17:00 <tinwood> #startmeeting openstack-charms-meeting 17:00 <meetingology> Meeting started Wed Jul 6 17:00:48 2016 UTC. The chair is tinwood. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 17:00 <meetingology> 17:00 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 17:00 <tinwood> welcome all! 17:01 <gnuoy> thanks 17:01 <tinwood> The first topic is: 17:01 <tinwood> #topic Review ACTION points from previous meeting 17:01 <tinwood> Looking at the last minutes, gnuoy, it's about moving this meeting!? 17:01 <gnuoy> sure, I've done a subtopic for each action in the past 17:02 <gnuoy> but I'm guessing you're looking at me for moving this meeting... 17:02 <tinwood> Not sure I follow. 17:02 <gnuoy> #subtopic gnuoy to move this meeting 17:02 <gnuoy> ^ that sort of thing 17:02 <gnuoy> anyway 17:02 <gnuoy> I have a gerrit request up for scheduling the meeting 17:03 <gnuoy> but we can't have this slot 17:03 <tinwood> (Still new at this) I guess I have to do that? 17:03 <gnuoy> we can have: http://paste.ubuntu.com/18635394/ 17:03 <tinwood> And those map to times, I'm guessing. 17:04 <gnuoy> tinwood, good point they are all 17:00 UTC 17:04 <gnuoy> so, I propose openstack-meeting-4 biweekly-even 17:04 <gnuoy> on a Monday 17:05 <thedac> works for me 17:05 <gnuoy> biweekly means we can have another meeting if we need for apac 17:05 <tinwood> We'd have to move our charms catchup? 17:05 <gnuoy> 1 week in USA friendly time, one week in apac friendly 17:05 <tinwood> Or is that earlier? (UTC vs BST). 17:06 <gnuoy> not everyone would attend both 17:06 <thedac> tinwood: that is one hour earlier 17:06 <tinwood> Sounds okay then. 17:06 <gnuoy> this meeting is 17:00 UTC 17:06 <tinwood> Yes, I like those slots 17:06 <coreycb> that time sounds good to me 17:06 <gnuoy> ok, I will book that first slot, thanks 17:06 <tinwood> Okay, sounds like an action - is that okay for you to do gnuoy as you're running with it. 17:07 <gnuoy> yep 17:07 <tinwood> #action gnuoy to try to book first slot from http://paste.ubuntu.com/18635394/ 17:07 * meetingology gnuoy to try to book first slot from http://paste.ubuntu.com/18635394/ 17:07 <tinwood> thanks gnuoy 17:07 <tinwood> #topic State of Development for next Charm Release 17:08 <tinwood> Any comments on this topic, please? 17:08 <gnuoy> Keystone v3 support in the dashboard has landed 17:08 <tinwood> \o/ 17:08 <thedac> Apparmor for nova-compute is close. I am fighting an amulet race condition at the moment. 17:09 <gnuoy> A few caveats though. The dashboard now has to have a db relation if you want to use keystone v3 17:09 <gnuoy> Designate and designate bind should land this week. 17:09 <tinwood> barbican is very close, but has a bug upstream :( 17:09 <coreycb> I have a number of deploy from source reviews ready for review, which should cover the bulk of getting DFS into shape. the corresponding c-h changes have landed for the current reviews. 17:10 <gnuoy> \o/ 17:10 <gnuoy> coreycb, hopefully you should get your charmhelper syncs for free 17:10 <gnuoy> with jamespages ch sync for licensing changes 17:10 <tinwood> So it looks like it's all heading in the right direction. 17:11 <gnuoy> one more thing 17:11 <tinwood> Any more before we move on? 17:11 <gnuoy> all interfaces and layers are in Git/Gerrit now 17:11 <gnuoy> ^ Repoint reviews if you need to! 17:11 <coreycb> gnuoy, very nice 17:11 <gnuoy> jamespages work but am happy to take the credit 17:12 <coreycb> :) 17:12 <tinwood> Oh, at the feature freeze day is next week. 17:12 <gnuoy> yea! good point 17:12 <thedac> coreycb++ 17:13 <gnuoy> Thursday next week to be precise 17:13 <tinwood> So anything that has to make the release needs to be done by next Thursday. 17:13 <coreycb> tinwood, feature-wise, at least 17:13 <tinwood> yes 17:14 <tinwood> next: 17:14 <tinwood> #topic Release Bugs 17:14 <tinwood> gnuoy, would you have your link handy? 17:15 <tinwood> I'm guessing: #link https://goo.gl/HJjORI 17:15 <gnuoy> yep 17:15 <tinwood> Yes, there are 32 bugs on the list. 17:16 <gnuoy> ...and we still seem to making little progress 17:16 <gnuoy> that seems to be like 32 too many 17:16 <tinwood> Do they need to be shifted by 16.07? 17:17 <tinwood> bearing in mind some of them are quite 'old'. 