13:35:32 <cdrage> #startmeeting Nulecule Weekly IRC Meeting
13:35:32 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Apr 18 13:35:32 2016 UTC.  The chair is cdrage. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:35:32 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
13:35:32 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'nulecule_weekly_irc_meeting'
13:35:45 <ccaf> .hellomynameis containscafeine
13:35:45 <zodbot> ccaf: containscafeine 'Shubham Minglani' <shubham@linux.com>
13:35:48 <dustymabe> cdrage++
13:35:54 <dustymabe> .hellomynameis dustymabe
13:35:55 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dustymabe@redhat.com>
13:35:57 <preeti> .fas preeti
13:35:58 <zodbot> preeti: pri013 'preeti' <py29958@gmail.com> - preetish 'c.preetish' <preetishnandhreddy@gmail.com> - preeti 'Preeti Chandrashekar' <preetipagad@gmail.com> - tripathp 'Preetish Tripathi' <preetish.tripathi@gmail.com>
13:36:04 <tkral> .hellomynameis tkral
13:36:07 <zodbot> tkral: tkral 'Tomas Kral' <tkral@redhat.com>
13:36:22 <cdrage> ping ccaf dharmit dustymabe mzee1000 praveenkumar rtnpro surajd tkral i think that's it
13:36:28 <surajd> .fas surajd
13:36:29 <zodbot> surajd: surajd 'Suraj Deshmukh' <surajssd009005@gmail.com>
13:36:30 <mzee1000> .fas mohammedzee1000
13:36:32 <zodbot> mzee1000: mohammedzee1000 'Mohammed Zeeshan Ahmed' <mohammed.zee1000@gmail.com>
13:36:42 <cdrage> Let's keep the format the same as last week since it helped with time / discussion.
13:36:55 <cdrage> So everyone please state any blockers and what you've been working on this week.
13:37:06 <cdrage> If we still have time, let's have a quick talk about the new Nulecule spec.
13:37:10 <cdrage> (at the end)
13:37:13 <cdrage> :)
13:37:27 <surajd> cdrage, On AtomicApp part working on the certs bug, no blockers, thanks.
13:37:33 <rtnpro> .fas rtnpro
13:37:33 <zodbot> rtnpro: rtnpro 'Ratnadeep Debnath' <rtnpro@gmail.com>
13:37:35 <surajd> s/bug/feature
13:37:44 <cdrage> hahaha
13:37:57 <surajd> :)
13:38:25 <tkral> ccccccevincngnvdfvbcbfrbfbidriggkfvhbcjfirfh
13:38:50 <tkral> sorry, yubikey ;-)
13:38:54 <dustymabe> cdrage - I've been working on some vagrant-sshfs stuff and trying to get things sorted out for the re-org and the coming weeks of travel. Nothing much on Atomic App since last weeks release. No Blockers.
13:39:25 <cdrage> No blockers from me, just need feedback on new Nulecule spec. Pushed the new README's out to nulecule-library so that should clarify the examples as well as gone over / researched what to do to improve Nulecule for new-comers. In between all tested a tiny bit / looked over rtnpro's functional tests.
13:39:40 <ccaf> Hey, started work on docker-py parsing today, should have something soon. Last week was NHO (boring)! No blockers, thanks!
13:40:16 <cdrage> ccaf: Did you get your hat!
13:40:31 <ccaf> cdrage, no, going to borrow yours when you land here :)
13:40:42 <cdrage> hahahhahah
13:40:52 <dharmit> cdrage: That's a bad question to ask to those in India. :(
13:41:22 <surajd> yep
13:41:25 * dharmit waited over a year and half last time.
13:41:34 <rtnpro> I pushed some fixes for atomicapp init last week, worked on ansible/vagrant scripts for cccp, attended rootconf, worked on fedora-motd, etc. I am blocked on PR 442
13:41:55 * cdrage pulling up PR 442
13:42:22 <rtnpro> cdrage, see the latest comment
13:43:13 <cdrage> rtnpro: Okay, so to unblock, would you be willing to help in regards to implementing global params to the new Nulecule spec? After GA, we'll most likely start work on that.
