17:00:25 <edwarnicke> #startmeeting
17:00:25 <odl_meetbot> Meeting started Fri Jan 17 17:00:25 2014 UTC.  The chair is edwarnicke. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:25 <odl_meetbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:29 <edwarnicke> #topic rollcall
17:00:35 <edwarnicke> Everybody #info in
17:00:56 <phrobb> #info Phil Robb present
17:01:17 <shague> #info shague
17:01:27 <edwarnicke> #info Ed Warnicke for controller
17:01:31 <LuisGomez> #info Luis is also here
17:01:35 <oflibMichal> #info oflibMichal for the openflowjava
17:01:42 <abhijitkumbhare> #info Abhijit Kumbhare for openflowplugin
17:01:50 <ashaikh> #info Anees / opendove
17:01:52 <michal_rehak> #info michal_rehak for openflowplugin
17:02:02 <tykeal> #info Andrew Grimberg for infrastructure support
17:02:03 <cdub> #info Chris Wright for troublemaking
17:02:21 <tykeal> nice
17:02:29 <Madhu> #info Madhu here
17:02:53 <edwarnicke> Anybody else?
17:03:13 <edwarnicke> #topic review decisions from 5:45pm meeting
17:03:32 <edwarnicke> We've started in the 5:45pm meeting reviewing the decisions from the 9am meeting to make sure everyone is OK with them
17:03:52 <edwarnicke> Since some folks at the 5:45pm can't attend the 9am and should have a voice
17:04:06 <edwarnicke> All #agreed items from yesterdays meeting the 5:45pm concurred with
17:04:26 <edwarnicke> In addition, the 5:45pm meeting #agreed to some things
17:04:41 <edwarnicke> And so I wanted to review those with the 9am to see how folks here felt about them
17:04:49 <edwarnicke> Does that sound good to everyone?
17:05:02 <phrobb> yep
17:05:13 <cdub> +1
17:05:13 <edwarnicke> Here's what was agreed at the 5:45pm meeting:
17:05:18 <edwarnicke> AGREED: to add decisions on the changes to https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Draft_Syslog_Level_Settings to the bottom of the page
17:05:29 <edwarnicke> AGREED: copyright/license headers need not go into configuration files, .gitignore, or READMEs
17:05:37 <edwarnicke> AGREED: copyright/license headers need not go into .gitreview
17:05:46 <edwarnicke> AGREED: raise the question to the attorneys as to whether we need copyright/license headers in pom.xml files
17:05:52 <edwarnicke> AGREED: to cancel 5:45pm PST Friday meeting
17:05:59 <edwarnicke> AGREED: to have 5:45pm PST Sunday meeting
17:06:30 <edwarnicke> I would maintain that the last two are matters purely internal to the 5;45pm meeting and thus do not require our concurance... feel free to voice other thoughts on that :)
17:06:40 <edwarnicke> What do folks think about these agreed items?
17:06:45 <cdub> all good
17:07:05 <edwarnicke> Other folks?
17:07:25 <ashaikh> sounds good to me too
17:07:28 <cdub> we discussed the pom.xml a bit in integration call as well...some (non-odl) projects do, some don't put copyright/license header
17:07:35 <oflibMichal> agree ... but i have question: what about copyright in yang files ?
17:07:56 <rovarga> #info rovarga for bgpcep
17:08:01 <edwarnicke> oflibMichal: Good question, do yang files have a commenting mechanism sufficient to support it?
17:08:24 <rovarga> well, what we are doing is sticking the copyright in the description
17:08:38 <cdub> what about models coming from ietf?
17:08:48 <edwarnicke> I would suggest we treat those like third party code
17:08:49 <cdub> i'm not sure we have authority on all models
17:09:21 <edwarnicke> I would suggest we treat the models coming from the ietf the same way we treat third party code.  It's not our copyright/license.
17:09:26 <edwarnicke> Thoughts?
17:09:28 <cdub> makes sense, so leaves only uniquely authored odl yang models?
17:09:31 <rovarga> edwarnicke: +1
17:09:46 <rovarga> we even do not want to change them, as that may create interop issues
17:10:42 <cdub> indeed
17:10:45 <phrobb> correct, don't put copyright/license headers on files you didn't author
17:12:25 <edwarnicke> oflibMichal: I think your question was do we want to put copyright/license info in the originally authored yang files
17:12:38 <oflibMichal> edwarnicke: right
17:12:40 <phrobb> For the config files, I know it is  a gray area and many projects don't put copyright/license header information in them.  The approach we were suggesting though is that "if you want someone else to be able to take a file and modify it and pass it on, go ahead and put a copyright/license header on it… that way the downstream user is assured that your intent was to let them use/modify the file under the terms of the EPL
17:13:46 <phrobb> I'm fine with that being a guideline/suggestion as opposed to a mandate
17:14:14 <edwarnicke> OK... so can I #agree to concur with:
17:14:21 <edwarnicke> AGREED: to add decisions on the changes to https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Draft_Syslog_Level_Settings to the bottom of the page
17:15:10 <edwarnicke> Cnn I #agree to concur with the 5:45pm decisions and then we can switch the topic to continue the converation?
