Difference between revisions of "Meetings/Horizon/March4Log"
David Lyle (talk | contribs) (Created page with "david-lyle: #startmeeting Horizon david-lyle: hmm is the meeting bot sleeping? doug-fish: seems that way :-) david-lyle: ok, we'll just do without david-lyle: Let's start wit...") |
David Lyle (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | david-lyle: #startmeeting Horizon | + | * david-lyle: #startmeeting Horizon |
| − | david-lyle: hmm is the meeting bot sleeping? | + | * david-lyle: hmm is the meeting bot sleeping? |
| − | doug-fish: seems that way :-) | + | * doug-fish: seems that way :-) |
| − | david-lyle: ok, we'll just do without | + | * david-lyle: ok, we'll just do without |
| − | david-lyle: Let's start with dates reminder | + | * david-lyle: Let's start with dates reminder |
| − | david-lyle: March 9 is Feature Proposal Freeze (FPF), all proposed changes for Kilo should have the initial patch set posted by then | + | * david-lyle: March 9 is Feature Proposal Freeze (FPF), all proposed changes for Kilo should have the initial patch set posted by then |
| − | david-lyle: March 19 is Feature Freeze (FF), all code needs to be merged by this date. | + | * david-lyle: March 19 is Feature Freeze (FF), all code needs to be merged by this date. |
| − | david-lyle: there is the possibility of exceptions, but it is always preferable not to use them | + | * david-lyle: there is the possibility of exceptions, but it is always preferable not to use them |
| − | david-lyle: https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/kilo-3 | + | * david-lyle: https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/kilo-3 |
| − | david-lyle: with that in mind, I've started removing items from kilo-3 | + | * david-lyle: with that in mind, I've started removing items from kilo-3 |
| − | david-lyle: will remove more as time goes on | + | * david-lyle: will remove more as time goes on |
| − | david-lyle: removed a fair number of cinder patches blocked by no python-cinderclient release | + | * david-lyle: removed a fair number of cinder patches blocked by no python-cinderclient release |
| − | david-lyle: that being release on the last couple of days of Kilo is too late to handle effectively | + | * david-lyle: that being release on the last couple of days of Kilo is too late to handle effectively |
| − | doug-fish: are the python client updates scheduled? | + | * doug-fish: are the python client updates scheduled? |
| − | david-lyle: for us | + | * david-lyle: for us |
| − | doug-fish: (I may know of another item in trouble without an update) | + | * doug-fish: (I may know of another item in trouble without an update) |
| − | david-lyle: doug-fish: not generally, just when ready | + | * david-lyle: doug-fish: not generally, just when ready |
| − | doug-fish: ok | + | * doug-fish: ok |
| − | david-lyle: most don't release very often, which is unfortunate | + | * david-lyle: most don't release very often, which is unfortunate |
| − | david-lyle: for us | + | * david-lyle: for us |
| − | doug-fish: agreed | + | * doug-fish: agreed |
| − | david-lyle: for high priority items in Kilo we only have 4 of 9 implemented | + | * david-lyle: for high priority items in Kilo we only have 4 of 9 implemented |
| − | david-lyle: I did see mrunge posted a patch for the unowned one, thanks, will try to look at today | + | * david-lyle: I did see mrunge posted a patch for the unowned one, thanks, will try to look at today |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, yeah. | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, yeah. |
| − | mrunge: unfortunately, we're a bit blocked here | + | * mrunge: unfortunately, we're a bit blocked here |
| − | mrunge: django-1.8 needs an update of django-nose | + | * mrunge: django-1.8 needs an update of django-nose |
| − | david-lyle: which is not released? | + | * david-lyle: which is not released? |
| − | mrunge: right | + | * mrunge: right |
| − | mrunge: the issue has a patcj | + | * mrunge: the issue has a patcj |
| − | mrunge: patch, and I cherry-picked that patch for fedora. | + | * mrunge: patch, and I cherry-picked that patch for fedora. |
| − | david-lyle: well 1.7 support is the higher priority | + | * david-lyle: well 1.7 support is the higher priority |
| − | mrunge: nevertheless, there's still work to do | + | * mrunge: nevertheless, there's still work to do |
| − | david-lyle: 1.8 would be great too, but 1.7 is essential | + | * david-lyle: 1.8 would be great too, but 1.7 is essential |
| − | mrunge: yepp | + | * mrunge: yepp |
| − | david-lyle: mrunge: is you opinion that with your patch, 1.7 support is complete? | + | * david-lyle: mrunge: is you opinion that with your patch, 1.7 support is complete? |
