14:30:06 #startmeeting Ansible Documentation Working Group 14:30:06 Meeting started Tue Oct 30 14:30:06 2018 UTC. 14:30:06 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 14:30:06 The chair is gundalow. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:30:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:30:06 The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_documentation_working_group' 14:30:32 #chair acozine samccann bizonk dfed thedoubl3j 14:30:32 Current chairs: acozine bizonk dfed gundalow samccann thedoubl3j 14:31:25 Anyone else around? 14:31:40 <--- JLieske 14:31:46 #chair GreNME 14:31:46 Current chairs: GreNME acozine bizonk dfed gundalow samccann thedoubl3j 14:32:03 #Info First meeting, will have a look at some PRs 14:32:13 I think the whole GS team is around 14:32:28 should we do introductions first? 14:32:43 acozine: Sure, if you do `#info ...` then it will go into the main log 14:32:56 (everything is logged, #info just makes it stand out more) 14:33:03 ahoy bcoca. 14:37:17 #info my name is Alicia Cozine, I'm the lead tech writer for Ansible 14:37:17 * bcoca waves 14:37:17 sup dawg 14:37:17 <-- Lieske 14:37:17 bcoca: since this is the first public IRC meeting, I thought we'd do introductions 14:37:17 for posterity, you know 14:37:17 Sounds good! 14:37:17 #info I am David F, I am on the Ansible BU Product Management team. 14:37:17 #info I'm gundalow, I look after the Ansible Community 14:37:17 #info I'm Brian Coca and have been so.. er a core developer for ansible 14:37:17 I'm John L, on the Product Management team (getting started) 14:37:17 #info I'm samccann, I handle docs efforts for Ansible network 14:37:18 #info my name is Jake Jackson, I am a senior product field engineer, working with the getting started team at Ansible 14:37:18 #info I am Bianca H, I work on the Getting Started team as well, as Sr Product Field Engineer. 14:37:18 Ace, that everybody 14:37:18 #topic PR review 14:39:38 #info Will go through some PRs to see what we can merge 14:39:38 we've got two open PRs related to RabbitMQ docs 14:39:38 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/46504 RabbitMQ documentation suggests that deleting queues/exchanges is not implemented, but it is 14:39:38 hum, that looks straight forward 14:39:38 +1 to merge 14:39:38 +1 14:39:38 +1 looks good to merge 14:39:38 +1 14:39:39 for my edification, can anyone point at the line in the python where the delete action is implemented? 14:39:39 s/line/lines, since there are two modules? 14:39:55 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/f3c05ccc37587530be1aa5271baad0af517efcda/lib/ansible/modules/messaging/rabbitmq_exchange.py#L203 14:40:10 it's just a deletion, click on the "files changed" tab 14:40:24 ah, cool, yep, "requests:delete" 14:40:50 dfed: yeah, I just wanted to double-check that the docs really do reflect the code correctly 14:40:56 #action gundalow to create backport 14:41:03 Next PR? 14:41:04 sure thing, 14:41:32 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/46064 14:41:55 moves the RabbitMQ modules into a sub-directory 14:42:00 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/46064 BOTMETA: Move rabbitmq modules to own directory 14:42:11 oops, missed the "info" bit 14:42:23 LOL it takes a bit to get used to the meetbot commands 14:42:34 this way we'll have room for other messaging options 14:42:42 topic, info and action are the most used ones. 14:42:48 Plus some wording/formatting changes 14:43:25 yeah, while dag was moving the files he tidied them up 14:43:41 ah, needs rebasing 14:43:52 Apart from rebase looks good to me 14:44:57 welcom akshay196 14:45:11 I can haz spellink 14:45:12 acozine, Thank you :) 14:45:37 we're in the midst of the docs community meeting, reviewing some open PRs 14:45:49 #chair akshay196 14:45:49 Current chairs: GreNME acozine akshay196 bizonk dfed gundalow samccann thedoubl3j 14:46:22 any other thoughts on the RabbitMQ-move PR? 14:47:10 yeah rebase and it's good 14:47:21 looks okay to me. 14:47:27 #action acozine to rebase PR 46064 14:47:28 Looks good! 14:47:38 #agreed rebase & merge BOTMETA: Move rabbitmq modules to own directory #46064 14:47:44 next (#info) 14:47:49 awesome! 