[Ansible-service-broker] 3/6/18 meeting logs
Ryan Hallisey
rhallise at redhat.com
Tue Mar 6 15:42:19 UTC 2018
==========================
#asbroker: asbroker 3/6/18
==========================
Meeting started by rhallisey at 14:31:16 UTC. The full logs are attached.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Attendance (rhallisey, 14:31:33)
* News (rhallisey, 14:33:07)
* LINK: https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot (rhallisey, 14:34:17)
* rhallisey needs to fix brokerbot (rhallisey, 14:35:28)
* LINK:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mj7bVYJ8NK-TwU_mxeZLprmBBZZ-xOq-Hg4CiD3E6pM/edit#
(rhallisey, 14:36:21)
* Bugs/Issus triage (rhallisey, 14:36:57)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/789
(rhallisey, 14:37:09)
* LINK:
https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/ansible-playbook-bundle/pull/240
(dymurray, 14:38:46)
* ACTION: rhallisey: to post wip patch (rhallisey, 14:41:39)
* ACTION: shurley: assign himself and push it over the finish line
(rhallisey, 14:42:05)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
(rhallisey, 14:42:44)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/347
(rhallisey, 14:44:36)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/351
(rhallisey, 14:46:21)
* duplicate of:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/576
(rhallisey, 14:48:15)
* ACTION: community needs to follow up on issue (rhallisey, 14:51:24)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531
(rhallisey, 14:51:39)
* ACTION: maleck13: see if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531 is
still occurring (rhallisey, 14:55:02)
* LINK:
jmhttps://
github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
<http://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug>
(rhallisey, 14:55:27)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
<https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug>
(rhallisey, 14:55:41)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585
(rhallisey, 14:55:59)
* ACTION: ernelson: check if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585 is
fixed and close it (rhallisey, 14:57:51)
* Features (rhallisey, 14:58:32)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/812
(rhallisey, 14:58:39)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Afeature
(rhallisey, 15:04:52)
* 3.10 features (rhallisey, 15:04:59)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
(rhallisey, 15:06:07)
* ACTION: jmrodri to look at
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
(rhallisey, 15:07:43)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
(rhallisey, 15:09:05)
* ACTION: close
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501 and
create a new granular issue after vendoring discussion (rhallisey,
15:12:03)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/530
(rhallisey, 15:12:17)
* ACTION: community reviews needed on proposal
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/pull/809
(rhallisey, 15:13:32)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/590
(rhallisey, 15:13:49)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/614
(rhallisey, 15:15:47)
* Open Discussion (rhallisey, 15:17:52)
* LINK: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/ (jmrodri, 15:18:24)
* LINK:
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md
(shurley, 15:20:57)
* ACTION: jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
(rhallisey, 15:20:58)
* LINK:
https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/hello-world-apb/pull/3
(dzager, 15:23:45)
* LINK: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/36789 (dymurray,
15:24:13)
* LINK: https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/apb-test-shim to see
the APB testing shim and an example .travis.yml for APB devs to get
started (dzager, 15:26:08)
* ACTION: dzager get hello-world-apb merged (dzager, 15:27:42)
* ACTION: rhallisey figure out where to host logs (rhallisey,
15:30:40)
Meeting ended at 15:30:58 UTC.
Action items, by person
-----------------------
* dzager
* dzager get hello-world-apb merged
* ernelson
* ernelson: check if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585 is
fixed and close it
* jmrodri
* jmrodri to look at
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
* jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
* maleck13
* maleck13: see if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531 is
still occurring
* rhallisey
* rhallisey: to post wip patch
* rhallisey figure out where to host logs
* shurley
* shurley: assign himself and push it over the finish line
* jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
* **UNASSIGNED**
* community needs to follow up on issue
* close https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
and create a new granular issue after vendoring discussion
* community reviews needed on proposal
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/pull/809
People present (lines said)
---------------------------
* rhallisey (161)
* jmrodri (82)
* brokerbot (55)
* ernelson (44)
* shurley (30)
* dzager (21)
* dymurray (19)
* maleck13 (17)
* lorbus (11)
* dwhatley (1)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/ansible-service-broker/attachments/20180306/d2f72440/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
14:31:16 <rhallisey> #startmeeting asbroker 3/6/18
14:31:16 <brokerbot> Meeting started Tue Mar 6 14:31:16 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rhallisey. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:31:16 <brokerbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:31:16 <brokerbot> The meeting name has been set to 'asbroker_3_6_18'
14:31:16 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "startmeeting" is not a valid command.