| − | david-lyle: or is that a step? | + | * david-lyle: or is that a step? |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, nope. it's not | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, nope. it's not |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, and I was just looking for 1.8, because of LTS | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, and I was just looking for 1.8, because of LTS |
| − | mrunge: 1.7 should be doable more easily | + | * mrunge: 1.7 should be doable more easily |
| − | mrunge: needs 2 tests to be fixed, afaik | + | * mrunge: needs 2 tests to be fixed, afaik |
| − | david-lyle: ok, will take a closer look later | + | * david-lyle: ok, will take a closer look later |
| − | doug-fish: is it time to update gate-horizon-python27-django14? | + | * doug-fish: is it time to update gate-horizon-python27-django14? |
| − | mrunge: those tests need to be fixed anyways. | + | * mrunge: those tests need to be fixed anyways. |
| − | mrunge: doug-fish, django-1.4 will be supported until october, or so | + | * mrunge: doug-fish, django-1.4 will be supported until october, or so |
| − | david-lyle: I think next release | + | * david-lyle: I think next release |
| − | doug-fish: k, sounds good | + | * doug-fish: k, sounds good |
| − | mrunge: my way would be, to add another job to gate on django-1.7 | + | * mrunge: my way would be, to add another job to gate on django-1.7 |
| − | david-lyle: mrunge: or move default to 1.7 and add 1.6 job | + | * david-lyle: mrunge: or move default to 1.7 and add 1.6 job |
| − | mrunge: sure! | + | * mrunge: sure! |
| − | mrunge: makes even more sense | + | * mrunge: makes even more sense |
| − | david-lyle: easier to do with the higher cap anyway | + | * david-lyle: easier to do with the higher cap anyway |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, I've seen an infra issue with django-1.7. not sure, what this is. | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, I've seen an infra issue with django-1.7. not sure, what this is. |
| − | mrunge: we'll need to figure that out, once we're ready | + | * mrunge: we'll need to figure that out, once we're ready |
| − | mrunge: it was "django-nose not found" | + | * mrunge: it was "django-nose not found" |
| − | david-lyle: mrunge: just an openstack/requirements problem, or something more | + | * david-lyle: mrunge: just an openstack/requirements problem, or something more |
| − | david-lyle: oh, I see | + | * david-lyle: oh, I see |
| − | mrunge: I'll link the review to the blueprint | + | * mrunge: I'll link the review to the blueprint |
| − | david-lyle: ok, thanks | + | * david-lyle: ok, thanks |
| − | david-lyle: For other high priority items in flight, progress is being made on the table paging/sorting blueprint | + | * david-lyle: For other high priority items in flight, progress is being made on the table paging/sorting blueprint |
| − | david-lyle: I believe that there is a new release of magic-search pending that will require a new rev of the xstatic package | + | * david-lyle: I believe that there is a new release of magic-search pending that will require a new rev of the xstatic package |
| − | david-lyle: and that will require the requirements dance | + | * david-lyle: and that will require the requirements dance |
| − | david-lyle: fortunately the xstatic package has already been added to requirements and will just need a version rev | + | * david-lyle: fortunately the xstatic package has already been added to requirements and will just need a version rev |
| − | david-lyle: and the launch instance redesign is progressing, but has a bit to go still | + | * david-lyle: and the launch instance redesign is progressing, but has a bit to go still |
| − | david-lyle: most of tools/widgets are in place, including a base wizard, and now work is concentrating on the steps themselves | + | * david-lyle: most of tools/widgets are in place, including a base wizard, and now work is concentrating on the steps themselves |
| − | david-lyle: a sub-group is still regularly meeting to push that work, but I have not been able to attend | + | * david-lyle: a sub-group is still regularly meeting to push that work, but I have not been able to attend |
| − | david-lyle: the etherpad, which I don't have handy has the up to date status | + | * david-lyle: the etherpad, which I don't have handy has the up to date status |
| − | david-lyle: ping me later if you are interested and can't find the link | + | * david-lyle: ping me later if you are interested and can't find the link |
| − | neillc: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-kilo-virtual-sprint | + | * neillc: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-kilo-virtual-sprint |
| − | david-lyle: thanks neillc | + | * david-lyle: thanks neillc |
| − | david-lyle: that's about it for status, any questions? | + | * david-lyle: that's about it for status, any questions? |
