19:00:14 <thaumos> #startmeeting Ansible meeting
19:00:14 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Jul 18 19:00:14 2017 UTC.  The chair is thaumos. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:00:14 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
19:00:14 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_meeting'
19:00:33 <chillysurfer> hello, all
19:01:35 <caphrim007> howdy
19:01:39 * shertel waves
19:01:49 <thaumos> #chair chillysurfer caphrim007 shertel
19:01:49 <zodbot> Current chairs: caphrim007 chillysurfer shertel thaumos
19:03:13 <yaacov> hi
19:03:53 <thaumos> #chair yaacov
19:03:53 <zodbot> Current chairs: caphrim007 chillysurfer shertel thaumos yaacov
19:05:37 <newswangerd> \o
19:05:38 <abadger1999> hello
19:06:46 <thaumos> #chair newswangerd abadger1999
19:06:46 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 caphrim007 chillysurfer newswangerd shertel thaumos yaacov
19:06:51 <thaumos> okay, let's get started.
19:06:59 <dag> o/
19:07:11 <thaumos> #chair dag
19:07:11 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 caphrim007 chillysurfer dag newswangerd shertel thaumos yaacov
19:07:15 <thaumos> #topic ansible/ansible#26641
19:07:26 <thaumos> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26641
19:07:38 <thaumos> @yaacov this is your's
19:07:42 <yaacov> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/25106
19:07:52 <yaacov> 26641 is 25106
19:08:09 <thaumos> what?
19:08:24 <thaumos> that was the closed one
19:08:25 <yaacov> daniel who made 25106 has little time now , so I took it over and make 26641
19:08:27 <thaumos> we're talking about the new PR.
19:08:31 <thaumos> right
19:08:40 <thaumos> so discussing the new pr
19:08:46 <yaacov> it's the same PR, I took it over,
19:08:50 <thaumos> right
19:08:51 <thaumos> got it
19:08:59 <thaumos> we discussed this yesterday on the bluejeans
19:09:03 <thaumos> and I said ;et
19:09:12 <ryansb> sup errbody
19:09:17 <thaumos> let's have a meeting first with the manageiq team before we raise this here.
19:09:21 <thaumos> #chair ryansb
19:09:21 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 caphrim007 chillysurfer dag newswangerd ryansb shertel thaumos yaacov
19:09:26 <jtanner> yawn
19:09:33 <thaumos> #chair jtanner
19:09:33 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 caphrim007 chillysurfer dag jtanner newswangerd ryansb shertel thaumos yaacov
19:09:35 <jtanner> meetings, meetings, meetings
19:09:41 <thaumos> ^^ manager
19:10:19 <jtanner> i looked at java code this morning ... that was funny
19:10:59 <chillysurfer> ha
19:11:06 <thaumos> so @yaacov, are you good with first speaking with the manageiq folks?  I'd like to have their backing on this before anything.
19:11:44 <yaacov> yes we set a meeting this thersday
19:11:45 <thaumos> we have the meeting scheduled for Thursday.
19:11:46 <thaumos> ok
19:12:01 <yaacov> ok good by me :-)
19:12:02 <thaumos> so I am going to put this item on the backburner for review until we have that meeting.
19:12:06 <thaumos> 👍
19:12:11 <yaacov> thanks
19:12:20 <thaumos> #action thaumos to raise awareness to this again after meeting with manageiq team.
19:12:45 <thaumos> #topic ansible/ansible#26684
19:12:52 <thaumos> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26684
19:13:37 <thaumos> this introduces a test suite for the crypto namespace.
19:14:06 <thaumos> is spredzy present?
19:14:16 <thaumos> should we punt this to to the test meeting afterwards?
19:14:45 <thaumos> makes more sense to me having the discussion there, and mattclay is already commenting on the thread.  so i am not sure why this was brought up for here
19:14:53 <abadger1999> It looks like mattclay and Pilou are on top of reviewing it.
19:14:57 * thaumos nods
19:15:05 <thaumos> ok, moving on then 😄
19:15:10 <abadger1999> mattclay: would you need anything from us or will you just merge that when it's ready?
19:15:30 <abadger1999> thaumos: yeah, move on.
19:15:46 <thaumos> #topic ansible/ansible#26026
19:15:57 <thaumos> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26026
19:16:57 <thaumos> asking for core team review for a new hponeview module
19:18:56 <thaumos> @abadger1999 you willing to take a look at this module and provide some code feedback?
19:19:08 <thaumos> nvm, you already pinged it
19:19:33 <thaumos> ok, I'll add that as an action item, and will also add another ai to have myself follow up on it.
19:19:45 <abadger1999> thaumos: yeah, I can look... If there's someone using hponeview, that would be good too... I can only code review, not usage review
19:19:49 <thaumos> #action abadger1999 to do an initial review
19:20:06 <thaumos> heh, not sure we have anyone that is.  I think this person is from hp though?  not 100% sure
19:20:20 <thaumos> #action thaumos to also review and follow up on PR
19:20:57 <thaumos> in some cases we're going to have to trust the vendors at a community level
19:21:06 <thaumos> when they want to become curated, that's a whole other story.
19:21:20 <fgbulsoni> Hey
19:21:28 <thaumos> #chair fgbulsoni
19:21:28 <zodbot> Current chairs: abadger1999 caphrim007 chillysurfer dag fgbulsoni jtanner newswangerd ryansb shertel thaumos yaacov
19:21:34 <thaumos> Hi fgbulsoni
19:21:39 <fgbulsoni> Sorry bout that, got distracted for a few minutes
19:21:42 <thaumos> someone from the team is reviewing your PR.
19:21:50 <fgbulsoni> awesome, thanks
19:21:55 <thaumos> I'll also be following up too.
19:22:07 <thaumos> do you have any questions you'd like to pose to the group as well?
19:22:43 <fgbulsoni> For now I think most of my questions have been answered on the PR, I've changed the the location in the modules where it is at and it is passing with the CI
19:22:50 <fgbulsoni> so just waiting on comments for things to fix
19:22:57 <fgbulsoni> oh, one things maybe
19:23:17 <fgbulsoni> we have many other ov resources which we manage with ansible, and are sending this one PR first before sending in the other ones
19:23:34 <fgbulsoni> is it the standard procedure to have 1 integrated, then send in 5 modules at a time, in 5 different PRs?
19:23:41 <fgbulsoni> I think I read that in the ansible devel guide
19:23:56 <bcoca> yes, otherwise we never have enough time to review
19:24:07 <bcoca> if PR is over 1 module it normally gets ignored
19:24:28 <thaumos> yep, let's get this merged first.
19:24:29 <fgbulsoni> ok, makes sense. This one is for the FC network management on the hpe oneview appliances
19:24:42 <fgbulsoni> will start sending in other ones after this is merged then
19:24:51 <thaumos> kk
19:24:52 <fgbulsoni> thank you.
19:24:55 <thaumos> np
19:25:12 <thaumos> #topic  ansible/ansible#22756
19:25:29 <thaumos> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/22756
19:25:37 <thaumos> @alikins, this one's your's!
19:26:14 <bcoca> its part of roadmap
19:26:26 <alikins> Mostly just looking for feedback on feature and it's usage
19:26:44 <alikins> does it do some of what people need/want?
19:28:13 <bcoca> kindof, i just dont think people want to deal with vault id managment, my initial description was for much simpler solution
19:28:51 <thaumos> I'll admit I haven't read up on your email yet alikins, and the PR. I still need to do that.
19:28:52 <bcoca> the request from users was 'just pass a list of secrets'
19:29:14 <abadger1999> alikins: I take it that multiple keys being able to decrypt a single vault file will have to wait for gpg support?
19:29:28 <bcoca> this is not that feature
19:29:29 <abadger1999> (since our vault algos are symmetric key)
19:30:02 <bcoca> abadger1999: so is gpg in the end, it just uses mulitple copys of same secret each encrypted with the one of the multiple secrets
19:30:08 <bcoca> so its double vaulting
19:30:09 <abadger1999> And because of that, we don't have to worry about vault format 1.2 being expandable to that use case.... we'll need a different vault revision for that anyway.
19:30:14 <bcoca> not hard to implement
19:30:44 <bcoca> well, yeah, 'container format' is something we need to make vault expandable/configurable, but that was not part of this feature
19:30:47 <alikins> abadger1999: that would required a non backwards compatible vault format change (or gpg/plugins etc)
19:31:08 <bcoca> alikins: can be backwards compatible, just one of the plugins needs to be the 'current' format
19:31:33 <abadger1999> alikins: yep... I'm just checking that we can't shoehorn it anyhow so we don't have to link that change to the 1.2 change of the vault format
19:31:39 <bcoca> ^ kindof what i did with new 'script' inventory plugin to enable backwards compat with inventory scripts
19:31:43 <alikins> old ansible wouldn't understand the new format
19:32:07 <bcoca> yes, but that is a user issue, if they change encryption ... they will have to upgrade all at same time
19:32:42 <bcoca> not even saying 'current' should not be default, but mostly for those that 'require' specific encryption.. then the plugins become very useful
19:32:54 <bcoca> and when you'require' its normally uniform in the same environment
19:33:02 <abadger1999> alikins: for bcoca's question, user's can treat it as just passing a list of secrets, right?  --vault-id is optional... if users use vault-id then vault will be quicker (because it doesn't have to use trial and error to decrypt)?
19:34:28 <alikins> elaborate on what 'passing a list of secrets' means
19:34:52 <bcoca> ^ the purpose of the feature, users passing multiple secrets in same invocation
19:35:09 <abadger1999> bcoca: is'nt thaat this: "* default behavior is to try all of the specified vault secrets/passwords in the order they were specified, until one work"
19:35:42 <alikins> --vault-id foo@prompt --vault-id ./mypasswordfile --vault-password-file another-password-file --vault-id prompt     works
19:35:46 <bcoca> abadger1999: on phone, i reviewed code a while back so i might be wrong about current state
19:40:01 <thaumos> @alikins, not to veer off current thread, but you did ask for feedback on ansible-devel mail list right?  how about ansible-project?
19:44:49 <thaumos> ok...
19:44:59 <thaumos> well, since discussions have stopped.
19:45:12 <thaumos> #action thaumos to follow up with alikins offline about the PR.
19:45:19 <thaumos> #topic Open Floor
19:45:32 <thaumos> anyone have anything they'd like to bring up, or shall we end the meeting for today?
19:45:32 <ryansb> I have an open PR on copyright headers https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26812
19:45:49 <bcoca> +1 on cright
19:45:54 * bcoca heads home
19:45:57 <thaumos> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26812 (Copyright header pr)
19:45:59 <ryansb> I'm fine with all discussion being on the PR, so next topic is fine
19:46:05 <thaumos> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/26812
19:46:22 <thaumos> +1 on copywrite stuff too.
19:48:30 <thaumos> should we have someone from the legal side to glance at it?
19:49:36 <thaumos> acutally nvm
19:49:42 <thaumos> let's just merge it. lgtm
19:50:06 <abadger1999> I think the last edit looked pretty good.. I can check after meeting if you want
19:50:51 <ryansb> k. I'll merge it tomorrow unless there is some new showstopping event
19:50:55 <thaumos> yeah I think it's very clean and precise.
19:51:00 <thaumos> sounds good @ryansb
19:51:14 <thaumos> #action ryansb to merge tomorrow if no other items raised against pr
19:51:21 <abadger1999> ryansb: one more place t oreplace unicode copyright symbol with (c)
19:51:25 <abadger1999> ryansb: other than that +1 from me
19:51:27 <ryansb> gah, I missed one
19:51:33 <ryansb> thanks abadger1999
19:51:37 <thaumos> lol ryansb just put (c) on every line
19:51:38 <abadger1999> no problem.
19:51:41 <thaumos> that'll cover it
19:52:02 <thaumos> #topic Open Floor
19:52:15 <thaumos> any other last minute things?  If not, I'll close the meeting
19:52:54 <ryansb> abadger1999: I fix
19:53:30 <abadger1999> ryansb: +1, merge it
19:57:14 <ryansb> k, last call for open floor (Windows WG is on in 3 mins)
19:58:24 <thaumos> #endmeeting