14:31:33 <rhallisey> #topic Attendance
14:31:33 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "topic" is not a valid command.
14:31:38 <rhallisey> hey folks
14:31:51 <lorbus> hey everyone :)
14:31:54 <rhallisey> everyone sound off
14:31:56 <dymurray> Hey guys
14:31:57 <rhallisey> please :)
14:32:03 <dzager> zing
14:32:04 <ernelson> morning
14:32:08 <maleck13> hey
14:32:13 <jmrodri> el capitan here
14:32:37 <dwhatley> hello
14:32:44 <dzager> jmrodri + long hair + goatee = Captain Morgan...hmm
14:32:49 <shurley> Hello
14:33:07 <rhallisey> #topic News
14:33:07 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "topic" is not a valid command.
14:33:22 <rhallisey> welcome to broker's first irc meeting!
14:33:23 <rhallisey> woo
14:33:29 <shurley> +1
14:33:35 <ernelson> \o/
14:33:37 <lorbus> yay!
14:33:38 <rhallisey> first thing I want to do is talk about the bot
14:33:54 <rhallisey> as you can see, the bot is splitting out some errors
14:34:07 <rhallisey> so just ignore it for now and I'll get it fixed
14:34:17 <rhallisey> #link https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
14:34:17 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:34:29 <rhallisey> these are a list of command that you can use with the bot
14:34:53 <jmrodri> that's fascinating.
14:34:57 <rhallisey> when you want something recorded in the minutes, use the 'Commands for Everyone' section
14:35:05 <rhallisey> for example
14:35:28 <rhallisey> #info rhallisey needs to fix brokerbot
14:35:28 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "info" is not a valid command.
14:35:36 <rhallisey> that will be recorded for the summary
14:35:54 <rhallisey> so feel free to use those as needed when we cover topics
14:36:18 <rhallisey> oh one more thing
14:36:21 <rhallisey> #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mj7bVYJ8NK-TwU_mxeZLprmBBZZ-xOq-Hg4CiD3E6pM/edit#
14:36:21 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:36:33 <rhallisey> google doc for the meeting structure
14:36:44 <rhallisey> add things as we go through if needed
14:36:57 <rhallisey> #topic Bugs/Issus triage
14:36:57 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "topic" is not a valid command.
14:37:09 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/789
14:37:09 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:37:33 <rhallisey> first issue to talk about is loading multiple specs
14:37:48 <rhallisey> for a short summary
14:38:17 <rhallisey> we load specs from the endpoint images, (oc get images)
14:38:23 <jmrodri> wow, that looks like a crazy oen.
14:38:25 <jmrodri> one
14:38:46 <dymurray> #link https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/ansible-playbook-bundle/pull/240
14:38:46 <brokerbot> dymurray: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:38:47 <rhallisey> but, the correct spec to load is only the latest image not all the images
14:38:52 <rhallisey> thank you dymurray
14:39:15 <rhallisey> dymurray, has a workaround to delete the images after we push
14:39:18 <dymurray> ^^ I submitted the above PR to help developers remove locally pushed images for this reason just as an FYI
14:39:30 <shurley> I still think that we should fix this in the registry IMO
14:39:38 <dymurray> +1
14:39:41 <dzager> shurley: +1
14:39:45 <rhallisey> shurley, agree, because what if you aren't using apb push
14:40:05 <shurley> I can take this bug if no other takers?
14:40:09 <jmrodri> shurley: by registry you mean the registry adapters?
14:40:16 <shurley> correct
14:40:40 <dymurray> Well, TBF the only concern I have is that someone could delete an imagestream and still have the associated image in the internal registry. We just need to document how the broker functions to avoid confusion
14:40:42 <rhallisey> shurley, I believe I have a WIP that I can post that can help get this started
14:40:44 <jmrodri> +1 making sure I'm on the same page, registry is such an overloaded term.
14:40:45 <rhallisey> iirc
14:41:15 <dymurray> A broker will only bootstrap an APB if it has an associated ImageStream... if we go with this fix
14:41:25 <jmrodri> so let's add assignees to that issue. Add links to WIP, etc.