| − | david-lyle: The agenda today only consists of a request to review SSO (single sign on) patches | + | * david-lyle: The agenda today only consists of a request to review SSO (single sign on) patches |
| − | david-lyle: there is one in django_openstack_auth and one in Horizon | + | * david-lyle: there is one in django_openstack_auth and one in Horizon |
| − | david-lyle: I've looked at the django_openstack_auth review, but I'm concerned about it and the domain scoped token work and other efforts to get auth to work with Kerberos all stomping on each other | + | * david-lyle: I've looked at the django_openstack_auth review, but I'm concerned about it and the domain scoped token work and other efforts to get auth to work with Kerberos all stomping on each other |
| − | doug-fish: I think that's a reasonable concern | + | * doug-fish: I think that's a reasonable concern |
| − | david-lyle: so I've been reluctant to bless any of them | + | * david-lyle: so I've been reluctant to bless any of them |
| − | david-lyle: without getting that worked out | + | * david-lyle: without getting that worked out |
| − | mrunge: yeah. django_openstack_auth seems to be in a not so good shape | + | * mrunge: yeah. django_openstack_auth seems to be in a not so good shape |
| − | david-lyle: doug-fish: also is trying to allow for Keystone2Keystone federation in the same area as well | + | * david-lyle: doug-fish: also is trying to allow for Keystone2Keystone federation in the same area as well |
| − | doug-fish: yeah, I wasn't going to mention it because the patch looks so bad right now, but I'm hopeful to make progress over the next day or two after I get a python-keystoneclient patch outdoug-fish: how do we resolve the conflict? these are all things people care about enough to provide the code | + | * doug-fish: yeah, I wasn't going to mention it because the patch looks so bad right now, but I'm hopeful to make progress over the next day or two after I get a python-keystoneclient patch outdoug-fish: how do we resolve the conflict? these are all things people care about enough to provide the code |
| − | doug-fish: arm wrestling? | + | * doug-fish: arm wrestling? |
| − | david-lyle: my short assessment is we're trying to handle too many keystone changes at once without coordinated efforts | + | * david-lyle: my short assessment is we're trying to handle too many keystone changes at once without coordinated efforts |
| − | david-lyle: I've dropped consideration of HMT for that reason | + | * david-lyle: I've dropped consideration of HMT for that reason |
| − | david-lyle: also lack of support in other projects in Kilo | + | * david-lyle: also lack of support in other projects in Kilo |
| − | david-lyle: doug-fish: I think I need we need to pull in all parties pushing the patches and try to unify on an approach, or at least better coordinate | + | * david-lyle: doug-fish: I think I need we need to pull in all parties pushing the patches and try to unify on an approach, or at least better coordinate |
| − | david-lyle: I'll work on arranging that | + | * david-lyle: I'll work on arranging that |
| − | doug-fish: sounds good | + | * doug-fish: sounds good |
| − | david-lyle: #topic Open Discussion | + | * david-lyle: #topic Open Discussion |
| − | absubram: david-lyle: agree with the trimming of the k-3 list to just important items.. having said that I am here to request a couple additions of low priority items into kilo-3 haha.. it isn’t obviously going to hold up k-3 without them.. but the owners are targeting k-3 | + | * absubram: david-lyle: agree with the trimming of the k-3 list to just important items.. having said that I am here to request a couple additions of low priority items into kilo-3 haha.. it isn’t obviously going to hold up k-3 without them.. but the owners are targeting k-3 |
| − | absubram: the owners aren’t here at the meeting given they’re in CA.. but both already have reviews out for their BPs.. it’s just that their BP’s need approval and targets for K-3 please.. they will also make sandboxes available for each of their reviews so people can test out their changes.. | + | * absubram: the owners aren’t here at the meeting given they’re in CA.. but both already have reviews out for their BPs.. it’s just that their BP’s need approval and targets for K-3 please.. they will also make sandboxes available for each of their reviews so people can test out their changes.. |
| − | david-lyle: absubram: what is the content of the blueprints? | + | * david-lyle: absubram: what is the content of the blueprints? |
| − | mrunge: absubram, at least I have some need for discussion here | + | * mrunge: absubram, at least I have some need for discussion here |