17:17 <gnuoy> I'm not sure, I think James does something about retargeting bus 17:17 <gnuoy> * bugs 17:17 <jamespage_shadow> so long as our run rate on bugs is stable, I think we're ok - we need to focus on high priority bugs first 17:17 <jamespage_shadow> (of coursE) 17:18 <jamespage_shadow> I would encourage you all to take some time over the next week and spend an hour on the bug queue 17:18 <jamespage_shadow> please :-) 17:18 <jamespage_shadow> I'll be focussing on reviews, landing and bugs in the next 8 days in the runup to final freeze 17:18 <tinwood> okay, that sounds like a good plan. 17:19 <tinwood> #topic Openstack Events 17:19 <tinwood> I noticed an email that said there was a week to go for submitting talk abstracts for ODS? Did I read that right? 17:20 <gnuoy> tinwood, I think your looking at an out of data agends 17:20 <gnuoy> * agenda 17:20 <gnuoy> I have next agenda item as "Openstack talk submissions for ODS 17:20 <gnuoy> " 17:20 <gnuoy> ... 17:20 <tinwood> indeed. sorry. 17:20 <gnuoy> np, they were adds 17:21 <tinwood> #topic Openstack talk submissions for ODS 17:21 <gnuoy> So, hands up if you've submitted one! 17:21 * gnuoy keeps his hand down 17:21 * tinwood knows nothing :( 17:21 <coreycb> I plan to submit one, not sure what yet though 17:21 <tinwood> aparently ONE talk has been submitted so far. 17:22 <tinwood> according to the email I saw. 17:22 <thedac> gnuoy: we talked about a Openstack charms development talk we could co-author 17:22 <gnuoy> yes, agreed 17:23 <tinwood> I'd love to collaborate as I enjoy talking. 17:23 <tinwood> but not if you've already got a partner! 17:23 <thedac> sounds good we can discuss offline 17:23 <gnuoy> and lets talk to markbaker about getting a charm school workshop as well 17:24 <jamespage_shadow> some general guidance - talk about things openstack-ish that are really interesting to the general community 17:24 <jamespage_shadow> we're (almost) and openstack project, so this is a great change to let the world know about us! 17:24 <jamespage_shadow> deploying openstack talks +1000 17:25 <jamespage_shadow> beisner, testing stuff good as well - maybe some s390-ish? 17:25 <tinwood> Anything else on ODS? 17:25 <tinwood> Any actions? 17:26 <cargonza> wrt to charm school, I need to sync with the sales team to field the attendance... 17:26 <tinwood> #action cargonza to sync with sales team re charm school at ODS Barcelona 17:26 * meetingology cargonza to sync with sales team re charm school at ODS Barcelona 17:26 <cargonza> I'll coordinate logistics with the admins (ie. rooms, av, etc.) 17:26 <gnuoy> awesome 17:27 <tinwood> excellent. 17:27 <tinwood> Okay, next topic looks a bit strange. 17:27 <tinwood> #topic What does the chair of this meeting do after the meeting? 17:27 <gnuoy> ok, this one is mine 17:28 <gnuoy> The chair of this meeting doesn't always seem to be following the actions outlined in the wiki 17:28 <coreycb> drinks a beer and goes to bed? 17:28 * tinwood lol 17:28 <gnuoy> So, can we review the process and amend accordingly 17:29 <tinwood> My first time so .. 17:29 <gnuoy> tinwood, I think thats an action for jamespage and I 17:29 <jamespage_shadow> agreed - 17:29 <jamespage_shadow> once we move under #openstack for meetings we get automated minutes; but I'd like for us to announce the meeting prior to it happening 17:30 <jamespage_shadow> and summarize on the openstack-dev ML afterwards 17:30 <tinwood> #action gnuoy & jamespage to review the chair's post meeting process and amend as required. 17:30 * meetingology gnuoy & jamespage to review the chair's post meeting process and amend as required. 17:30 <jamespage_shadow> which is not as documented on the ubuntu wiki, but that's where we came from , not where we want to be 17:30 <jamespage_shadow> lets get that sorted out between now and next week 17:31 <gnuoy> tinwood, sorry, I meant previous chairs not you 17:31 <gnuoy> what I really meant was: 17:31 <tinwood> okay, that sounds good. I'm hoping one of you is a chair for the first openstack-meetings meeting. 17:31 <gnuoy> We have a process documented and I don;t think its clear to everyone so lets review that 17:32 <tinwood> Right, so there's an action for that. okay to move on? 17:32 <gnuoy> sounds good to me 17:32 <tinwood> #topic workload status messages, max 20 chars and proper case? 17:32 <gnuoy> ok, so, thats me as weel 17:32 <gnuoy> * well 17:32 <tinwood> I think I'm guilty here. 17:33 * thedac hides 17:33 <gnuoy> There was a suggestion that we are consistent accross all charms and use proper caps and limit them to 20 chars 17:33 <tinwood> When you say 'Proper Caps', what do you mean? 17:33 <gnuoy> I'm not convinced tbh. I think we'll loose valuable info 17:33 <gnuoy> Like this 17:33 <gnuoy> rather than 17:33 <gnuoy> like this 17:34 <tinwood> Okay, that's good. 17:34 <tinwood> What's the driver? 