14:41:39 <rhallisey> #action rhallisey: to post wip patch
14:41:39 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:41:58 <shurley> Assigned to myself
14:42:05 <rhallisey> #action shurley: assign himself and push it over the finish line
14:42:05 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:42:09 <rhallisey> thanks shurley
14:42:44 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
14:42:44 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:42:52 <rhallisey> next item is 3.10 issues
14:43:02 <jmrodri> bigger than I thought
14:43:04 <rhallisey> this is the list of open 3.10 issues
14:43:32 <jmrodri> can we start from the bottom (oldest ones first)?
14:43:50 <rhallisey> sure, but just some ground rules
14:43:56 <jmrodri> okay
14:44:01 <rhallisey> first I want to get a target release for these
14:44:09 <rhallisey> lets 1) make sure it's a bug
14:44:18 <rhallisey> 2) make sure 3.10 makes sense
14:44:31 <rhallisey> so starting from the bottom
14:44:36 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/347
14:44:36 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:44:45 <jmrodri> +1 to those rules. I was particularly interested in rule #1 :)
14:44:59 <jmrodri> this issue has been lingering for a while
14:45:07 <ernelson> Some of these are relevant, but shouldn't be considered blockers to 3.10
14:45:30 <jmrodri> it's not simple IIRC, and not sure how problematic is has been recently.
14:45:37 <jmrodri> I would not do this in 3.10
14:45:40 <rhallisey> ok
14:45:47 <rhallisey> let's kick this to 3.11
14:45:49 <rhallisey> I agree
14:45:53 <jmrodri> +1
14:46:07 <dymurray> +1
14:46:10 <shurley> +1
14:46:21 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/351
14:46:21 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:46:51 <ernelson> this is probably related to the highly privileged work going on for 3.10
14:46:51 <dzager> is this where the APB container image is running as root?
14:46:56 <dymurray> I think this is something we should be addressing soon... ability to declare permissions
14:46:57 <rhallisey> I think this is related to kubevirt
14:47:09 <rhallisey> kubevirt is able to run with privilaged
14:47:16 <dymurray> from the broker?
14:47:21 <rhallisey> I think this is a dup
14:47:32 <ernelson> Sounds like this needs to stay for 3.10 if this is part of the kubevirt work.
14:47:40 <jmrodri> ernelson: +1
14:47:51 <dzager> Should any container image on OpenShift be accessing /root directories?
14:47:59 <jmrodri> if it is a dupe, let's link to it in the issue.
14:48:12 <dymurray> dzager, if the administrator allows it yes
14:48:15 <rhallisey> #info duplicate of: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/576
14:48:15 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "info" is not a valid command.
14:48:35 <rhallisey> you can make the apb privilaged if you use the login work around
14:48:58 <dzager> I'm not sure that those are duplicates
14:49:01 <dymurray> rhallisey, right but this issue is really tracking the APBs ability to declare elevated permission requirements right?
14:49:29 <dymurray> Ideally instead of doing the workaround we actually bake this into the APB itself
14:49:56 <shurley> +1
14:49:57 <dymurray> That way we can control which APBs are displayed to which users etc
14:50:16 <shurley> -1 that is not as easy right now
14:50:31 <dymurray> I know... just thinking long term. Understand that would require svcat changes
14:50:38 <rhallisey> ok let's follow up on this issue then
14:50:41 <jmrodri> should we move this to a deep dive session instead? I think we should focus on is it a bug? should it be on 3.10, and assignees for now.
14:50:42 <shurley> ok, just making sure
14:50:47 <rhallisey> I don't want to spend to mush time on the details
14:50:54 <rhallisey> I think it's a bug and it targets 3.10
14:50:58 <rhallisey> folks agree with that?
14:51:03 <jmrodri> +1 sounds good
14:51:05 <rhallisey> ok
14:51:09 <ernelson> jmrodri: +1, we have design sessions scheduled for this for 3.10
14:51:24 <rhallisey> #action community needs to follow up on issue
14:51:24 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:51:39 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531
14:51:39 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:52:21 <jmrodri> seems like they can't get the route during an unbind.
14:52:24 <rhallisey> maleck13, you reported this
14:52:38 <maleck13> rhallisey: looking
14:52:39 <jmrodri> is it possible something is removed by the time this gets run?
14:52:46 * jmrodri waits for maleck13 input
14:53:29 <shurley> jmrodri: that would a not found error not a forbidden error I think
14:53:48 <maleck13> I haven't seen that issue for some time, I will take an action to attempt to reproduce to ensure it is still a bug
14:53:49 <jmrodri> shurley: good point
14:54:09 <ernelson> should we close for now and maleck13 can reopen if confirmed?
14:54:13 <ernelson> or leave open?