14:47:57 okay, we've got two new simple ones 14:48:16 oh I forgot about hashtag agreed 14:48:32 see gundalow is making me remember all sorts of meetbot goodness 14:48:43 #action acozine to merge https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47818 (2.7 backport) 14:48:49 reconnecting (I timed out) 14:48:58 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47816/files would change description of VLAN parameters 14:49:03 #chair thedoubl3j_ 14:49:03 Current chairs: GreNME acozine akshay196 bizonk dfed gundalow samccann thedoubl3j thedoubl3j_ 14:49:54 +1 good improvement 14:50:00 +1 14:50:09 I think that new wording makes things more clear, +1 14:50:28 merged 14:50:46 #action gundalow to backport https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47816/files would change description of VLAN parameters 14:50:51 bizonk: did you have one? 14:50:56 Yes 14:51:28 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47778 This adds a link so that contributors have an easier time finding additional information on PRs 14:52:21 +1 helps users find more info 14:52:37 +1 14:52:37 +1 agreed 14:52:47 +1 14:52:56 +1 14:55:09 <---can't type but I will remain so I don't get behind 14:55:09 heh, I've tried twice to merge 47778, are multiple people trying to merge it? 14:55:09 still showing open on my end 14:55:09 fourth time was apparently the charm 14:55:09 merged 14:55:24 :D 14:55:25 maybe we start the next meeting with an assigned merger person 14:55:33 samccann: that's a good idea 14:55:36 (or maybe it was just github gremlins) 14:55:44 Great idea! 14:55:51 samccann: Good idea 14:55:56 had a question about how/when the deprecation of with_ for loops would be implemented into docs. 14:56:04 also it's fine to just #action it all, then that person can merge & dobackports 14:56:09 ...and an assigned backporter... I know I get 'in the groove' when doing those and they go faster in batches 14:56:29 theodubl3j: let's talk about that 14:56:40 for all modules etc. I know that we updated the playbook guides etc but when/how do we want modules to update? 14:56:54 we've updated some, but not all 14:57:00 ok 14:57:06 only reason I brought it up was https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47244 14:57:09 the issue is that with_* is still a viable option 14:57:23 #topic with_ vs loops docs 14:57:26 bcoca: may want to join in 14:57:30 #chair bcoca 14:57:30 Current chairs: GreNME acozine akshay196 bcoca bizonk dfed gundalow samccann thedoubl3j thedoubl3j_ 14:57:56 that it is, that is why I asked, didn't know how and when we would want to update the module docs that had those examples in them 14:58:01 theodubl3j: we've seen quite a few PRs changing "with_*" to "loop" 14:58:36 the consensus is that for simple examples, where it's just with_items, then a list of items, we should change to loop 14:58:36 I think there are a few parts to this, which we've talked about in the past 14:58:54 1) What should the examples (in rst & module.EXAMPLES) use 14:59:12 2) Where/how should we detail how to move from `with_` to `loops` 14:59:33 3) Is there anycase where `with_` still make sense 14:59:59 We have some content for 2) here: https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/porting_guides/porting_guide_2.5.html#migrating-from-with-x-to-loop 15:00:00 how about with_dict? that's pretty simple to translate 15:00:53 #chair felixfontein 15:00:53 Current chairs: GreNME acozine akshay196 bcoca bizonk dfed felixfontein gundalow samccann thedoubl3j thedoubl3j_ 15:00:57 felixfontein: Welcome :) 15:02:00 aconzine: ok cool, this PR references all the way back for 2.5. with_* deprecates when? 2.9 right? 