks | 22:44 |
| bradjones | thanks | 22:44 |
| *** jcru has quit IRC | 22:44 | |
| vkmc | Thanks! | 22:44 |
| lcheng | thanks | 22:44 |
| *** bradjones is now known as bradjones|away | 22:45 | |
| *** dolphm has quit IRC | 22:46 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:46 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 22:47 | |
| *** gabrielhurley has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** lglenden has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul|away | 22:49 | |
| *** lloydde has quit IRC | 22:51 | |
| *** datsun180b has quit IRC | 22:52 | |
| *** mikal has quit IRC | 22:56 | |
| *** spzala has quit IRC | 22:57 | |
| *** shardy has left #openstack-meeting | 22:57 | |
| *** mikal has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:59 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 22:59 | |
| *** johnpur has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** vipul|away is now known as vipul | 23:01 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul|away | 23:03 | |
| *** ladquin is now known as ladquin_brb | 23:03 | |
| *** lloydde has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:07 | |
| *** vipul|away is now known as vipul | 23:07 | |
| *** mkollaro has quit IRC | 23:07 | |
| *** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:13 | |
| *** mdenny has quit IRC | 23:14 | |
| *** hemna is now known as hemnafk | 23:14 | |
| *** mdenny has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:17 | |
| *** mdenny has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** mdenny has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:18 | |
| *** beyounn has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** beyounn has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:19 | |
| beyounn | bt | 23:20 |
| *** gongysh has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:22 | |
| *** dwcramer has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:25 | |
| *** markpeek has quit IRC | 23:31 | |
| *** amyt has quit IRC | 23:33 | |
| *** jrodom has quit IRC | 23:35 | |
| *** topol has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:43 | |
| *** jamespage_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:57 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!