14:54:21 <rhallisey> #action maleck13: see if it's still occurring
14:54:21 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:54:31 <maleck13> happy to close for now
14:54:36 <rhallisey> ok wfm
14:54:43 <rhallisey> #undo
14:54:43 <brokerbot> Removing item from minutes: #action maleck13: see if it's still occurring
14:54:43 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "undo" is not a valid command.
14:54:59 <jmrodri> rhallisey: we started the bug issue topic at 9:36, agenda has it for 20 minutes. We have 2 minutes left.
14:55:02 <rhallisey> #action maleck13: see if https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531 is still occurring
14:55:02 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:55:17 <rhallisey> jmrodri, we'll do 1 more
14:55:22 <ernelson> closed
14:55:27 <rhallisey> #link jmhttps://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
14:55:27 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:55:28 <jmrodri> rhallisey: +1
14:55:32 <rhallisey> #undo
14:55:32 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "undo" is not a valid command.
14:55:41 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
14:55:41 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:55:50 <rhallisey> #undo
14:55:50 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "undo" is not a valid command.
14:55:59 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585
14:55:59 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:56:02 <rhallisey> ok that's the one
14:56:17 <ernelson> I believe this should be resolved?
14:56:31 <jmrodri> I think we started tagging things properly.
14:56:35 <jmrodri> didn't you do that dzager ?
14:56:38 <ernelson> maybe I jumped the gun, but it sounds related to us tagging things
14:56:47 <jmrodri> ernelson: that's what I thought as well
14:56:51 <ernelson> yes, this was also fixed in openshift-ansible
14:56:54 <rhallisey> > @jmontleon sounds like this may still be an issue we gotta look into.
14:57:11 <dzager> reading
14:57:19 <ernelson> rhallisey: this is as of a few days ago
14:57:27 <ernelson> I think we need to confirm, happy to do that
14:57:30 <rhallisey> ernelson, awesome
14:57:33 <ernelson> belongs in 3.10 though
14:57:51 <rhallisey> #action ernelson: check if https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585 is fixed and close it
14:57:51 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
14:58:09 <rhallisey> ok we're moving on to features
14:58:13 <ernelson> for posterity, the root issue was that we were setup to deploy "latest" often, which ended up pointing at 3.9 images in the 3.7 branch.
14:58:30 <jmrodri> rhallisey: +1
14:58:32 <rhallisey> #topic Features
14:58:32 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "topic" is not a valid command.
14:58:39 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/812
14:58:39 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
14:58:46 <rhallisey> maleck13, I believe this is you
14:58:57 <rhallisey> nope I'm wrong
14:59:11 <maleck13> :)
14:59:17 <ernelson> this is required for 3.10
14:59:22 <rhallisey> maleck13, did you have a feature in there? I may have wrote over it
14:59:47 <ernelson> or, appropriately tagged for 3.10. I'm not certain it's a required prereq for accomplishing kubevirt
14:59:48 <maleck13> rhallisey: I did but removed it as the proposal is already labelled 3.10 and had feedback on it
14:59:52 <rhallisey> ok anyway, I reported this because in kubevirt some folks wanted to enable nested virt in the apb
15:00:00 <rhallisey> maleck13, +!
15:00:02 <rhallisey> +1
15:00:09 <jmrodri> rhallisey: WOW!
15:00:34 <rhallisey> I pushed back a little, but it got me thinking that we don't allow anyone to mount in volumes
15:00:53 <rhallisey> for nested virt it would need to mount in /lib/modules
15:01:21 <rhallisey> do folks think this needs a proposal?
15:01:27 <jmrodri> for my edification, this is a container with nested virt in it?
15:01:27 <shurley> would that be a volume from another namespace then?
15:01:41 <jmrodri> rhallisey: +1 to proposal, seems big
15:01:42 <ernelson> rhallisey: +1 definitely. we also need the security team's blessing on that
15:01:47 <jmrodri> ernelson: +1
15:01:51 <rhallisey> jmrodri, it enables nested virt on the host machine
15:01:58 <maleck13> It seems quite broad a proposal sounds good to me to narrow down the scope and use cases +1
15:02:21 <rhallisey> ok thanks folks. We'll with a proposal
15:02:24 <ernelson> agreed, I'd like to see a solid problem statement explaining the requirement
15:02:39 <shurley> Is this required for 3.10 though?
