-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
Public Core Meeting Agenda - Feb 2017 #150
Comments
Merged to devel |
Re-moved ansible/ansible#19070 win_file: fix error when creating an existing dir
Moved to #153 |
Merged |
Discuss extending the module "shipit" workflow to non-modules, such as:
Update 12 Jan 2017 Meeting
Update 9th Feb 2017 Meeting
Feb 21 Meeting
|
Decision made to reject this new feature. abadger to update the ticket. |
We decided to reject this new feature. abadger will close out the ticket. |
2017-02-09 <@bcoca> -1 <@mattclay>+0 I see a little benefit of the validation, but it's not much more than just template/lineinfile abadger1999 +1
-1:5, 0:3, +1:1, so this module was not accepted for merge due to redundancy with template and concerns about cross-platform maintainability. can still be hosted on galaxy (and hopefully we'll have a time frame for when ansible-installer can make things hosted on galaxy more discoverable). |
From luto: ansible/ansible#19297 Fix for wildcards inside of a path for fileglob lookup (ie:
Moved to #156 |
From bcoca: Decide which are valid directives on include (for execution or inheritance) and what to do when we decide they are not. This issue deals with one case, but i think we should deal with it in general ansible/ansible#20440 also document once decided so users KNOW what to expect
Migrated to #156 |
From rfleschenberg versioned docs
Migrated to #156 |
|
Define and document proposals process i.e ansible/proposals#50 was created and 'agreed' to immediately, w/o giving time for community feedback, which is happening now after implementation. We might need to review/update this: 7 Feb Meeting Discussed at the meeting. Many problems with the meta-proposal for creating proposals were discussed. Minimum timeframes were proposed but no agreement could be come to. Proposal documenting the new proposal process was asked for. 14 Feb Meeting
Migrated to #156 |
Not an agenda item |
Rejected by vote of -4 +2 |
Minuites for today's meeting: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/ansible-meeting/2017-02-07/ansible_core_meeting.2017-02-07-19.00.html |
Merged |
Discussed 9th Feb 2017 ACTION: bcoca (if he has time) to review the code. albertom knows we are close to the 2.3 cut off, so we can't guarantee it will make it in for 2.3 MERGED |
Edit: Discussed in the #ansible channel with @abadger and it seems to be "good to go". |
How do we:
14 Feb Meeting
Post meeting ansible/ansible#21430 "Move to using a requirements.txt to install the python packages. " was merged |
14th Feb Meeting
|
16th Feb Meeting
Has been merged |
16th Feb Meeting
Will be tracked via proposal |
16th Feb Meeting
21 Feb Meeting
It lives: #153 |
IRC nickname is enunez-cyberark Has been reviewed waiting on updates. Will now follow standard review process |
Merged, no further discussion needed |
Ansible Core 2.1.5RC1 and 2.2.2RC1 are available for testing |
|
I would like to discuss
|
I would like to discuss what the process is when
Migrated to #156 |
I think a new discussion is in order on how to tackle the "modules are used for adding, changing, removing and giving information about an object". Discussion triggered by: ansible/ansible#20399 (review) We have modules that allow state=list (or state=info), other (sets of) modules have _facts or _stat variants and here the contributor was requested to leave it out and assume that an undefined "state" means returning information, rather than making changes. Migrated to #156 |
Related to ansible/ansible#21874 we disabled the standard expanduser/expandvars in a lot of internal module_utils functions. And it appeared that (at least) none of the integration tests rely on this specific expanding of user/vars of paths. Since we usually expand directly as part of processing parameters, it seems we don't actually need this on different levels (and in the case of unarchive in this specific case it was undesirable and potentially a security problem). The question being: can we get rid of these expanduser/expandvars calls here ? And if so, what's the process to get it done. Migrated to #156 |
Update to the metadata format: ansible/proposals#54 Want to update the metadata format prior to 2.3 to get rid of some warts that have been identified post-implementation. Migrated to #156 |
Please leave a comment regarding any agenda item you wish to discuss. If you don't show up for the meeting, your item will be skipped.
If your IRC nick is different from your Github username, leave that as well.
See https://github.com/ansible/community/blob/master/meetings/README.md for the schedule
Once an item has been addressed it should get
strike-though~~strike-though~~
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: