Draft Minutes 28th January 2015

[Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>]

Meeting Minutes 28th January 2015

Attendees:   

Oracle			Martin Chapman	Chair
NetApp			Don Deel	Member
Fujitsu Limited		Jacques Durand	Voting Member
Cloudsoft Corporation Limited	Alex Heneveld	Voting Member
Oracle			Ashok Malhotra	Voting Member
Rackspace Hosting, Inc.	Adrian Otto	Secretary
Oracle			Gilbert Pilz	Voting Member
Fujitsu Limited		Tom Rutt		Voting Member
Software AG, Inc.		Prasad Yendluri	Voting Member

Intro:

    Scribe: Gil
    Roll: Attendees above. 8 of 10 voting members, 80%, Meetign is quorate
             New member Don Deel (NetApp) introduces himself.
    TOPIC: Agenda
           Agenda approved as posted

TOPIC: Minutes of 2014-12-10

      10th December 2014: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201412/msg00012.html
      MOTION: approve minutes (Ashok, s: Tom Rutt)
       motion approved

TOPIC: Implementation Status

      Gil: Solum implementation is progressing, now supports CAMP conformant Plans
      alex heneveld: nice update on solum. here's the latest from brooklyn:  https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/learnmore/blueprint-tour.html
      Adrian: Solum has added a new core reviewer to smooth the process
      Alex: Brooklyn updates
      REST API has Sensors and ??
      Gil: been playing with nCAMP and Docker
      CAMP could support Docker images just as easily as any other artifact

TOPIC: Future Meetings and New Work

      Martin: what do people think about our meeting schedule going forward?
      ...we have some deferred issues, a primer, etc.
      Adrian: suggest reducing 90 minutes to 60 minutes
      ... move to a 2 week schedule and see how that works
      ... if that is not long/often enough we can adjust
     Alex: +1
     Ashok Malhotra (Oracle): +1
     Martin: can meet in two weeks on the 11th Feb
     Martin: any objections to this plan?
      (no objections)
     Chair will set up calendar entries

     Tom: does anyone have the cycles to work on the primer?
      ... I don't
      ... though I think it would be a useful document
       Martin: what is the thought of the TC?
      Alex: sort of a catch-22
      ... most of us have limited bandwidth
      ...  but a lot of people don't like reading spec docs
      ...  we need a primer to explain to people how to use the spec
      ...  Adrian: Rackspace did some research we learned that users don't like the concepts of assemblies and plans
      ...  those two things pretty much define CAMP
      ...   getting developers over the "what is a plan? / what is an assembly ?" is nearly impossible
      ... would suggest re-factoring the spec to talk about "applications, etc."
      ...  writing a primer based on CAMP v1.1 might not be a good investment
      ...  until we resolve this conceptual problem
      alex heneveld: +1 adrian - in brooklyn we actually are calling those concepts "application" (=assembly) and "template/blueprint" (=plan)

      Martin: we've gone back and forth over terminology and concepts
      ...  appropriate way to handle this is to raise an issue and process it
      ...  this could include starting a new working draft

      Tom: changing terms: Plan to Template sounds easy enough
      ... w/regards to "assembly" is it just a matter of changing the name?
      ...  or is there more to it
      Adrian: primarily it is a mental conception of what a plan and an assembly mean
      ...  it is based on the terminology
      Gil: +1, let's fix it in CAMP v1.2
      ... we can do this quickly if we don't screw around
      Alex: I'm completely in favor of the change and trying to act on the change quickly
      Tom: would this have to be a new version number
      Martin: yes
      Alex: we encountered that same conceptual roadblocks
      ... the meanings in Brooklyn are the same, we just changed the terms
      ... people didn't much like the idea of "artifact type", "requirement type", ?.
      ... we have not had anyone wanting to use the "artifacts" entry point
      ... everyone wants to use services
      Ashok: is this going to be enough?
      ... are there more fundamental changes necessary?
       Adrian: good question
      ... we also asked about "one step deployment vs. two step deployment"
      ... most wanted a two step process ()
      ... we have it conceptually right, but people have a problem in the way that we refer to them
      Gil: if we want to do this quickly, we need to be disciplined about the scope of the changes
      Tom: changing the UML diagrams would take me about an hour
      ... we should work on suggested name changes etc. for next meeting
      ... once we agree on those names, we can process them quikcly
      Martin: Adrian should raise an issue
      ... we can make proposals against that issue
      alex heneveld: * remove "artifacts" entry point (it complicates things)
      alex heneveld: * support "type" as a synonym for "xxxxType" wherever it is unambiguous
      Gil: Alex, could you raise this as a separate issue?
      Alex: yes
      Adrian Otto (Rackspace): I agreed to raise an issue

TOPIC: AOB

      Next meeting 11th Feb 2015. Martin will be on vacation so Adrian is appointed pro-tem chair.

MEETING ADJOURNED