15:02:37 I don't know if we will ever remove `with_` 15:02:43 theodubl3j: we have not deprecated with_* 15:02:47 oh 15:02:54 we also have this page: https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/user_guide/playbooks_loops.html 15:02:59 As it's been used waaaaaaaaay too much 15:02:59 my apologies, stuck in my head that it was being deprecated. 15:03:11 theodubl3j: The original plan was that it would be 15:03:14 Oh so it's more of a "better practices" sort of thing? 15:03:24 If you are confused then others will be 15:04:34 for folks writing new playbooks/roles, should we encourage them to use loop? 15:05:08 good question 15:05:20 that is what I was thinking aconzine. I was wondering what the right way to point people to was. 15:05:25 Looks like that's something to explicitly state in that page (that the current plan is to NOT deprecate it), unless like acozine mentioned, we want to actively encourage people to use "loop" 15:06:06 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/47703#issuecomment-433946762 15:06:14 if we want to encourage folks to use loop, then we can replace with_* in the 2.8 docs at least 15:06:21 #info `with_` syntax is not obsolete, and is not deprecated. 15:07:38 we do plan on deprecating it, but long way from there 15:07:43 I personally find `with_` to be easier to use, since it directly addresses what the variables are that it's referencing (e.g. `with_items`) 15:08:00 with_items is problematic as it is deceptive 15:08:10 it has an implicit |flatten(1) 15:08:18 most people think it works like with_list: 15:08:25 ^ which is what loop: is equivalent to 15:08:28 ok so how should docs make that more clear? 15:08:50 I think that playbooks_loops page could do a better job of describing the current state 15:08:56 should we mention the flatten? 15:09:02 unsure, the 'flatten' part has been in docs for long time, yet no one seems to read it 15:09:13 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47364#issuecomment-431472984 15:09:17 that would imply we need to revisit how it is in the docs. 15:09:43 gundalow: thanks, that's a great source 15:09:46 ^ link has the when to/when not to use 15:09:55 #info when to, and when not to use `loop` https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47364#issuecomment-431472984 15:10:01 hm yesl 15:10:14 #action acozine to update the playbooks_loops page with sivel's comments 15:10:21 I like that. 15:10:56 once we have an updated page, we can merge or close the open PRs that change with_* in accordance with those guidelines 15:11:12 Sounds like a plan 15:11:54 can we look at another open docs PR? 15:11:58 acozine: theodubl3j bizonk Anything else on that? 15:12:01 acozine: Sure 15:12:04 #topic PR review 15:12:50 anybody want to add to the discussion on loop? 15:13:10 Before we get off the topic of loops, just wanted to add something: 15:13:13 `flatten` has been in the docs but I haven't seen that used very frequently in playbooks 15:13:14 sivel's comments are really useful 15:13:31 I don't think I've actually ever seen it in playbooks 15:13:35 especially "Any with_ statement, that requires using lookup within loop should not be converted" 15:13:53 So either emphasizing its usage/explaining it further in the docs would be good, imo 15:14:10 yeah ditto 15:14:23 felixfontein: yeah, it's a really clear guideline, and with an example or two, it should give us an easy way to evaluate existing examples in module docs, etc. 15:14:37 bizonk: agreed that flatten isn't common 15:15:35 imo, I wasn't up to date on how and when things would be changing, I think sivel's comments are super helpful so I won't echo any further on that as it would be repeating others. 