15:02:39 <jmrodri> an example use case might help
15:02:42 <dzager> I would contend #812 should be kicked to 3.11 maleck13's proposal is slightly different with respect to mounting volumes
15:02:53 <jmrodri> shurley: I would say no, but I'll let rhallisey confirm.
15:02:57 <rhallisey> shurley, I was about to ask that. What do folks think ?
15:03:11 <rhallisey> I don't think it needs to be 3.10
15:03:18 <jmrodri> the proposal can be done for 3.10, but the implementation should be left for 3.11
15:03:21 <ernelson> We have a mandate for kubevirt in 3.10 I believe, is this a blocker for that effort?
15:03:25 <jmrodri> I don't think it is trivial
15:03:47 <shurley> is it a blocker for kubevirt ^ +1
15:03:56 <rhallisey> it's not
15:04:03 * dzager votes 3.11
15:04:04 <rhallisey> they can enable nested virt without an apb
15:04:11 <ernelson> sounds like it can get pushed then.
15:04:19 <rhallisey> ok moving to 3.11
15:04:21 <jmrodri> dzager: I second that
15:04:24 <jmrodri> sold 3.11
15:04:28 <shurley> I vote 3.12
15:04:29 <ernelson> +1
15:04:46 <jmrodri> shurley: so 3.11 +1 :)
15:04:52 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Afeature
15:04:52 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:04:59 <rhallisey> #info 3.10 features
15:04:59 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "info" is not a valid command.
15:05:04 <jmrodri> shurley: I guess taht would make it 4.11. oh well, joke fail
15:05:29 <rhallisey> we'll start at the bottom again
15:05:35 <rhallisey> 1) will it make 3.10
15:05:43 <rhallisey> 2) does it need a proposal
15:05:55 <jmrodri> 3) who's taking it
15:05:59 <shurley> +1
15:06:05 <rhallisey> +1
15:06:07 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
15:06:07 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:06:44 <shurley> I think we just need to add the user and the service id for this one I say it stays in 3.10
15:06:58 <ernelson> yeah this is pretty straightforward
15:06:59 <rhallisey> this may be a quick patch
15:06:59 <jmrodri> shurley: +1
15:07:01 <maleck13> +1
15:07:10 <rhallisey> ok we'll keep it
15:07:19 <rhallisey> anyone interested in working on this?
15:07:20 <jmrodri> I can look at this one
15:07:28 <dzager> service instance id is already there, you are only missing the user
15:07:36 <jmrodri> dzager: even better
15:07:43 <rhallisey> #action jmrodri to look at https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
15:07:43 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:08:03 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
15:08:03 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:08:11 <rhallisey> #undo
15:08:11 <brokerbot> Removing item from minutes: #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
15:08:11 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "undo" is not a valid command.
15:08:26 <jmrodri> DOH! did brokerbot kick ryan
15:08:40 <jmrodri> DOH! did brokerbot kick ryan
15:08:42 <rhallisey> woops
15:08:47 <dzager> brokerbot++
15:08:50 <rhallisey> was in the wrong window
15:08:53 <jmrodri> rhallisey: you had the entire row here LOLing
15:09:05 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
15:09:05 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:09:10 <rhallisey> ok that one
15:09:22 <jmrodri> this refactor is sort of happening in different areas
15:09:29 <rhallisey> 3.10 make sense?
15:09:35 <jmrodri> I'm not 100% sure if I'd make it a 3.10 blocker though
15:09:39 <ernelson> I would consider this closed with my refactoring work honestly
15:09:40 <jmrodri> feels like a 3.10 nice to have
15:09:48 <jmrodri> ernelson: even better :)
15:10:03 <ernelson> it condensed the shared behavior, or do we think there's further work to be done here?
15:10:05 <shurley> ernelson: I wouldn't just yet
15:10:16 <rhallisey> we may touch in this some more in coming weeks
15:10:22 <shurley> I think the APB package still has exported types that should not be exported
15:10:32 <rhallisey> I agree shurley
15:10:39 <jmrodri> let's leave it open until we have vendor discussions.
15:10:43 <ernelson> Feels like we need to get finer grained with this issue then with work items?
15:10:45 <shurley> +1
15:10:48 <ernelson> Right now it's a little vague
15:10:48 <dymurray> +1
15:10:55 <shurley> +1
15:10:58 <jmrodri> ernelson: +1
15:11:05 <maleck13> +1
15:11:05 <jmrodri> should we create finer issues then?
15:11:12 <jmrodri> or just add work items to this issue?