17:15:12 <edwarnicke> Can
17:15:20 <edwarnicke> (cutting and pasting again was getting to be a drag)
17:15:57 <cdub> i agree w/ the 5.45 outcome
17:16:00 <Madhu> edwarnicke: not sure if i understood the pom.xml clearly
17:16:08 <Madhu> shud we copyright or not
17:16:28 <cdub> "raise the question to the attorneysraise the question to the attorneys"
17:16:36 <edwarnicke> pom.xml would be come a #action on phrobb to check with legal on whether we need copyright/license headers in pom.xml
17:16:36 <cdub> not settled yet
17:16:47 <edwarnicke> My gut would be they are not copyrightable really... but IANAL
17:16:58 <Madhu> thanks (and sorry for repeating the question :) )
17:18:21 <edwarnicke> #agreed 9am meeting agrees with all #agreed decisions from 1/16/2014 5:45pm meeting
17:18:37 <edwarnicke> #action phrobb:  check with legal as to whether pom.xml files need copyright/license headers
17:19:06 <edwarnicke> #topic copyright/license headers
17:19:12 <abhijitkumbhare> For files that do not support commenting - may be an additional file can be added in the same directory which states the different copyrights and files in the directory that those copyrights are applicable?
17:19:19 <edwarnicke> Do we want to continue with copyright/license headers on yang files?
17:19:31 <cdub> phrobb: as an example...maven does this:
17:19:33 <edwarnicke> abhijitkumbhare: Do we have such file types identified yet?
17:19:37 <cdub> #link https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven.git;a=blob;f=pom.xml;h=0c5133762f06739eda6c3914b0584db7a5da706d;hb=HEAD
17:19:48 <abhijitkumbhare> edwarnicke: none that i am aware
17:19:52 <phrobb> cdub:  Maven does what?
17:20:00 <edwarnicke> abhijitkumbhare: Lets cross that bridge when we come to it then :)
17:20:02 <cdub> see #link
17:20:31 <phrobb> cdub:  got it, yep
17:20:34 <cdub> phrobb: just a fyi for pom.xml legal discussion
17:21:01 <edwarnicke> Mind if I move along to per project reporting?
17:21:23 <phrobb> no, go for it
17:21:47 <edwarnicke> #topic per project status
17:21:58 <edwarnicke> #link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AoSzir1BfjyWdDQyVElWNG9mcWxhblREckZjbjFxUVE#gid=1
17:22:29 <edwarnicke> One thing we tried at the 5:45pm that seemed to work well was simply a call out for projects to #info their status on their work items at the same time.  Turned out to be a quick way to get through it all.
17:22:34 <edwarnicke> So... lets try that here...
17:22:48 <edwarnicke> Everybody #info their per project items status
17:23:14 <Madhu> #info ovsdb : owners assigned to each per-project task and the spreadsheet is unto date with the status.
17:23:53 <edwarnicke> #info controller: Globale Code Cleanup per-project items assigned in spreadsheet
17:24:24 <abhijitkumbhare> #info For openflowplugin - we have assigned some tasks (marked in the spreadsheet). However we are still assigning the remaining tasks - we will be lengthening our daily meeting on Monday morning Pacific to make sure  the tasks are assigned.
17:24:51 <oflibMichal> #info openflowjava: oflibMichal responsible for all items - doing one by one
17:25:23 <edwarnicke> Anybody else who hasn't spoken up yet, please do so... we'll change topic soon
17:25:37 <LuisGomez> #info integration: not sure which release tasks apply to integration repo
17:25:45 <ashaikh> #info opendove: global code cleanup close to done; working on artifact creation for non bundle components; docs task being assigned
17:25:49 <rovarga> #info bgpcep: owners assigned and on-track for ETAs so far
17:26:33 <edwarnicke> OK... last call... 1 more minute before topic change
17:26:48 <edwarnicke> #topic which per project issues apply to integration project
17:27:12 <edwarnicke> (apologies, epic fail on actually correctly ascertaining a minute... I got excited...)
17:27:42 <ermagan> #info lispflowmapping: David Goldberg is handling the tasks and assigning when needed. on track.
17:28:33 <edwarnicke> I don't see Global Cleanup items that would apply to integration, what to other folks thing?
