Summary of IRC Meeting in #aurora at Mon Feb 23 19:01:06 2015: Attendees: thalin, davmclau, dnorris, t3hSteve, jfarrell, jcohen, wfarner, ro_, kts, jaybuff, mkhutornenko, zmanji, Floomi, dlester, Ming, mindscratch
- Preface - graduation - incompatible change in beta updater API - scheduler REST API RFC progress update IRC log follows: ## Preface ## [Mon Feb 23 19:01:48 2015] <wfarner>: welcome, everyone! this is our weekly community meeting. everyone is welcome and encouraged to participate [Mon Feb 23 19:01:48 2015] <wfarner>: let [Mon Feb 23 19:01:53 2015] <wfarner>: let's start with a roll call [Mon Feb 23 19:01:54 2015] <wfarner>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:57 2015] <t3hSteve>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:57 2015] <zmanji>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:57 2015] <jfarrell>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:58 2015] <davmclau>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:59 2015] <dnorris>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:01:59 2015] <thalin>: present [Mon Feb 23 19:02:05 2015] <jcohen>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:02:12 2015] <kts>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:02:18 2015] <mindscratch>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:02:30 2015] <dlester>: hello hello [Mon Feb 23 19:02:33 2015] <ro_>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:02:53 2015] <mkhutornenko>: here [Mon Feb 23 19:02:54 2015] <wfarner>: while folks trickle in, feel free to message me with desired topics on the agenda ## graduation ## [Mon Feb 23 19:03:48 2015] <jfarrell>: thanks to everyone that participated in the community vote, we had 26 +1's [Mon Feb 23 19:04:10 2015] <wfarner>: hooray! [Mon Feb 23 19:04:12 2015] <jfarrell>: i've started the IPMC vote thread and we currently have 3 +1's [Mon Feb 23 19:04:37 2015] <t3hSteve>: /cheer [Mon Feb 23 19:04:47 2015] <jfarrell>: link for anyone interested in following along with that vote, http://s.apache.org/EPo [Mon Feb 23 19:05:26 2015] <jfarrell>: if that is successful i'll notify the dev@ list and add our graduation resolution to the upcoming board report [Mon Feb 23 19:05:56 2015] <jfarrell>: great community effort to get to this point, thanks everyone [Mon Feb 23 19:07:00 2015] <jcohen>: hooray! ## incompatible change in beta updater API ## [Mon Feb 23 19:08:18 2015] <wfarner>: i wanted to echo a thread i started on the dev list [Mon Feb 23 19:08:19 2015] <wfarner>: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-aurora-dev/201502.mbox/%3CCAGRA8uP_CVYz%3Dof2-teEuke_eO%2BZBnXrLUjCdjB9tngDaDbeXA%40mail.gmail.com%3E [Mon Feb 23 19:08:57 2015] <jfarrell>: we probably want to make sure to outline that in the release notes [Mon Feb 23 19:09:11 2015] <wfarner>: jfarrell: agreed [Mon Feb 23 19:09:42 2015] <wfarner>: i don't believe we have established a protocol for that yet, any suggestions where we collect those as we work towards a release? [Mon Feb 23 19:10:13 2015] <davmclau>: out of interest - how would we have handled that type of change if that feature wasnât in beta? a new RPC and deprecate the old one? [Mon Feb 23 19:10:17 2015] <jfarrell>: lets keep them in the 0.8.0 ticket and then can figure it out from there [Mon Feb 23 19:10:45 2015] <kts>: we wouldn't need to do that [Mon Feb 23 19:11:52 2015] <kts>: we can add a new argument to the rpc [Mon Feb 23 19:12:01 2015] <kts>: treat it as nullable for one version [Mon Feb 23 19:12:04 