15:11:16 <jmrodri> I'm fine either way
15:11:25 <rhallisey> can we fold this into another issue?
15:11:30 <rhallisey> since it's a specific pkg
15:11:32 <shurley> do we want to close and just make sure that we create a finer grained issue from the vendor discussion?
15:11:42 <ernelson> shurley: ack, +1
15:11:48 <jmrodri> shurley: that sounds better
15:12:03 <rhallisey> #action close https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501 and create a new granular issue after vendoring discussion
15:12:03 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:12:17 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/530
15:12:17 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:12:33 <rhallisey> maleck13, I think this may be what you had linked earlier
15:12:44 <maleck13> yes this is covered by my proposal
15:12:53 <jmrodri> okay leave this for 3.10
15:12:56 <maleck13> I would like to aim to get it into 3.10
15:12:58 <maleck13> +1
15:13:06 <rhallisey> ok this is all set
15:13:08 <shurley> +1
15:13:16 <rhallisey> nice job maleck13
15:13:19 <jmrodri> It's assigned to me to keep tracking it.
15:13:32 <rhallisey> #action community reviews needed on proposal https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/pull/809
15:13:32 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:13:49 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/590
15:13:49 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:14:25 <rhallisey> shurley, should this be 3.10
15:14:50 <shurley> 3.11 unless someone wants to take this. I don't think I'll have the time and it is just a nice to have IMO
15:15:07 <rhallisey> any takers?
15:15:08 <ernelson> shurley: +1
15:15:24 <rhallisey> if there are, assign yourself
15:15:25 <jmrodri> let's move to 3.11 for now.
15:15:38 <rhallisey> 1 more feature
15:15:47 <rhallisey> #link https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/614
15:15:47 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:15:53 <rhallisey> this is a good one
15:16:18 <rhallisey> 3.10? and do we need a proposal?
15:16:34 <jmrodri> I can look at this one, I remember doing the recover stuff.
15:16:41 <jmrodri> and +1 to proposal
15:16:44 <maleck13> +1
15:16:44 <shurley> yes, and yes I think
15:16:48 <ernelson> +1
15:17:01 <rhallisey> ok thank jmrodri
15:17:03 <rhallisey> thanks
15:17:17 * jmrodri will have to double check what I've signed up for :)
15:17:33 <jmrodri> rhallisey: I think we've reached the time limit for features
15:17:43 <rhallisey> #link Open Discussion
15:17:43 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:17:47 <rhallisey> #undo
15:17:47 <brokerbot> Removing item from minutes: #link Open
15:17:47 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "undo" is not a valid command.
15:17:52 <rhallisey> #topic Open Discussion
15:17:52 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "topic" is not a valid command.
15:18:12 <rhallisey> there's an item here for drafting a code of conduct
15:18:22 <jmrodri> I believe there was precendence for using the contributor covenant
15:18:24 <jmrodri> https://www.contributor-covenant.org/
15:18:27 <jmrodri> the 3rd in the list
15:18:35 <rhallisey> how do we want to tackle this process?
15:18:39 <ernelson> jmrodri: what is the precedence?
15:18:41 * dzager votes using contributor covenant
15:18:45 <jmrodri> RH legal :)
15:18:53 <dymurray> :) +1
15:18:56 <jmrodri> I will confirm with RH legal if there are any issues
15:18:59 <ernelson> I would suggest doing whatever openshift is doing
15:19:05 <ernelson> But it doesn't look like they actually have one.
15:19:08 <maleck13> ernelson: makes sense
15:19:27 <maleck13> do they use k8s maybe
15:19:33 <jmrodri> if they don't have any issues with any of the 3, then we can pick whichever one suits our needs.
15:19:34 <ernelson> so possibly just k8s
15:19:34 <shurley> +1 I would prefer to do the cncf if our stuff is maybe going to go into k8s/sig-apps then we should be using theres
15:19:39 <rhallisey> maybe we can start with that code of conduct?
15:19:39 <ernelson> maleck13: yeah
15:19:53 <jmrodri> otherwise, I will defer to their decision.
15:19:54 <ernelson> shurley: is cncf == k8s?
15:19:59 <shurley> yes
15:20:03 <rhallisey> who wants to create draft for this?