17:29:44 <LuisGomez> we do not develop project code but we build release editions and rpms
17:30:42 <LuisGomez> just wonder if there is any action ti be done on those
17:31:12 <ashaikh> LuisGomez: we are tyring to leverage some of integration project's rpm stuff for opendove
17:31:28 <edwarnicke> Can we #agreed that integration can mark the Global Code Cleanup items N/A for them?
17:31:32 <rovarga> well... I guess the nexus group and pom.xml copyrights may apply
17:31:39 <Madhu> edwarnicke: do u have anything in mind ?
17:32:09 <edwarnicke> Madhu: I didn't understand your question
17:32:40 <edwarnicke> Can we #agreed that other than possibly the copyright/license section, they can mark Global Cleanup items N/A?
17:32:41 <Madhu> i meant, if u have any tasks in mind for integration project that we miss ?
17:33:18 <Madhu> edwarnicke: gut feeling. there will be something just we are missing now :)
17:33:30 <Madhu> like the run.sh work that we did just on the integration project
17:34:00 <edwarnicke> Right, but those are not yet identified
17:34:11 <edwarnicke> I'm talking about for the identified tasks
17:35:31 <LuisGomez> something that we can do after the release cut is to change the current system test jenkins jobs to point to RELEASE or new SNAPSHOT version
17:35:55 <edwarnicke> True, but that's down in the Finalization section
17:36:02 <LuisGomez> yes
17:36:04 <edwarnicke> Lets #agree this so we can move on to docs
17:36:23 <Madhu> sure
17:36:46 <edwarnicke> #agreed With the possible exception of copyright/license item, the integration project can mark per project Global Code Cleanup items as N/A (note: we may discover some other integration specific things later)
17:36:54 <edwarnicke> #topic documentation
17:37:13 <edwarnicke> Do we have RobDolin or chrisprice on the line?
17:37:32 <edwarnicke> (Or other doc team members (noted: Madhu is here for Developer Guide))
17:38:10 <Madhu> edwarnicke: i have asked networkstatic to help out with Developer guide
17:38:26 <edwarnicke> Could you ask him to add himself to the spreadsheet?
17:38:28 <networkstatic> rogr
17:38:51 <edwarnicke> #topic download page
17:39:09 <edwarnicke> Quick note from the 5:45pm meeting
17:39:22 <edwarnicke> dbainbri has volunteered to do docker for all three release editions
17:39:48 <cdub> shague: ^^^ worth noting...and connecting w/ dbainbri
17:39:58 <shague> yeah, that was the only status update for today on the download page. already working with him!
17:40:08 <cdub> nice
17:40:08 <edwarnicke> shague: I pointed dbainbri to you already, but bilteral connecting is alway desirable :)
17:40:24 <edwarnicke> phrobb: Do we have anything from the design folks?
17:40:24 <dbainbri> yep, we are connecting.
17:40:57 <phrobb> Not yet.  I pinged them yesterday but haven't heard back yet
17:41:15 <shague> and mucho gracias to David for picking it up.
17:41:24 <edwarnicke> dbainbri: is awesome :)
17:41:48 <dbainbri> wouldn't go that far.
17:41:54 <edwarnicke> #topic System test
17:42:18 <LuisGomez> thats me
17:42:41 <LuisGomez> we are developing system test for base edition of13 option
17:42:59 <LuisGomez> we have vtn mgr in place
17:43:03 <edwarnicke> LuisGomez: Can you provide a pointer to how to hook up new testing with the new OF13 VM
17:43:11 <edwarnicke> We have some automated scripts we'd like to see run regularly
17:44:13 <abhijitkumbhare> LuisGomez: Great that you will be testing VTN with of13 option soon - that means the AD-SAL adapters will get tested well.
17:44:23 <LuisGomez> EWd: the automated scripts is the python script that I saw from Jan?
17:44:48 <edwarnicke> LuisGomez: Yes
17:45:06 <LuisGomez> Ed: that script will be running today if all goes well
17:45:11 <edwarnicke> We *really* need to run it for regression, and tykeal says the VM is only available from integration Jenkins
17:45:19 <edwarnicke> LuisGomez: That is awesome
17:45:28 <edwarnicke> Where is it checked in so we can commit our updates there
17:45:49 <tykeal> edwarnicke: I can get a VM built out for openflowplugin's jenkins today. I'm going to need to get one for VTN as well
17:46:08 <edwarnicke> tykeal: Thanks
17:46:12 <Madhu> tykeal: ovsdb ? :-(
17:46:21 <edwarnicke> Anything else for system test?
17:46:36 <tykeal> right... ovsdb, I think that may be the ticket I got yesterday
17:46:50 <LuisGomez> Ed: the plan is to move the pythin script to our repo today and set a jenkins job to run it with controller -of13 option
17:46:59 <Madhu> tykeal: thanks. i was working the social engineering path before. seems like ticket works better :)
17:47:07 <edwarnicke> LuisGomez: Awsome :)
17:47:12 <edwarnicke> Anything else before topic change?