15:16:25 bcoca: I missed your comment about an "implicit flatten" - do you have examples where that would trip a user up? 15:17:08 https://gist.github.com/bcoca/b1f3d8d6e802663b0e818959b2d547e6 15:17:26 ^ change to with_list or 'loop' and you get 3 items, vs 4 with with_items 15:17:37 90% of usage of with_items really was meant to be with_list 15:17:48 ah, that is a great illustration of the difference 15:18:12 definitely great content for the playbooks_loops page 15:19:26 other ideas about loops, with_*, or how to document them? 15:19:44 welcome Xaroth: 15:19:48 o7 15:20:06 we're in the home stretch of the docs working group meeting 15:20:24 #topic squeezing in a last PR review 15:21:08 https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47767 - updates the output shown for ansible facts from Ansible 1.4 to Ansible 2.7 15:21:35 I threw a bunch of other updates in while i was there, though the page could still use more love 15:21:41 #chair Xaroth 15:21:41 Current chairs: GreNME Xaroth acozine akshay196 bcoca bizonk dfed felixfontein gundalow samccann thedoubl3j thedoubl3j_ 15:21:47 Xaroth: Hello again :) 15:21:51 :) 15:21:53 felixfontein: and samccann have already reviewed 15:23:00 +1 update was needed and addresses everything, looks great to me 15:23:03 wait we were still showing facts from ansible 1.4 runs? 15:23:13 wow. yeah good update!@ 15:23:25 dfed: yep 15:23:36 +1 15:23:54 1.4 was released november of 2013, just after I first started. 15:24:07 I blame sivel. 15:24:15 I would too 15:24:26 +1 for PR 47767 15:24:29 +1 acozine that looks good 15:24:53 excellent! 15:24:59 I have a couple more suuuuper quick ones if we have time... 15:25:02 anybody else have PRs they'd like to bring to the floor? 15:25:09 bizonk: great 15:25:15 +1 could only find a minor nit-pick (ipv6 fact doesn't show anything, which makes sense since a lot of systems don't have active ipv6 configs) 15:26:07 Xaroth: do you have some sample output for ipv6 we could add? 15:26:31 more is better when it comes to examples 15:27:57 * gundalow doesn't have IPv6 on any of his systems 15:28:20 * acozine doesn't have even a tenth of the stuff in that example output on any of hers 15:28:33 let me check my cluster, I think we have it disabled internally 15:28:41 Thanks :) 15:28:47 Xaroth: awesome 15:29:00 we got IPv6 on all our servers, but I don't have any (local) internet connection which has IPv6... 15:29:42 I could create a lab to do it later this week, but honestly someone's gonna have this snippet to add surely before I get to it 15:30:36 We can always add it later 15:30:47 Xaroth: we'll probably merge the current PR today, but if you get that output after, another PR would be very welcome 15:30:56 +1 15:30:59 +1 15:31:00 +1 15:31:16 +1 15:31:31 Before we close out... 15:31:34 #info https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/47664/files This is very sweet, but I think it's one to close (changes "Ansible is an IT automation tool" to "Ansible is an great IT automation tool" [sic]) 15:31:52 LOL +1 we don't need to get into commentary 15:32:00 :) 15:32:17 bizonk: agreed, but maybe we could notify marketing and have them tweet something about it or otherwise give the person some love? 15:32:41 +1 nice of them and aconzine: that sounds like a great idea 15:32:52 acozine: I have a few systems that show ipv6 info, but no ansible_default_ipv6; since we have no ipv6 default gateway. Will check when I'm in the office tomorrow to see if I can find any stragglers that do. 15:33:12 Awww that does sound like a good idea, acozine! 15:33:13 that PR looks like a great opportunity for a little PR (pun intended) 15:33:19 lol 15:33:25 +1 on that idea, acozine. 15:33:28 +1 15:33:28 Xaroth: awesome, thanks 15:33:41 +1 15:33:52 we're at time . . . thanks everyone for attending, for chatting, for working to make the docs better! 15:34:19 Thank you! 15:34:24 thanks y'all. 15:34:32 thanks all 15:34:35 I will alert Marketing about 47664 15:34:39 Thanks 15:34:42 thanks everyone! 15:34:49 bizonk: awesome 15:34:51 bizonk: make that an action in the meeting pls. 15:35:15 #info Agenda has been created https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/389 15:35:17 #action bizonk to alert Marketing about Docs PR 47664 15:35:25 Thanks y'all 15:35:26 someone push close on it? 15:35:29 #endmeeting