| − | absubram: one is a Cisco FWaaS addition - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161049/ .. and the other is another addition to the N1K - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/143582/ | + | * absubram: one is a Cisco FWaaS addition - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161049/ .. and the other is another addition to the N1K - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/143582/ |
| − | absubram: mrunge: sure thing! I do believe I saw an email with some comments you posted on the FW BP | + | * absubram: mrunge: sure thing! I do believe I saw an email with some comments you posted on the FW BP |
| − | mrunge: exactly | + | * mrunge: exactly |
| − | mrunge: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/bp-cisco-fwaas-horizon | + | * mrunge: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/bp-cisco-fwaas-horizon |
| − | david-lyle: glancing at the patch, I'll reiterate that I'm not looking to add driver specific code into Horizon | + | * david-lyle: glancing at the patch, I'll reiterate that I'm not looking to add driver specific code into Horizon |
| − | mrunge: my question was: where to put this, how to put this | + | * mrunge: my question was: where to put this, how to put this |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, can you explain that a bit more? | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, can you explain that a bit more? |
| − | mrunge: so, no spice support? | + | * mrunge: so, no spice support? |
| − | absubram: do you mean vendor specific code? :) | + | * absubram: do you mean vendor specific code? :) |
| − | david-lyle: consoles are a bit different and most nebulus | + | * david-lyle: consoles are a bit different and most nebulus |
| − | david-lyle: (sp) | + | * david-lyle: (sp) |
| − | mrunge: or does that mean, there won't be ceph-radosgw specific code in horizon? | + | * mrunge: or does that mean, there won't be ceph-radosgw specific code in horizon? |
| − | mrunge: (as requested 2 days before on the mailing list) | + | * mrunge: (as requested 2 days before on the mailing list) |
| − | david-lyle: so that one I think is us misusing headers in Horizon | + | * david-lyle: so that one I think is us misusing headers in Horizon |
| − | david-lyle: requiring non-required headers | + | * david-lyle: requiring non-required headers |
| − | mrunge: yupp | + | * mrunge: yupp |
| − | mrunge: although first direction was a bit different | + | * mrunge: although first direction was a bit different |
| − | mrunge: about non standard API support | + | * mrunge: about non standard API support |
| − | mrunge: - whatever that means | + | * mrunge: - whatever that means |
| − | david-lyle: it's more along the lines of building on top of cinder and neutron or swift, where backend drivers code can be swapped out | + | * david-lyle: it's more along the lines of building on top of cinder and neutron or swift, where backend drivers code can be swapped out |
| − | david-lyle: I think once we're beyond the abstraction level built into the API, we're getting into plugin territory | + | * david-lyle: I think once we're beyond the abstraction level built into the API, we're getting into plugin territory |
| − | david-lyle: plugin to horizon | + | * david-lyle: plugin to horizon |
| − | absubram: haha true | + | * absubram: haha true |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, can we write that somewhere down? I foresee the demand to do plugins more and more | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, can we write that somewhere down? I foresee the demand to do plugins more and more |
| − | absubram: yeah.. agree with mrunge | + | * absubram: yeah.. agree with mrunge |
| − | mrunge: or support plugins into e.g cinder | + | * mrunge: or support plugins into e.g cinder |
| − | absubram: david-lyle: I do have a BP I created.. though it is definitely going to be an L target.. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-vendor-split | + | * absubram: david-lyle: I do have a BP I created.. though it is definitely going to be an L target.. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-vendor-split |
| − | david-lyle: mrunge: yes, I also think the stigma around this will go down in L after everyone gets over the shock of the release working differently | + | * david-lyle: mrunge: yes, I also think the stigma around this will go down in L after everyone gets over the shock of the release working differently |
| − | mrunge: maybe worth a topic for the summit | + | * mrunge: maybe worth a topic for the summit |
| − | david-lyle: For L, I think we as horizon need to look to splitting out some of the code already integrated into plugins | + | * david-lyle: For L, I think we as horizon need to look to splitting out some of the code already integrated into plugins |