17:47:15 <LuisGomez> Ed: i will send info to ofplugin devs when is ready
17:47:18 <ashaikh> LuisGomez: i think you mentioned an updated mininet VM for base qualification testing -- when do you think that will be avail
17:47:36 <networkstatic> what version of OVS is being loaded on this e guys?
17:47:50 <networkstatic> v2.0+ important
17:48:14 <abhijitkumbhare> LuisGomez: Just confirming - you will be testing -of13 option with both OF1.0 and OF1.3 switches, right?
17:48:15 <LuisGomez> ashaikh: the VM to validate controller will be prepared this weekend as i plan to present it on Monday TWS call
17:48:53 <LuisGomez> abhijitkumbhare: yes
17:49:01 <abhijitkumbhare> Thanks for the info
17:49:03 <tykeal> v2.0
17:49:05 <edwarnicke> Since we are running low on time, lets take this offline (carrier pidgeons) and run through the last two
17:49:08 <ashaikh> LuisGomez: ok, great -- thanks
17:49:09 <networkstatic> ty tykeal
17:49:47 <edwarnicke> #topic Additional Testing
17:49:55 <edwarnicke> ashaikh: How are we doing on platform coverage?
17:50:27 <ashaikh> i think we have linux variants covered -- need some input from Rob still on Windows
17:50:37 <ashaikh> will follow up with him again
17:51:04 <ashaikh> for Mac OS , i'll ask a couple of individuals
17:51:20 <ashaikh> hint edwarnicke
17:51:38 <edwarnicke> ACK
17:51:46 <edwarnicke> #topic finalization activities
17:52:03 <edwarnicke> Madhu: Any progress on investigating signing of artifacts?
17:52:17 <Madhu> edwarnicke: no.
17:52:37 <edwarnicke> Have we figured out how to do a dry run by next Wed of cutting release artifacts?
17:53:22 <Madhu> edwarnicke: we first have to make sure all the projects are done with convergence
17:53:36 <Madhu> not sure who is handling the external artifact convergence
17:53:42 <Madhu> and what is the final decision on that.
17:53:52 <edwarnicke> cdub: Do you know?
17:53:53 <cdub> i will send list to list
17:53:58 <edwarnicke> Ack
17:54:03 <edwarnicke> Anything else guys before we end?
17:54:08 <Madhu> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Anypq0z_rOtOdE1YOUFSejQ0TGk0TkFhbVdEZ0d0VHc#gid=0
17:54:16 <Madhu> owners : please make all of them green
17:54:34 <Madhu> this is the first basic step for even dry-run of release-artifacts
17:54:50 <Madhu> but edwarnicke there is a dry-run option for the release plugin
17:54:53 <rovarga> ed/madhu: bgpcep removal from controller is all queued up, feel free to merge
17:54:55 <Madhu> which we can try
17:55:06 <Madhu> rovarga: thanks appreciate it
17:55:17 <edwarnicke> rovarga: I will do some runtime testing to make sure it all works out :)
17:55:27 <Madhu> edwarnicke: if we can get yang tools and controller  project on wed
17:55:33 <Madhu> we shud be able to dry run them ?
17:55:36 <edwarnicke> Madhu: Mind if handle that merge
17:55:44 <Madhu> edwarnicke: don't mind at all :)
17:55:49 <edwarnicke> Madhu: Have we figured out how to dry run yet?
17:55:49 <michal_rehak> what about removing the old plugin from controller odl/distributions?
17:56:04 <michal_rehak> I mean openflow protocol plugin
17:56:15 <edwarnicke> michal_rehak: I believe that whole thing has been decided already by the TSC
17:56:16 <Madhu> michal_rehak: we are not removing them
17:56:23 <cdub> michal_rehak: it gets used
17:56:26 <michal_rehak> ok
17:56:29 <edwarnicke> old OF plugin is default, -of13 turns on new one instead
17:56:47 <michal_rehak> cool
17:56:51 <edwarnicke> Mechanics are already in place and in use :)
17:57:01 <edwarnicke> OK, anything else before we close?
17:57:02 <Madhu> edwarnicke: shall we align yang tools for the dry run
17:57:12 <Madhu> that is the only possible project we can do dry run on at this point
17:57:33 <Madhu> everything else is dependent on the SNAPSHOT version of yangtools
17:57:43 <Madhu> i mean every other project is
17:58:10 <edwarnicke> Hmm...
17:58:23 <edwarnicke> Sounds like we still need to figure this out a bit
17:58:32 <edwarnicke> I'll check in with the yangtools guys though
17:58:36 <edwarnicke> #endmeeting