13:43:35 <cdrage> I've created the proposal, that looks (imo) cleaner than what we have at the moment
13:44:06 <dustymabe> rtnpro: yeah. I would agree that we shouldn't work on this until we have a clearer direction forward
13:44:22 <tkral> I've finally started working on AtomicApp again ;-) I've been looking into authenticating via certificates for openshift provider (#533) with surajd. This will probably include refactoring how we parse kubeconfig. no blockers
13:44:24 <rtnpro> cdrage, ok
13:44:29 <dustymabe> rtnpro: I do have one thing that should be "unblocked" for you now
13:44:31 <cdrage> We can implement mapping into the global params in the new Nulecule spec so we can map the params to different nuleculized applications
13:44:34 <dustymabe> we are now on docker 1.9+
13:44:57 <dustymabe> so now the docker stop+remove should work fine in atomicapp
13:45:07 <rtnpro> dustymabe, awesome
13:45:12 <dustymabe> rtnpro: you could resurrect that work
13:45:33 <rtnpro> dustymabe, yeah
13:45:37 <dustymabe> rtnpro: let's discuss after meeting
13:45:44 <cdrage> although there may be another blocker in the future, docker 1.11 now requires four binaries :) (docker-containerd, docker, docker-containerd-shim and docker-runc). I've tested it locally and atomicapp works, don't know about atomic cli though
13:45:53 <cdrage> tkral: yay! :)
13:46:20 <cdrage> mzee1000: did you go?
13:46:22 <dustymabe> tkral: very glad to have you back
13:46:39 <mzee1000> cdrage : sure
13:46:40 <mzee1000> Nothing on Atomic app side yet figuring hot how to go ahead with nuleculising pulp though Finished pulp study, working on atomic registry and cockpit dockerfiles
13:46:57 <mzee1000> s/hot/out
13:47:01 <rtnpro> dustymabe, ok
13:47:12 <cdrage> mzee1000: you saw this right? https://github.com/projectatomic/nulecule-library/pull/71
13:47:18 <cdrage> for adding docker registry
13:47:24 <cdrage> may be of interest
13:47:37 <mzee1000> cdrage: sure
13:47:46 <cdrage> no one has reviewed / tested it yet, so that may be something you'd be interested in :)
13:49:38 <cdrage> Okay! So I think we're near the end. I've re-written the Nulecule spec (it's revision two on the PR), so I'd love some feedback as it will have a major impact on how we shape Nulecule in the future. If anyone can comment on it / have a quick look over this week that would be great
13:49:40 <cdrage> https://github.com/projectatomic/nulecule/pull/205
13:49:56 <preeti> I am still working on ADB docs, so nothing to report on Atomic app side.
13:50:09 <cdrage> If anyone else has any discussion that they would like to bring up for this meeting please do :)
13:50:46 <surajd> cdrage, the second revision has made Nulecule file more complicated
13:51:28 <cdrage> surajd: I think it's the opposite, why do you think it's more complicated?
13:51:57 <rtnpro> cdrage, surajd, let's discuss Nulecule new spec, v2
13:51:59 <surajd> cdrage, because everything in one file, makes it something similar to OpenShift
13:52:07 <surajd> yes
13:52:09 <surajd> ccaf, ^^
13:52:45 <rtnpro> cdrage, the first cut was looking good, but the second cut really let me down
13:52:58 <cdrage> rtnpro: how do
13:53:00 <cdrage> how so*
13:53:03 <surajd> cdrage, can we make it more simpler on the lines of compose
13:53:07 <ccaf> cdrage, are we not going with the Compose to Nulecule to all, kind of approach. In a world where Nulecule has no artifacts section and everything is parsed by atomicapp?
13:53:09 <tkral> i looked revision 2 only briefly, but I don't think that embeding artifacts in Nulecule is going to solve problems that current nulecule has :-(
13:53:12 <ccaf> dustymabe, ^
13:53:14 <rtnpro> cdrage, bringing all the noise in one single file
13:53:31 <tkral> rtnpro, ^ +1
13:53:40 <cdrage> rtnpro: it's an option. They can either provide: - pod: | or - pod: file://foobar
13:53:50 <surajd> cdrage, also why was the auto-generation idea was dropped?
13:53:53 <cdrage> I knew some people wouldn't like it :(
13:54:03 <rtnpro> cdrage, we should not give options which can cause confusion
13:54:13 <rtnpro> we should enforce best practices
13:54:30 <surajd> Yes, multiple ways of doing things only confuse user
13:54:38 <ccaf> :D too many questions. Can we have a quick bjn call?
13:54:49 <tkral> i agree we need to have one clear path
13:54:53 <cdrage> rtnpro: imo, having everything in one-file would be more beneficial as it creates it more portable. If you look at the helloapache example you can see how it's not that complicated. But because I did a full example with etherpad it does look much longer than before.
13:54:53 <surajd> yes I feel we should have one
13:55:08 <cdrage> Yeah! Let's swap over to bluejeans
13:55:26 <surajd> link please and meeting should end
13:55:34 <cdrage> Okay, if no one else has any other discussions, I'm going to end the meeting in 10 seconds.
13:55:48 <tkral> cdrage, that might be true, but biggest problem as i see it is that putting everything in one file doesn't solve any of big problems
13:56:21 <cdrage> #endmeeting