| − | absubram: it is to try and see if we can maybe do somehting like what neutron did recently.. move the vendor specific plugins to their own stackforge repo.. I think that’ll be best for all the “cisco” specific code we’re trying to add.. as far as I know we have four platforms that all what platform specific code in Horizon | + | * absubram: it is to try and see if we can maybe do somehting like what neutron did recently.. move the vendor specific plugins to their own stackforge repo.. I think that’ll be best for all the “cisco” specific code we’re trying to add.. as far as I know we have four platforms that all what platform specific code in Horizon |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, +1 that would solve some of the problems | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, +1 that would solve some of the problems |
| − | david-lyle: I think there will be several plugins and we can using tagging to identity interoperability | + | * david-lyle: I think there will be several plugins and we can using tagging to identity interoperability |
| − | mrunge: oh, reading https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-liberty-summit again, I already added that :D | + | * mrunge: oh, reading https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-liberty-summit again, I already added that :D |
| − | absubram: ok.. I’ll let the owners of these two BPs know.. but for now their code will be just left in review? | + | * absubram: ok.. I’ll let the owners of these two BPs know.. but for now their code will be just left in review? |
| − | david-lyle: it would also reduce the load on the core horizon project and allow those projects to move more quickly | + | * david-lyle: it would also reduce the load on the core horizon project and allow those projects to move more quickly |
| − | david-lyle: absubram: yes, I'll look more closely at them, and comment | + | * david-lyle: absubram: yes, I'll look more closely at them, and comment |
| − | absubram: lol mrunge | + | * absubram: lol mrunge |
| − | absubram: ty | + | * absubram: ty |
| − | absubram: I do believe the firewall community had an idea for one more BP.. that is not vendor specific :p | + | * absubram: I do believe the firewall community had an idea for one more BP.. that is not vendor specific :p |
| − | mrunge: david-lyle, any info about string freeze? | + | * mrunge: david-lyle, any info about string freeze? |
| − | david-lyle: oh yes | + | * david-lyle: oh yes |
| − | david-lyle: talked to amotoki about that | + | * david-lyle: talked to amotoki about that |
| − | david-lyle: I believe we arrived at approx a week before RC-1 | + | * david-lyle: I believe we arrived at approx a week before RC-1 |
| − | david-lyle: and use RC-2 for translated strings primarily, as we have done in the past | + | * david-lyle: and use RC-2 for translated strings primarily, as we have done in the past |
| − | mrunge: ok, great | + | * mrunge: ok, great |
| − | david-lyle: RC-1 date is not set in stone, but we'll know when we're close | + | * david-lyle: RC-1 date is not set in stone, but we'll know when we're close |
| − | david-lyle: as long as we allow approx 2 weeks, we should be ok | + | * david-lyle: as long as we allow approx 2 weeks, we should be ok |
| − | david-lyle: anything other topics? | + | * david-lyle: anything other topics? |
| − | david-lyle: *any | + | * david-lyle: *any |
| − | david-lyle: ok, well I'm UTC-8 today, so I'm going back to sleep for a bit. | + | * david-lyle: ok, well I'm UTC-8 today, so I'm going back to sleep for a bit. |
| − | absubram: :) | + | * absubram: :) |
| − | absubram: thanks all.. later! | + | * absubram: thanks all.. later! |
| − | david-lyle: Thanks, everyone. Have a great week! And get your features up by March 9. | + | * david-lyle: Thanks, everyone. Have a great week! And get your features up by March 9. |
| − | neillc: night all | + | * neillc: night all |
| − | mrunge: thanks david-lyle and good night | + | * mrunge: thanks david-lyle and good night |
| − | david-lyle: #endmeeting | + | * david-lyle: #endmeeting |
Latest revision as of 21:26, 5 March 2015
- david-lyle: #startmeeting Horizon
- david-lyle: hmm is the meeting bot sleeping?
- doug-fish: seems that way :-)
- david-lyle: ok, we'll just do without
- david-lyle: Let's start with dates reminder
- david-lyle: March 9 is Feature Proposal Freeze (FPF), all proposed changes for Kilo should have the initial patch set posted by then
- david-lyle: March 19 is Feature Freeze (FF), all code needs to be merged by this date.
- david-lyle: there is the possibility of exceptions, but it is always preferable not to use them
- david-lyle: https://launchpad.net/horizon/+milestone/kilo-3
- david-lyle: with that in mind, I've started removing items from kilo-3
- david-lyle: will remove more as time goes on
- david-lyle: removed a fair number of cinder patches blocked by no python-cinderclient release
- david-lyle: that being release on the last couple of days of Kilo is too late to handle effectively
- doug-fish: are the python client updates scheduled?