17:34 <tinwood> for 20 chars only? 17:34 <thedac> I agree a max 20 chars will lose valuable information 17:34 <gnuoy> I think its useful to say: all these interfaces are missing... 17:34 <gnuoy> thats more that 20chars right there 17:35 <coreycb> that is fairly limiting, 20 chars 17:35 <coreycb> perhaps the requester will negotiate 17:35 <tinwood> Unless it's "'mysql', 'hsm', is miss..." 17:36 <jamespage_shadow> okies - so I think working some examples might be useful 17:36 <jamespage_shadow> then we can review appropriately and see what works well 17:36 <coreycb> jamespage, +1 17:36 <tinwood> It sounds like we need to pull together all of the workload statuses we set, put them down somewhere, and review it? Or is that too much? 17:37 <coreycb> or gnuoy ^ 17:37 <gnuoy> Maybe aim for nice caps and succint message but not limit chars 17:37 <gnuoy> coreycb, haha that was jamespage 17:37 <coreycb> lol 17:37 <coreycb> tinwood, I think that's a good idea 17:38 <coreycb> at least a subset of the common messages 17:38 <tinwood> This sounds like an action. Who's not here today? 17:39 <tinwood> Seriously, do we need this as a minuted action? 17:39 <gnuoy> tinwood, I don't think so. Maybe lets all keep in mind the formatting of thos stauses 17:39 <gnuoy> * those 17:40 <tinwood> Can I ask where the '20' came from? 17:40 <gnuoy> it was a suggestion floating around for people with limited terminal width 17:40 <thedac> --format yaml FTW 17:41 <gnuoy> haha yeah 17:42 <tinwood> okay, so no action, but try to keep them short and snappy. assess_status() is a repeat offender as it concatenates missing interfaces ... a lot. 17:42 <tinwood> #topic Openstack Events 17:42 <tinwood> We may have covered this, but any more events? 17:42 <gnuoy> Well ODS but I think we've covered that 17:43 <tinwood> Ok, moving on to: 17:43 <tinwood> #topic Open Discussion 17:43 <tinwood> The floor is yours. 17:44 <gnuoy> I have nothing to openly discuss :-) 17:44 * tinwood chuckles 17:44 <thedac> Do we want to discuss the email thread about hosting third party OS charms? 17:44 <tinwood> fire away. 17:44 <thedac> congress and charm partner charms 17:45 <thedac> Should all charms go upstream or is there a selection criteria? 17:45 <gnuoy> there are no 3rd party os charms 17:46 <jamespage_shadow> as a project, openstack charms should be embracing anyone who wants to charm their part of openstack 17:46 <thedac> agreed. I am aksing if the charm partner SDN charms should also be in this category 17:46 <jamespage_shadow> publication of such charms to the juju charm store is dependent on them meeting the criteria as set out by the juju charm team 17:47 <jamespage_shadow> thedac, +1 absoluletey 17:47 <jamespage_shadow> thedac, plumgrid already asked, onos want to be 17:47 <jamespage_shadow> I think the model of charms-core + charms-<group>-core will work well here 17:47 <thedac> ok, so if we could document the procedure that would be helpful 17:47 <jamespage_shadow> sure - I'll put something in the charm-guide 17:48 <thedac> great 17:48 <jamespage_shadow> #action jamespage document procedure for setup of sub-charm group ownership for SDN/storage vendors etc... 17:48 * meetingology jamespage document procedure for setup of sub-charm group ownership for SDN/storage vendors etc... 17:48 <tinwood> jamespage, beat me to it. 17:49 <gnuoy> thanks jamespage 17:49 <tinwood> Anything more for Open Discussion? 17:49 <gnuoy> not from me 17:49 <gnuoy> or from jamespage 17:49 <thedac> I am good 17:49 <coreycb> I'm good as well 17:49 <tinwood> Great. 17:50 <tinwood> #action Announce next meeting date, time and chair 17:50 * meetingology Announce next meeting date, time and chair 17:50 <tinwood> So the chair rotates; who's up for it next? 17:50 <gnuoy> tinwood, it's in the wiki, one sec 17:50 <gnuoy> tinwood, thedac is the winner 17:50 <tinwood> \o/ 17:51 <tinwood> At the moment, we're assuming next Wednesday at 17.00UTC here again? 17:51 <gnuoy> tinwood, yes, I hope its elsewhere but will post a redirect here if needs be 17:51 <thedac> ok 17:52 <tinwood> okay, then. With no further ado, thanks everybody and ... 17:52 <tinwood> #endmeeting