16:03:48 <pabelanger> #startmeeting Ansible Network Working Group
16:03:48 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Aug 21 16:03:48 2019 UTC.
16:03:48 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:03:48 <zodbot> The chair is pabelanger. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:03:48 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:03:48 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_network_working_group'
16:04:13 <pabelanger> #info Feature freeze for 2.9 is almost here
16:04:19 <pabelanger> #info No new features will be accepted for 2.9 after 2019-08-29
16:04:26 <pabelanger> #info No new features will be accepted for 2.9 after 2019-08-29
16:04:34 <pabelanger> #link https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/roadmap/ROADMAP_2_9.html for more
16:04:52 <pabelanger> #info AnsibleFest is happening Sept 24-26, in Atlanta, GA
16:05:19 <pabelanger> #info we also have a Contributor's Summit on Monday Sept. 23
16:05:29 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/449
16:06:06 <pabelanger> We have a few items on the agenda today
16:06:14 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/363
16:06:46 <pabelanger> #topic exos_lldp_global
16:06:51 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/60988
16:07:05 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: I believe this is your PR?
16:07:20 <UjwalKomarla> Hi pabelanger. Yes, that is right.
16:08:13 <UjwalKomarla> I am writing the exos_lldp_global module using the RMB. The connection for the module will be httpapi, and is based on using restconf.
16:08:21 <pabelanger> cool!
16:08:35 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: have you been working with anybody about the RMB?
16:08:59 <UjwalKomarla> No.
16:09:00 <pabelanger> I know of a few people on network team that will likely want to review here
16:09:33 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: okay, np. Are you seeing any specific issues?
16:10:41 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: I'd agree with your commit message too, looks like you still need to add tests
16:10:42 <UjwalKomarla> I'm not facing issues as such. I'm following other RMB modules written by @justjais, @ganeshrn
16:11:22 <UjwalKomarla> Should I tag them on the PR to get some feedback?
16:11:31 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: okay great, thanks for bring this up. I'm going to share with team to get some feedback
16:11:42 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: sure, I'll also give them a heads up too
16:11:56 <UjwalKomarla> Great! Thanks!
16:12:03 <pabelanger> great to see community using RMB
16:12:56 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: if nothing else, I'll move on to next topic
16:12:59 <UjwalKomarla> RMB is great! The effort to write the new module is better
16:13:08 <UjwalKomarla> I have another query.
16:13:15 <pabelanger> sure
16:13:46 <UjwalKomarla> Is there any example of using RMB for operations? Say reboot, install_os?
16:14:01 <UjwalKomarla> Or doesn't RMB apply for such modules?
16:14:27 <pabelanger> UjwalKomarla: not that I am aware of, for the moment it is targeting our network modules
16:14:30 <Qalthos> UjwalKomarla: Well, they aren't really resources, so no
16:14:50 <UjwalKomarla> I see.
16:15:22 <UjwalKomarla> So those modules will still be written similar to previous(older) module design?
16:16:25 <Qalthos> You could try to build it our with the builder, though I'm not sure how well that would work
16:16:51 <Qalthos> The facts integration for one would not really be relevant
16:17:01 <UjwalKomarla> Okay.
16:17:32 <pabelanger> Is there something specific with RMB you are wanting to use for others?
16:17:50 <UjwalKomarla> SOrry, I didn't get what you meant by 'The facts integration for one would not really be relevant' @Qalthos
16:18:44 <UjwalKomarla> I was wondering if I should use RMB for 'exos_reboot', 'exos_install_os' and what would be the 'state' options as such.
16:19:56 <pabelanger> I am not sure myself and would have to find out
16:20:24 <UjwalKomarla> Okay. No issues. That would be for another day.
16:20:37 <UjwalKomarla> They wouldn't make it for 2.9 anyway.
16:20:58 <pabelanger> I'll bring it up with team to get feedback, and hopefully know more for next week
16:21:15 <UjwalKomarla> Please and thanks.
16:21:25 <pabelanger> will do
16:21:26 <UjwalKomarla> That is all I got for now.
16:21:33 <pabelanger> thanks! lets move on to next item
16:21:42 <pabelanger> #topic nxos_file_copy PRs
16:21:53 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/60643
16:21:57 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/60003
16:22:08 <pabelanger> mikewiebe: I believe your topic
16:22:18 <mikewiebe> pabelanger That's correct
16:23:00 <mikewiebe> This is a rewrite of the nxos_file_copy module to be an action plugin to work around several deprecation warnings.  This was suggested by Qalthos a while back.
16:23:02 <pabelanger> I think we want trishnag to have a look here, looks like for first she has been active on
16:23:17 <pabelanger> and Qalthos  :)
16:23:27 <mikewiebe> pabelanger Sure thing.  Just want to make sure we can get this in for 2.9
16:23:58 <pabelanger> yup, understood. I can help make sure we get the required reviews
16:24:10 <Qalthos> mikewiebe: It might be a bit close for that, but I'll have a look
16:24:14 <mikewiebe> It also make the module/plugin more reliable across all nxos platform types and adds some important options when copies are initiated from the nxos device
16:24:55 <pabelanger> yah, hardest issue here, is lack of pre-merge testing. We still have to depend on that for post-merge for nxos
16:25:06 <pabelanger> (for testing, that is)
16:26:18 <mikewiebe> pabelanger for what it's worth, I added better tests and validated them across our nxos matrix in our lab
16:26:32 <pabelanger> mikewiebe: are you planning on going to ansiblefest?
16:26:43 <mikewiebe> pabelanger Yes
16:27:26 <pabelanger> okay great, I'd love to dive more into how to leverage your testing more, in a pre-merge state
16:27:38 <mikewiebe> pabelanger sounds good
16:28:10 <pabelanger> okay, lets move on to next one, it was just added
16:28:24 <pabelanger> #topic aci_vmm_credentials
16:28:29 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/60910
16:28:46 <jasonj> yes, that one is mine
16:28:48 <pabelanger> jasonj: this might be your item?
16:28:51 <pabelanger> okay great
16:29:25 <jasonj> this PR is related to feature request under issue #34885
16:30:05 <pabelanger> #link https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/34885
16:30:23 <jasonj> rather than squeeze it into the existing aci_domain module I created a new module aci_vmm_credential as it seemed a better fit
16:30:26 <pabelanger> so, just skimming the PR, it looks like testing is in place, which is nice
16:31:40 <pabelanger> jasonj: have you been working with anybody specific in the past?
16:32:00 <jasonj> I haven't and this is my first PR for Ansible
16:32:09 <pabelanger> welcome then!
16:32:13 <jasonj> thanks!
16:32:47 <pabelanger> okay, I'll have to look again who is managing ACI, I can't remember at this moment
16:32:58 <pabelanger> but seems to be okay at first glance
16:33:15 <jasonj> thank you
16:33:50 <pabelanger> okay, I've added myself to that to follow up
16:33:55 <pabelanger> will dig more
16:34:17 <pabelanger> #topic Open discussion
16:34:29 <pabelanger> that was everything on our agenda today, so if anybody else has something
16:34:39 <pabelanger> other wise, we can finish up early
16:37:10 <pabelanger> okay, thanks everybody for coming out. See you next week
16:37:12 <pabelanger> #endmeeting