- david-lyle: for us
- doug-fish: (I may know of another item in trouble without an update)
- david-lyle: doug-fish: not generally, just when ready
- doug-fish: ok
- david-lyle: most don't release very often, which is unfortunate
- david-lyle: for us
- doug-fish: agreed
- david-lyle: for high priority items in Kilo we only have 4 of 9 implemented
- david-lyle: I did see mrunge posted a patch for the unowned one, thanks, will try to look at today
- mrunge: david-lyle, yeah.
- mrunge: unfortunately, we're a bit blocked here
- mrunge: django-1.8 needs an update of django-nose
- david-lyle: which is not released?
- mrunge: right
- mrunge: the issue has a patcj
- mrunge: patch, and I cherry-picked that patch for fedora.
- david-lyle: well 1.7 support is the higher priority
- mrunge: nevertheless, there's still work to do
- david-lyle: 1.8 would be great too, but 1.7 is essential
- mrunge: yepp
- david-lyle: mrunge: is you opinion that with your patch, 1.7 support is complete?
- david-lyle: or is that a step?
- mrunge: david-lyle, nope. it's not
- mrunge: david-lyle, and I was just looking for 1.8, because of LTS
- mrunge: 1.7 should be doable more easily
- mrunge: needs 2 tests to be fixed, afaik
- david-lyle: ok, will take a closer look later
- doug-fish: is it time to update gate-horizon-python27-django14?
- mrunge: those tests need to be fixed anyways.
- mrunge: doug-fish, django-1.4 will be supported until october, or so
- david-lyle: I think next release
- doug-fish: k, sounds good
- mrunge: my way would be, to add another job to gate on django-1.7
- david-lyle: mrunge: or move default to 1.7 and add 1.6 job
- mrunge: sure!
- mrunge: makes even more sense
- david-lyle: easier to do with the higher cap anyway
- mrunge: david-lyle, I've seen an infra issue with django-1.7. not sure, what this is.
- mrunge: we'll need to figure that out, once we're ready
- mrunge: it was "django-nose not found"
- david-lyle: mrunge: just an openstack/requirements problem, or something more
- david-lyle: oh, I see
- mrunge: I'll link the review to the blueprint
- david-lyle: ok, thanks
- david-lyle: For other high priority items in flight, progress is being made on the table paging/sorting blueprint
- david-lyle: I believe that there is a new release of magic-search pending that will require a new rev of the xstatic package
- david-lyle: and that will require the requirements dance
- david-lyle: fortunately the xstatic package has already been added to requirements and will just need a version rev
- david-lyle: and the launch instance redesign is progressing, but has a bit to go still
- david-lyle: most of tools/widgets are in place, including a base wizard, and now work is concentrating on the steps themselves
- david-lyle: a sub-group is still regularly meeting to push that work, but I have not been able to attend
- david-lyle: the etherpad, which I don't have handy has the up to date status
- david-lyle: ping me later if you are interested and can't find the link
- neillc: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-kilo-virtual-sprint
- david-lyle: thanks neillc
- david-lyle: that's about it for status, any questions?
- david-lyle: The agenda today only consists of a request to review SSO (single sign on) patches
- david-lyle: there is one in django_openstack_auth and one in Horizon
- david-lyle: I've looked at the django_openstack_auth review, but I'm concerned about it and the domain scoped token work and other efforts to get auth to work with Kerberos all stomping on each other
- doug-fish: I think that's a reasonable concern
- david-lyle: so I've been reluctant to bless any of them
- david-lyle: without getting that worked out
- mrunge: yeah. django_openstack_auth seems to be in a not so good shape
- david-lyle: doug-fish: also is trying to allow for Keystone2Keystone federation in the same area as well
- doug-fish: yeah, I wasn't going to mention it because the patch looks so bad right now, but I'm hopeful to make progress over the next day or two after I get a python-keystoneclient patch outdoug-fish: how do we resolve the conflict? these are all things people care about enough to provide the code
- doug-fish: arm wrestling?
