16:00:30 <Qalthos> #startmeeting Ansible Network Working Group
16:00:30 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jan 24 16:00:30 2018 UTC.  The chair is Qalthos. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:30 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:30 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_network_working_group'
16:00:45 <Qalthos> #info Agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/labels/network
16:01:40 <Qalthos> #chair funzo gundalow gundalow_ kedarX trishnag ganeshrn
16:01:40 <zodbot> Current chairs: Qalthos funzo ganeshrn gundalow gundalow_ kedarX trishnag
16:01:58 * kedarX 👋
16:03:12 <Qalthos> And just as I was about to call open floor, we get a topic
16:03:18 <Qalthos> #chair grastogi
16:03:18 <zodbot> Current chairs: Qalthos funzo ganeshrn grastogi gundalow gundalow_ kedarX trishnag
16:03:47 <Qalthos> #topic Discuss use of VCR for acceptance test
16:04:07 * gundalow waves
16:04:36 <Qalthos> gundalow: If you have anything you want to mention, feel free
16:04:50 <Qalthos> I forget most of the nice reminders you have at the top
16:05:10 <gundalow> Qalthos: oh, just remind people of https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/docs/docsite/rst/roadmap/ROADMAP_2_5.rst :)
16:05:12 <grastogi> We were exploring how to add acceptance tests to Avi Network modules. we came across vcr
16:05:57 <grastogi> We would like to contribute our tests using vcr but were not sure of implications of dependency it would bring to the ansible core
16:06:41 <grastogi> The main benefit we see is that we can run the networking as a unit test rather than actually having a test setup were APIs are called. This is easy to maintain as well as fast.
16:07:05 <Qalthos> grastogi: Adding deps for tests is easier than adding them for core AFAIK.
16:07:15 <grastogi> we only need to add deps in test
16:07:24 <grastogi> because these are strictly test cases
16:07:39 <Qalthos> Right, that's why I mention it
16:08:04 <trishnag> o/
16:08:18 <grastogi> here is an example https://github.com/avinetworks/avi_ansible_modules/blob/AV-32324/test/avi_healthmonitor_test.py
16:08:32 <grastogi> if this is ok, then we will create a pull request for review
16:08:43 <grastogi> we can adjust it based on the feedback from the group
16:09:09 <Qalthos> That sounds like a fine plan
16:09:18 <grastogi> cheers!
16:09:25 <gundalow> mattclay: Not sure if you are online
16:10:06 <Qalthos> I don't see anything immediately wrong, but we can always come back to that in the PR if need be
16:10:16 <Qalthos> #chair mattclay
16:10:16 <zodbot> Current chairs: Qalthos funzo ganeshrn grastogi gundalow gundalow_ kedarX mattclay trishnag
16:10:20 <grastogi> ok, we will do a test drive with a single module test
16:10:27 * mattclay waves
16:10:35 <gundalow> grastogi: appoloiges I'm in another meeting at the moment, so can't give this my full time. Looks interestng. Will need to chat with mattclay about what would be the right way of adding this new testing framework
16:11:19 <Qalthos> mattclay: thoughts on using https://pypi.python.org/pypi/vcrpy for tests
16:12:12 <mattclay> Is this for unit tests? Or is there interest in trying to make it work for integration tests?
16:13:20 <grastogi> This is for integration test but without actual network service behind it. Basically, you can run the test against a real setup. It would record all network (HTTP) APIs. Later one can simply run the tests without the real API endpoint.
16:14:19 <grastogi> so to the ansible test, we will submit the VCR cassette that is a recorded list of AVI API calls. Once the recording is available the whole thing runs as a unit test.
16:15:40 <mattclay> It looks useful. We'd need to figure out how to make it work with modules if we wanted to use it in integration tests instead of just unit tests.
16:17:12 <grastogi> Yes, we have found it quite useful. We will do a pull request and may be again visit this next week for discussion.
16:17:28 <Qalthos> grastogi: Excellent
16:17:54 <Qalthos> #topic Open Floor
16:18:38 <Qalthos> I've been told to remind people about https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/docs/docsite/rst/roadmap/ROADMAP_2_5.rst
16:19:29 <Qalthos> Anyone have any other pressing matters to discuss?
16:20:50 <gundalow> Nothing else from me
16:21:40 <Qalthos> Right, short meeting this week, I think
16:21:58 <Anil_> Qualthos:
16:22:09 <Qalthos> Anil_: Howdy
16:22:34 <Anil_> I have few PRs pending for your apporval
16:23:35 <Anil_> Qalthos: They are basically change in license doc from BSD to GPL
16:24:57 <Anil_> Qalthos: 34888, 34889, 34909, 34910
16:25:31 <Anil_> Qalthos: If u can look at them once, it will great
16:26:15 <Qalthos> I can take a look over them and see what there is to do
16:26:57 <Anil_> Qalthos:May be, Just need to see the change in license information and say looks good and approve
16:28:46 <Qalthos> There's some external contributors (including myself) on some of these files and I'd like to see visible approval on these PRs for a license change
16:29:10 <Qalthos> That said, I don't think it should be too hard, going by 34888
16:29:45 <Anil_> Qalthos: You may do it in leisure, let the discussion here keep going..
16:30:06 <Qalthos> Anyone else?
16:30:06 <Anil_> Qalthos: Thats all from me
16:30:52 <bdowling> @ganeshrn:  Are you trying to confuse me on #34723 ?  You had a code comment this morning, then a minute later you approved it and I can't seem to see the comment anymore online. :)
16:31:25 <ganeshrn> bdowling: sorry about that comment, i didn't checked the referenced issue
16:31:37 <ganeshrn> bdowling: PR looks good
16:32:06 <Anil_> @ganeshrn: I have one PR 34793 pending for your approval
16:32:40 <ganeshrn> bdowling: and it's merged now
16:32:58 <bdowling> I had thought about sending the wrong password..  It's a valid comment.  But this is perhaps no worse than previous where it sent multiple new line characters.  (On some devices not sure if the newline would trigger bad password attempts and cause a lockout, but still)
16:33:10 <ganeshrn> Anil_: yup i added a comment sometime back
16:33:50 <Anil_> Ganesh: Yes, just Now I saw it, will change it by tommroow . thanks
16:33:51 <bdowling> A feature to improve that would be to have a maxhits on subprompt or something, if it is again seen a second time, it is considered a failure..
16:34:33 <ganeshrn> bdowling: currently i think it will result in command timeout
16:36:54 <ganeshrn> bdowling: if you can raise a feature request we can look into ways of improving this behavior
16:41:47 <Qalthos> Right, anyone else have anything?
16:46:50 <Qalthos> Alright, if there's nothing else, closing the meeting
16:46:56 <Anil_> sure
16:47:07 <Qalthos> Thanks everyone for your time, and have a good week
16:47:11 <Qalthos> #endmeeting