2015] <kts>: then remove the old one [Mon Feb 23 19:12:38 2015] <davmclau>: okay, thanks [Mon Feb 23 19:13:19 2015] <kts>: f(1: string a) -> f(1: string a, 2: string b) -> f(2: string b) [Mon Feb 23 19:13:44 2015] <wfarner>: jfarrell: i have made a note of this in the RC ticket [Mon Feb 23 19:13:44 2015] <wfarner>: AURORA-904 [Mon Feb 23 19:13:54 2015] <davmclau>: that might be a nice segue into another topic - the HTTP API progress ## scheduler REST API RFC progress update ## [Mon Feb 23 19:15:04 2015] <wfarner>: AURORA-987 [Mon Feb 23 19:15:29 2015] <wfarner>: not much to report here yet [Mon Feb 23 19:15:36 2015] <jcohen>: So far itâs mostly been concerned with foundational stuff. Investigating patterns and the like. [Mon Feb 23 19:15:59 2015] <wfarner>: +tooling/library support [Mon Feb 23 19:16:52 2015] <jcohen>: Iâd like to find time this week to add something more concrete to the effort. [Mon Feb 23 19:17:13 2015] <wfarner>: +1, i did not have much bandwidth to dedicate here the last 2 weeks, but this week is more clear [Mon Feb 23 19:17:17 2015] <davmclau>: sounds good, thanks for the update. [Mon Feb 23 19:18:03 2015] <wfarner>: jcohen: perhaps we can make a goal to model the paths needed to rebuild the existing API? [Mon Feb 23 19:18:14 2015] <jcohen>: Yes, thatâs my hope [Mon Feb 23 19:18:23 2015] <Ming>: is there any reason the HTTP/JSON API can't be thrift based? [Mon Feb 23 19:18:23 2015] <jcohen>: Though I suspect weâll probably have at least two proposals [Mon Feb 23 19:19:00 2015] <jcohen>: Ming: in general weâve found thrift to be difficult for clients to work with. [Mon Feb 23 19:19:29 2015] <jcohen>: A pure JSON API is much more approachable as an integration point [Mon Feb 23 19:19:36 2015] <mindscratch>: jcohen: +1 json API [Mon Feb 23 19:19:59 2015] <wfarner>: additionally, thrift ultimately aims to solve a different problem. fields are identified by numeric IDs for a good reason, which is different from what REST APIs try to accomplish [Mon Feb 23 19:20:03 2015] <t3hSteve>: +1 JSON as well [Mon Feb 23 19:20:10 2015] <wfarner>: our API is already JSON, but it is not human-friendly JSON [Mon Feb 23 19:20:13 2015] <davmclau>: Ming: there was an /apibeta which used TSimpleJsonProtocol, but it was unwiedly to use. [Mon Feb 23 19:20:45 2015] <Ming>: I don't know whether you guys have any experience with Google gRPC effort, they have some plan to make it work better with json [Mon Feb 23 19:20:50 2015] <Ming>: internally it's still protobuf [Mon Feb 23 19:21:24 2015] <wfarner>: IDL support of any form would be great, and i would favor those that don't leak themselves into the API [Mon Feb 23 19:21:47 2015] <Ming>: it's not GA yet, but I know their tech lead, so if you guys are open to the idea, I can get something sort out [Mon Feb 23 19:22:25 2015] <wfarner>: Ming: i assume you're not referring to this: http://code.google.com/p/grpc/ [Mon Feb 23 19:22:30 2015] <Floomi>: late to the party but also +1 json [Mon Feb 23 19:23:05 2015] <ro_>: same, +1 json [Mon Feb 23 19:23:26 2015] <jaybuff>: not human friendly? It's human-hostile json [Mon Feb 23 19:23:30 2015] <ro_>: well, +1 human friendly json [Mon Feb 23 19:23:44 2015] <Ming>: wfarner: no it's OK, that official one is on github but it's private [Mon Feb 23 19:23:44 2015] <wfarner>: semi-related, some folks have asked for this new interface to be in 0.8.0 [Mon Feb 23 19:23:51 2015] <wfarner>: i do not think this is a likely time frame [Mon Feb 23 19:24:05 2015] <wfarner>: Ming: let's