- david-lyle: my short assessment is we're trying to handle too many keystone changes at once without coordinated efforts
- david-lyle: I've dropped consideration of HMT for that reason
- david-lyle: also lack of support in other projects in Kilo
- david-lyle: doug-fish: I think I need we need to pull in all parties pushing the patches and try to unify on an approach, or at least better coordinate
- david-lyle: I'll work on arranging that
- doug-fish: sounds good
- david-lyle: #topic Open Discussion
- absubram: david-lyle: agree with the trimming of the k-3 list to just important items.. having said that I am here to request a couple additions of low priority items into kilo-3 haha.. it isn’t obviously going to hold up k-3 without them.. but the owners are targeting k-3
- absubram: the owners aren’t here at the meeting given they’re in CA.. but both already have reviews out for their BPs.. it’s just that their BP’s need approval and targets for K-3 please.. they will also make sandboxes available for each of their reviews so people can test out their changes..
- david-lyle: absubram: what is the content of the blueprints?
- mrunge: absubram, at least I have some need for discussion here
- absubram: one is a Cisco FWaaS addition - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161049/ .. and the other is another addition to the N1K - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/143582/
- absubram: mrunge: sure thing! I do believe I saw an email with some comments you posted on the FW BP
- mrunge: exactly
- mrunge: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/bp-cisco-fwaas-horizon
- david-lyle: glancing at the patch, I'll reiterate that I'm not looking to add driver specific code into Horizon
- mrunge: my question was: where to put this, how to put this
- mrunge: david-lyle, can you explain that a bit more?
- mrunge: so, no spice support?
- absubram: do you mean vendor specific code? :)
- david-lyle: consoles are a bit different and most nebulus
- david-lyle: (sp)
- mrunge: or does that mean, there won't be ceph-radosgw specific code in horizon?
- mrunge: (as requested 2 days before on the mailing list)
- david-lyle: so that one I think is us misusing headers in Horizon
- david-lyle: requiring non-required headers
- mrunge: yupp
- mrunge: although first direction was a bit different
- mrunge: about non standard API support
- mrunge: - whatever that means
- david-lyle: it's more along the lines of building on top of cinder and neutron or swift, where backend drivers code can be swapped out
- david-lyle: I think once we're beyond the abstraction level built into the API, we're getting into plugin territory
- david-lyle: plugin to horizon
- absubram: haha true
- mrunge: david-lyle, can we write that somewhere down? I foresee the demand to do plugins more and more
- absubram: yeah.. agree with mrunge
- mrunge: or support plugins into e.g cinder
- absubram: david-lyle: I do have a BP I created.. though it is definitely going to be an L target.. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/horizon-vendor-split
- david-lyle: mrunge: yes, I also think the stigma around this will go down in L after everyone gets over the shock of the release working differently
- mrunge: maybe worth a topic for the summit
- david-lyle: For L, I think we as horizon need to look to splitting out some of the code already integrated into plugins
- absubram: it is to try and see if we can maybe do somehting like what neutron did recently.. move the vendor specific plugins to their own stackforge repo.. I think that’ll be best for all the “cisco” specific code we’re trying to add.. as far as I know we have four platforms that all what platform specific code in Horizon
- mrunge: david-lyle, +1 that would solve some of the problems
- david-lyle: I think there will be several plugins and we can using tagging to identity interoperability
- mrunge: oh, reading https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-liberty-summit again, I already added that :D
- absubram: ok.. I’ll let the owners of these two BPs know.. but for now their code will be just left in review?
- david-lyle: it would also reduce the load on the core horizon project and allow those projects to move more quickly
- david-lyle: absubram: yes, I'll look more closely at them, and comment
- absubram: lol mrunge
- absubram: ty
- absubram: I do believe the firewall community had an idea for one more BP.. that is not vendor specific :p
- mrunge: david-lyle, any info about string freeze?
- david-lyle: oh yes
- david-lyle: talked to amotoki about that
- david-lyle: I believe we arrived at approx a week before RC-1
- david-lyle: and use RC-2 for translated strings primarily, as we have done in the past
- mrunge: ok, great
- david-lyle: RC-1 date is not set in stone, but we'll know when we're close
- david-lyle: as long as we allow approx 2 weeks, we should be ok
- david-lyle: anything other topics?
- david-lyle: *any
- david-lyle: ok, well I'm UTC-8 today, so I'm going back to sleep for a bit.
- absubram: :)
- absubram: thanks all.. later!
- david-lyle: Thanks, everyone. Have a great week! And get your features up by March 9.
- neillc: night all
- mrunge: thanks david-lyle and good night
- david-lyle: #endmeeting
