| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-12-04 | |||
| 21:22:24 | cmurphy | seeking feedback from the osc team on ^ | |
| 21:24:56 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix reno index list indent https://review.opendev.org/697356 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-12-05 | |||
| 11:24:55 | openstackgerrit | Vishakha Agarwal proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: WIP Adding options to user cli https://review.opendev.org/697444 | |
| 13:59:21 | mordred | rm_work: ossum | |
| 13:59:54 | rm_work | :) | |
| 15:31:23 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/shade master: Add source and contributing link in readme https://review.opendev.org/686871 | |
| 15:55:53 | elmiko | dtantsur: is the ironic thing happening today? | |
| 15:56:37 | dtantsur | elmiko: ironic things happen every day | |
| 15:57:02 | dtantsur | it's not ironic-specific, more of adopting all openstack ansible modules (and re-shaping their API for consistency - hence API SIG involvement) | |
| 15:57:59 | elmiko | ahh, gotcha | |
| 15:58:06 | cloudnull | o/ | |
| 15:58:12 | elmiko | is ironic things happening everyday also ironic? | |
| 15:58:43 | dtantsur | ironic things are ironically also ironic | |
| 15:58:49 | elmiko | nice | |
| 15:59:10 | cloudnull | isn't it ironic, don't you think? | |
| 15:59:25 | dtantsur | ++ | |
| 15:59:47 | ekultails | o/ | |
| 15:59:57 | sshnaidm | dtantsur, can you run the mtg bot here? | |
| 16:00:09 | dtantsur | we haven't done it for a while, I guess I can | |
| 16:00:10 | elmiko | API SIG office hour now open | |
| 16:00:15 | dtantsur | w00t | |
| 16:00:26 | elmiko | i'll let you do your bot thingie | |
| 16:00:31 | dtantsur | #startmeeting API-SIG | |
| 16:00:32 | openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 5 16:00:31 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dtantsur. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 16:00:33 | openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 16:00:35 | openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'api_sig' | |
| 16:00:41 | dtantsur | heya! | |
| 16:00:49 | sshnaidm | dtantsur, cool, if you can chair me too please :) | |
| 16:01:00 | dtantsur | today we're a bit hijacked by Ansible SIG and the ongoing effort of bringing OpenStack ansible modules under our wing | |
| 16:01:03 | dtantsur | #chair sshnaidm elmiko | |
| 16:01:04 | openstack | Current chairs: dtantsur elmiko sshnaidm | |
| 16:01:28 | sshnaidm | ok, so thanks to SDK folks for the channel time :) | |
| 16:01:32 | dtantsur | a big part of it will be re-designing the modules for consistency, hence our (API SIG) involvement | |
| 16:01:54 | dtantsur | sshnaidm: take it from here :) | |
| 16:02:03 | sshnaidm | dtantsur, right | |
| 16:02:05 | sshnaidm | please use the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-ansible-modules | |
| 16:02:18 | dtantsur | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-ansible-modules | |
| 16:02:18 | sshnaidm | we have update from gundalow from Ansible team | |
| 16:02:32 | sshnaidm | it's written in the bottom of etherpad | |
| 16:02:43 | sshnaidm | and I think we have a few decisions to make | |
| 16:03:00 | sshnaidm | 1. what is namespace name of openstack collections | |
| 16:03:11 | sshnaidm | gundalow, great | |
| 16:03:17 | elmiko | i just want to state for the record, that it is currently not within the goals of the api-sig to define guidance for these type of apis. /but/ with that said, it is within our goals to facilitate and promote these types of discussions. | |
| 16:03:58 | sshnaidm | elmiko, thanks | |
| 16:04:09 | dtantsur | well, our *actual* goals is to spend some time joking on each other | |
| 16:04:19 | dtantsur | soooo... :D | |
| 16:04:19 | elmiko | haha, too true | |
| 16:05:10 | sshnaidm | so, can we use "openstack." namespace? | |
| 16:05:15 | gundalow | So goal wise, all (will nearly all) modules/plugins will be removed from ansible/ansible before Ansible 2.10 ships. Getting a head of the curve and thinking about this now is good think | |
| 16:05:46 | gtema | is it official target of Ansible to remove modules from core? | |
| 16:05:49 | dtantsur | sshnaidm: my only concern is the fact that the collection won't be strictly "official" | |