continue offline, i'm interested in following that once it's public [Mon Feb 23 19:24:31 2015] <Floomi>: i don't really care if it's human-friendly, as long as it's documented. i'm not likely to be hand-writing it [Mon Feb 23 19:24:42 2015] <Ming>: wfarner: sure, if I can have your github handle, I can probably ask their TL to give your access to have a sneak peak [Mon Feb 23 19:24:43 2015] <wfarner>: i'd wager there's a small chance we may have a skeleton of the API in code by the time we reach 0.8.0 [Mon Feb 23 19:24:49 2015] <jfarrell>: i really dislike json, having to deal with things like cloudformaion and its json soup make me want to cry, i would hate to see our api go that route [Mon Feb 23 19:24:52 2015] <wfarner>: Ming: i'm wfarner [Mon Feb 23 19:25:27 2015] <jfarrell>: if the issue with thrift is the serialization from json string type to object i would rather see that get added/fixed [Mon Feb 23 19:25:28 2015] <kts>: i really like thrift for the data we persist to the replicated log [Mon Feb 23 19:25:29 2015] <wfarner>: Floomi: we doc our API javadoc-style, FWIW [Mon Feb 23 19:25:52 2015] <dlester>: jfarrell: are you still up to be release manager for 0.8.0? [Mon Feb 23 19:26:06 2015] <jfarrell>: dlester: yeah, i can [Mon Feb 23 19:26:10 2015] <wfarner>: Floomi: if you have a scheduler running in the vagrant image, visit this URL: http://192.168.33.7:8081/apiclient/api.html [Mon Feb 23 19:26:15 2015] <kts>: makes it fairly easy to reason about which changes will be backwards-compatible or not [Mon Feb 23 19:26:42 2015] <davmclau>: thrift has a lot of advantages that we might lose moving to a JSON/REST API. hopefully the RFC accounts for some of these :) [Mon Feb 23 19:27:02 2015] <wfarner>: in fact, i suggest all Aurora operators check out that URL to see what's in the API [Mon Feb 23 19:27:13 2015] <kts>: not that our rest API needs to use the same technology as our internal data serialization format [Mon Feb 23 19:28:03 2015] <davmclau>: proposal: letâs punt the rest of this discussion to the ticket or until the RFC is released [Mon Feb 23 19:28:12 2015] <kts>: +1 [Mon Feb 23 19:28:12 2015] <jcohen>: +1 [Mon Feb 23 19:28:15 2015] <wfarner>: davmclau: i suggest you point those out in AURORA-987 so we maintain that context [Mon Feb 23 19:28:25 2015] <zmanji>: +1 [Mon Feb 23 19:28:45 2015] <davmclau>: wfarner: sure, I can do that. [Mon Feb 23 19:29:01 2015] <wfarner>: anyone have a topic they would like to open? [Mon Feb 23 19:29:37 2015] <Floomi>: wfarner: yeah, i've seen the thrift API, and it's definitely doable. it's just less work to send a json request than integrate thrift, and i'm lazy [Mon Feb 23 19:30:00 2015] <dlester>: just one quick comment re: 0.8.0, the future REST API, etc. it would be nice if we could maintain a fairly consistent release cadence, and land a release not far from graduation (the apache board meeting is March 18th) [Mon Feb 23 19:32:06 2015] <wfarner>: dlester: i commented on this higher up in the buffer - noting that we are unlikely to include a feature-complete API rewrite in 0.8.0 [Mon Feb 23 19:32:35 2015] <dlester>: wfarner: got it, missed that in the conversation. we're an active bunch this morning (which is great to see!) [Mon Feb 23 19:32:51 2015] <wfarner>: :-) [Mon Feb 23 19:33:19 2015] <wfarner>: last call for a new topic [Mon Feb 23 19:34:38 2015] <wfarner>: thanks for participating, everyone! [Mon Feb 23 19:34:40 2015] <wfarner>: ASFBot: meeting stop Meeting ended at Mon Feb 23 19:34:40 2015
