00:00:00 #startmeeting Ansible Azure Working Group 00:00:00 Meeting started Thu Nov 8 00:00:00 2018 UTC. 00:00:00 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 00:00:00 The chair is nitzmahone. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 00:00:00 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 00:00:00 The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_azure_working_group' 00:00:00 Hello 00:00:06 hi all 00:00:08 hey 00:00:22 #chair zikalino82 jborean93 yungezz yuwei 00:00:22 Current chairs: jborean93 nitzmahone yungezz yuwei zikalino82 00:01:41 Hi 00:01:47 #chair Kylie_ 00:01:47 Current chairs: Kylie_ jborean93 nitzmahone yungezz yuwei zikalino82 00:01:54 Howdy 00:02:14 Do we 00:02:16 * nitzmahone hangs head in shame for not getting to module review again this week 00:02:40 ;) 00:02:41 🙂 00:02:48 Do we start? 00:02:54 Yes 00:03:14 yep, meeting's running already 00:04:37 For certified candidates, we checked notes. Zim, Catherine and yuwei will follow up notes. 00:05:17 #action nitzmahone still to review 46796, 46939, 47045, 47181 00:05:27 any others you need me to look at? 00:05:39 I have one more or for redis cache 00:05:39 Zim mentioned he does not fully understand some notes. I will leave them to him to communicate with you. 00:06:00 Yeah, email's fine, or we can chat in IRC or whatever 00:06:37 well, i just said i am not sure if i understand correctly... but as i go through fixing the issues i will know better 00:06:58 Feel free to reach out if anything's unclear 00:07:19 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:07:21 (or push back if you disagree with any of them, for that matter) 00:07:21 From BI side, besides modules you marked, I also noticed high traffic for load balancer and availability set. Catherine and Matt, what’s you insights for those modules? 00:07:27 yes, sure 00:08:02 Availability set should be pretty easy to get "over the line" (though expensive to test properly) 00:08:20 I can't remember if load balancer got rewritten to actually work yet 00:08:36 Initial module didn't produce a "usable" load balancer 00:09:09 Indempotence 00:10:05 the pr is pending... however we were discussing if there should be more changes done or not 00:10:26 i mean me and catherine 00:10:26 Yeah, there were a bunch of changes to it back in February, so maybe it's closer now. I haven't tried to use it since the most recent changes; would probably want to see some "real world" use of that (or at least an e2e sample) before we pull the trigger 00:10:39 (on certified) 00:11:25 ok, i can try it together with merging current pr 00:12:36 So I'm not opposed to adding that one to the list if you think it's important, but maybe a lot more work needed on it since it's complicated 00:13:22 * nitzmahone has to duck out in 15m 00:13:41 Anything else exciting going on? 00:13:48 No, let us see whether that is qualified to be a good candidate. I just shared learning from BI. 00:13:57 BI == ? 00:14:15 Business intelligence 00:14:27 so bi says it's actually usable already 00:14:28 (summarized telemetry data, or ?) 00:14:29 telemetry 00:14:32 Yes 00:14:35 yes 00:14:47 Well, "being used" != "usable" necessarily ;) 00:15:11 hmm... maybe... it's useful in some way to someone.... ;-) 00:15:19 But yeah, it's had changes made to it since I last played with it, so maybe it's great now 00:15:42 I didn't really even look at that one when I was making the list given my prior experience with it 00:15:55 Btw, I don’t say we agree or not agree on the certified program since that is business call as we discussed. Here we only focus on customer learning and technical analysis. 00:16:17 Same; we let the business folks worry about the details there :) 00:16:35 Nod 00:17:03 Regardless, I think the goals are in alignment anyway (about increasing quality/consistency) 00:17:16 It's not like it's a place we don't want to go ;) 00:18:40 * nitzmahone is jealous of telemetry data; Ansible could learn much from having our own telemetry, but it's kind of a non-starter with most customers 00:19:35 Nod. So I heard some notes for the quality of LB. Let us add LB refactoring in our backlog ( if already there, great:)) 00:20:53 Can Ansible capture who are using provisioning, who are doing configuration and who are deploying app? 00:21:30 Correction: No need to know who. How many 00:21:32 When you say "who"; do you mean a local username, or what? 00:21:56 We have no telemetry at all; Tower used to have a little bit, but I think it's all been removed 00:22:19 Maybe can distinguish it from arm call post or put/patch 00:22:31 No, that is not allowed. Apologize for my typing. Not who he/she is. 00:23:45 But depends on api, some using put for both create and update 00:23:49 I see. Thanks. No more topic from me for this meeting. 00:24:28 PR review? 00:24:43 I have the same list from last week :( 00:24:45 I am ok 00:25:00 we can help ;-) 00:25:23 Catherine, you mentioned you had a new one for redid 00:25:26 Redis 00:25:53 reddit? 00:26:09 Redis cache 00:27:05 Yes 00:27:06 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:27:06 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:27:06 Oh, Azure's hosted redis? 00:27:08 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:27:08 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:27:20 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47914 00:27:20 Yes 00:27:28 * nitzmahone adds to list 00:27:34 Yes 00:30:22 Thank you. And heads-up for our plan - we will write facts module for them and add more for storage side. 00:30:54 Any other topic? 00:31:24 Awesome 00:31:27 Nothing from me! 00:31:29 No from me 00:31:44 #endmeeting