| 16:05:50 | sshnaidm | gundalow, so no more community modules in 2.10? | |
| 16:06:23 | ekultails | What about modules that won't be able to find a new home? | |
| 16:06:26 | sshnaidm | dtantsur, yeah, these licenses differences, that's why raised this | |
| 16:06:27 | gundalow | ansible/ansible:stable-2.10 will only contain https://github.com/ansible-community/collection_migration/tree/master/scenarios/minimal | |
| 16:07:04 | gundalow | ekultails: for "homeless modules" that are currently in ansible/ansible they may go in the "catch-all" (aka dumping ground) repo & Collection | |
| 16:07:22 | dtantsur | ansible's stackforge :) | |
| 16:07:53 | sshnaidm | cool | |
| 16:07:57 | sshnaidm | so we're on time.. | |
| 16:08:04 | jistr | sshnaidm: +1 for using openstack. namespace for the collection, since it's supposed to be "the official thing" | |
| 16:08:09 | ekultails | gundalow: Okay, good to know, thanks. | |
| 16:08:19 | gtema | and what about collection name? | |
| 16:08:30 | jistr | openstack.openstack? :) | |
| 16:08:36 | gtema | too weird | |
| 16:08:37 | gundalow | https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-ansible-modules/pull/591 might have some useful background | |
| 16:08:40 | dtantsur | openstack.<service type>? | |
| 16:08:45 | dtantsur | otherwise why do we need both? | |
| 16:08:50 | sshnaidm | gundalow, well, I think nobody should take "openstack" namespace except Openstack.. | |
| 16:08:50 | ekultails | Not openstack.ansible, that could get confusing with OpenStack-Ansible. :-P | |
| 16:09:00 | jistr | having both is a requirement by Ansible galaxy IIUC | |
| 16:09:01 | dtantsur | #link https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-ansible-modules/pull/591 some helpful background | |
| 16:09:06 | gtema | for my org I ended up with "namespace.core" - for the core modules | |
| 16:09:11 | gundalow | What else could go under `openstack.`? | |
| 16:09:21 | dtantsur | gundalow: we can have a collection per service | |
| 16:09:26 | gundalow | (forgive me, I'm not familiar with all the parts of OpenStack) | |
| 16:09:29 | dtantsur | although it will probably complicate everything | |
| 16:09:44 | jistr | yea i also thing that would complicate it... | |
| 16:09:50 | dtantsur | gtema: we no longer have an official concept of core modules | |
| 16:09:58 | gtema | I don not think collection per service make sense, more a one collection with "core" modules, and perhaps additional ones for some "extra-weird" stuff | |
| 16:10:00 | dtantsur | we could have openstack.openstack and openstack.unofficial | |
| 16:10:18 | sshnaidm | what is "core" modules? | |
| 16:10:25 | dtantsur | let's avoid the term "core", it's a different thing for everyone | |
| 16:10:26 | jistr | gtema, dtantsur: +1 i think that scenario might come up perhaps | |
| 16:10:27 | gtema | well, everything what we have now | |
| 16:10:51 | gtema | and i.e. for some weird provisioning of triple-o infra - there might be openstack.tripleo | |
| 16:10:56 | sshnaidm | everything we have is kinda casual.. | |
| 16:11:06 | sshnaidm | it's just what people could made quickly | |
| 16:11:40 | jistr | gtema: +1. So for the ones that are getting imported from Ansible, i'd go openstack.openstack or openstack.core or something like that | |
| 16:11:40 | sshnaidm | and I think it will look very different in the end | |
| 16:11:57 | gtema | yeah, but I think openstack.core.server looks better than openstack.openstack.server or openstack.compute.server | |
| 16:12:09 | sshnaidm | I'd vote for openstack.[service/project] names | |
| 16:12:11 | pabelanger | o/ | |
| 16:12:18 | dtantsur | I think for many people 'core' may be nova+cinder+neutron+glance+keystone | |
| 16:12:23 | dtantsur | not things like ironic | |
| 16:12:30 | sshnaidm | gtema, openstack.compute.servers is actually as in SDK | |
| 16:12:42 | sshnaidm | and we may align with SDK here | |
| 16:12:46 | jistr | sshnaidm: hmm that does look good indeed | |
| 16:12:51 | gtema | I do not want to end up needing to do "ansible-galaxy collection install nova" | |
| 16:12:58 | gtema | and neutron and ... | |
| 16:13:07 | jistr | we'd force people to fetch multiple collections though... maybe not much of a problem | |