15:20:14 <rhallisey> create a draft*
15:20:17 <ernelson> +1 for cncf, I don't think we need to be drafting this ourselves
15:20:22 <jmrodri> rhallisey: I will work with RH legal and shurley :)
15:20:40 <maleck13> +1 cncf
15:20:57 <shurley> https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md
15:20:58 <rhallisey> #action jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
15:20:58 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:21:13 <jmrodri> and by drafting I mean picking an existing one :)
15:21:19 <shurley> +1000
15:21:24 <rhallisey> sounds good
15:21:33 <dzager> shurley: +0.1
15:21:39 <jmrodri> because if I came up with one it would not be very kind :) Torvalds Code of Conduct :)
15:21:51 <rhallisey> that's all I have on the agenda folks. Does anyone want to talk about anything else
15:22:09 <jmrodri> I'm good, thanks rhallisey for putting this together.
15:22:15 <maleck13> all good from me. Thanks for this
15:22:18 <jmrodri> thanks brokerbot for not hurting rhallisey
15:22:19 <lorbus> just a small q about the new APB structure
15:22:19 <shurley> +1
15:22:30 <jmrodri> lorbus: okay go for it
15:22:33 <rhallisey> hey lorbus, go ahead
15:22:38 <ernelson> rhallisey: thank you! very productive.
15:23:04 <lorbus> I assume it is going to be merged soon and I can base my stuff on it already?
15:23:21 <dzager> lorbus: you are referring to https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/hello-world-apb/pull/3 right?
15:23:29 <lorbus> yes :)
15:23:32 <rhallisey> dzager, you the command :)
15:23:36 <rhallisey> use*
15:23:42 <rhallisey> for links
15:23:45 <dzager> #link https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/hello-world-apb/pull/3
15:23:45 <brokerbot> dzager: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:23:48 <rhallisey> thanks
15:24:13 <dymurray> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/36789
15:24:13 <brokerbot> dymurray: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:24:14 <jmrodri> dzager: is that official yet?
15:24:15 <dzager> lorbus: yeah, that should be merged shortly.
15:24:26 <dymurray> It's also worth mentioning we are moving to a format that works with Galaxy as well
15:24:35 <lorbus> cool!
15:24:45 <dymurray> So a lot of APB directory changes coming down the pipeline. Mainly just trying to enforce the contract that mhrivnak is working on
15:25:09 <rhallisey> nice good stuff
15:25:22 <dzager> jmrodri: well, until Ansible 2.5 comes out, no to the k8s_raw stuff, but the structure of the APB I would say yes
15:25:37 <jmrodri> so does that mean lorbus can start basing his apbs on it? or wait?
15:26:08 <dzager> #link https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/apb-test-shim to see the APB testing shim and an example .travis.yml for APB devs to get started
15:26:08 <brokerbot> dzager: Error: "link" is not a valid command.
15:26:15 <lorbus> so k8s_raw won't be ready until Ansible 2.5 or even after?
15:26:41 <dzager> lorbus: k8s_raw is Ansible 2.5 (it's already into ansible/ansible master)
15:27:02 <dzager> you are welcome to use apb-base:canary to access k8s_raw module
15:27:18 <lorbus> that'll work, awesome! :)
15:27:42 <dzager> #action dzager get hello-world-apb merged
15:27:42 <brokerbot> dzager: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:27:46 <rhallisey> does anyone else have anything else to discuss?
15:27:56 <rhallisey> thanks for bringing that up lorbus
15:28:12 <lorbus> np :)
15:28:29 <rhallisey> some additional info about this meeting and we'll close it out
15:28:34 <rhallisey> I'll post the logs on the ML
15:29:19 <rhallisey> during the week leading up to the next meeting try and fill out the meeting template with discussion items
15:29:31 <ernelson> rhallisey: where are the logs going to be hosted?
15:29:45 <rhallisey> ernelson, I haven't figured that out yet
15:29:50 <ernelson> It would be nice to get them onto an apache server somewhere
15:29:54 <lorbus> is there a .cal file hosted somewhere to sync the dates?
15:29:56 <rhallisey> I was hoping to host on fedora but I didnt get that bot working
15:30:00 <ernelson> we might have some extra spots to put it
15:30:24 <ernelson> actually, those are internal to the RH network, probably want to host it publically somewhere
15:30:29 <rhallisey> ya
15:30:40 <rhallisey> #action rhallisey figure out where to host logs
15:30:40 <brokerbot> rhallisey: Error: "action" is not a valid command.
15:30:43 <jmrodri> ernelson: +1 I think fedora can do it even in one of our accounts.
15:30:45 <lorbus> +1 for leveraging fedora infra
15:30:50 <jmrodri> I think I can host some on my fedora people page
15:30:54 <rhallisey> ok folks that all the time we have
15:30:55 <ernelson> +1
15:30:58 <rhallisey> #endmeeting
-------------- next part --------------
==========================
#asbroker: asbroker 3/6/18
==========================
Meeting started by rhallisey at 14:31:16 UTC. The full logs are
available at asbroker/2018/asbroker.2018-03-06-14.31.log.html .
Meeting summary
---------------
* Attendance (rhallisey, 14:31:33)
* News (rhallisey, 14:33:07)
* LINK: https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot (rhallisey, 14:34:17)
* rhallisey needs to fix brokerbot (rhallisey, 14:35:28)
* LINK:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mj7bVYJ8NK-TwU_mxeZLprmBBZZ-xOq-Hg4CiD3E6pM/edit#
(rhallisey, 14:36:21)
* Bugs/Issus triage (rhallisey, 14:36:57)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/789
(rhallisey, 14:37:09)
* LINK:
https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/ansible-playbook-bundle/pull/240
(dymurray, 14:38:46)
* ACTION: rhallisey: to post wip patch (rhallisey, 14:41:39)
* ACTION: shurley: assign himself and push it over the finish line
(rhallisey, 14:42:05)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
(rhallisey, 14:42:44)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/347
(rhallisey, 14:44:36)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/351
(rhallisey, 14:46:21)
* duplicate of:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/576
(rhallisey, 14:48:15)
* ACTION: community needs to follow up on issue (rhallisey, 14:51:24)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531
(rhallisey, 14:51:39)
* ACTION: maleck13: see if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531 is
still occurring (rhallisey, 14:55:02)
* LINK:
jmhttps://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
(rhallisey, 14:55:27)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Abug
(rhallisey, 14:55:41)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585
(rhallisey, 14:55:59)
* ACTION: ernelson: check if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585 is
fixed and close it (rhallisey, 14:57:51)
* Features (rhallisey, 14:58:32)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/812
(rhallisey, 14:58:39)
* LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A3.10+label%3Afeature
(rhallisey, 15:04:52)
* 3.10 features (rhallisey, 15:04:59)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
(rhallisey, 15:06:07)
* ACTION: jmrodri to look at
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
(rhallisey, 15:07:43)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
(rhallisey, 15:09:05)
* ACTION: close
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501 and
create a new granular issue after vendoring discussion (rhallisey,
15:12:03)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/530
(rhallisey, 15:12:17)
* ACTION: community reviews needed on proposal
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/pull/809
(rhallisey, 15:13:32)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/590
(rhallisey, 15:13:49)
* LINK: https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/614
(rhallisey, 15:15:47)
* Open Discussion (rhallisey, 15:17:52)
* LINK: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/ (jmrodri, 15:18:24)
* LINK:
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md
(shurley, 15:20:57)
* ACTION: jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
(rhallisey, 15:20:58)
* LINK:
https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/hello-world-apb/pull/3
(dzager, 15:23:45)
* LINK: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/36789 (dymurray,
15:24:13)
* LINK: https://github.com/ansibleplaybookbundle/apb-test-shim to see
the APB testing shim and an example .travis.yml for APB devs to get
started (dzager, 15:26:08)
* ACTION: dzager get hello-world-apb merged (dzager, 15:27:42)
* ACTION: rhallisey figure out where to host logs (rhallisey,
15:30:40)
Meeting ended at 15:30:58 UTC.
Action items, by person
-----------------------
* dzager
* dzager get hello-world-apb merged
* ernelson
* ernelson: check if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/585 is
fixed and close it
* jmrodri
* jmrodri to look at
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/470
* jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
* maleck13
* maleck13: see if
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/531 is
still occurring
* rhallisey
* rhallisey: to post wip patch
* rhallisey figure out where to host logs
* shurley
* shurley: assign himself and push it over the finish line
* jmrodri and shurley will work on drafting Code of Conduct
* **UNASSIGNED**
* community needs to follow up on issue
* close https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/issues/501
and create a new granular issue after vendoring discussion
* community reviews needed on proposal
https://github.com/openshift/ansible-service-broker/pull/809
People present (lines said)
---------------------------
* rhallisey (161)
* jmrodri (82)
* brokerbot (55)
* ernelson (44)
* shurley (30)
* dzager (21)
* dymurray (19)
* maleck13 (17)
* lorbus (11)
* dwhatley (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
More information about the Ansible-service-broker
mailing list