[slack-digest] [2019-03-04] #general

[OpenWhisk Team Slack]

2019-03-04 06:11:51 UTC - Sven Lange-Last: @Peter Leitner if you are talking 
about an action creating files in the action container’s file system: at the 
moment, apache openwhisk imposes no limits on the action container file system. 
that’s independent from the action’s physical ram limit @Carlos Santana was 
talking about.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551679911058100?thread_ts=1551527847.054500=C3TPCAQG1

2019-03-04 10:05:14 UTC - Erez Hadad: Hi folks. I submitted the performance 
evaluation tool that I presented in the last bi-weekly as PR #4320. I'd 
appreciate it if some folks can review it.
+1 : Rodric Rabbah
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551693914060100

2019-03-04 16:11:59 UTC - Erez Hadad: It seems the default configuration of 
scancode in incubator-openwhisk-utilities is different from the one used by 
Travis. This is why my PR failed the first Travis check despite having me 
checked it previously with scancode. Is this worth notifying anyone?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551715919061500

2019-03-04 16:18:48 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: @Matt Rutkowski might know best ^^
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551716328062100

2019-03-04 16:25:33 UTC - Dave Grove: I think all of our projects use `--config 
scancode/ASF-Release.cfg` in their travis setup.  Arguably that should be the 
default config for `scancode`
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551716733063000

2019-03-04 16:36:18 UTC - Dave Grove: @Matt Rutkowski I submitted 
 to change the 
default
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717378063500

2019-03-04 16:38:04 UTC - Carlos Santana: @Dave Grove I think the one to use is 
V2, I think that's the one I use when I verify releases 

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717484064200

2019-03-04 16:38:25 UTC - Carlos Santana: But I could be wrong :shrug: just let 
me know
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717505064900

2019-03-04 16:39:07 UTC - Dave Grove: ok.  I looked at main openwhisk travis 
scan.  it is using ASF-Release.cfg.   Let’s wait for Matt to weigh in.  We 
should use the same config across all projects and it should be the default.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717547065700

2019-03-04 16:39:51 UTC - Carlos Santana: :100: same and all the repos
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717591066100

2019-03-04 16:40:16 UTC - Carlos Santana: including incubator-openwhisk-release 
repo/docs
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551717616066800

2019-03-04 18:33:57 UTC - Matt Rutkowski: will look ASAP out of mtg hell
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551724437067100

2019-03-04 20:34:27 UTC - Matt Rutkowski: Yes, all “released” repos. use the 
ASF-Release.cfg (at least before any recent additional repos. were added in the 
last few months).  I left “v2" out there for the remaining repos. that I did 
not have a chance to change their build/test scripts for so they would be 
break… indeed the file “ASF-Release.cfg should be the default.  Thanks Dave
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551731667069100

2019-03-04 20:35:18 UTC - Matt Rutkowski: as all the repos. I changed 
explicitly passed the .cfg file as an arg. I did not catch the .py default.. 
this should have been done all along
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551731718069700

2019-03-04 20:36:06 UTC - Matt Rutkowski: If you like, we can delete v2 and 
accept “breaks” as people encounter them by building non-release repos.?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551731766070300

2019-03-04 20:44:12 UTC - Dave Grove: Thanks Matt.   I don’t know the context 
for ASF-Release.cfg vs. ASF-Release-v2.cfg.   (is v2 stricter or more 
forgiving?)
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551732252072100

2019-03-04 20:45:38 UTC - Dave Grove: If we could manage to have just one, it 
would be simpler.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1551732338072700

[slack-digest] [2019-03-04] #random

[OpenWhisk Team Slack]

2019-03-04 15:52:52 UTC - Carlos Santana: A bit easier to navigate the IBM 
Functions actions docs, they are now split into separate pages, just select 
language from left menu 

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1551714772072100

2019-03-04 15:53:16 UTC - Carlos Santana: hope to see rust in the list soon ^^ 
:thinking_face:
partyparrot : Rodric Rabbah
tada : Roberto Diaz
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1551714796072800

2019-03-04 15:56:54 UTC - Matt Sicker: anyone tried making a CICD pipeline of 
some sorts in openwhisk? similar to github actions perhaps?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1551715014073600

2019-03-04 16:00:13 UTC - Carlos Santana: You mean like creating a Composer 
Flow but the actions being CICD steps/processes ?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1551715213074100

2019-03-04 16:02:24 UTC - Matt Sicker: yeah basically
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1551715344074400

[slack-digest] [2019-03-04] #apigateway

[OpenWhisk Team Slack]

2019-03-04 06:01:17 UTC - Dominic Kim: When I type `wsk api list`, I am getting 
this error:
```
style95@style95-ubuntu:~/git/openwhisk$ wsk api list -i
error: Unable to obtain the API list: gwUrl is required.
```
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551679277000700

2019-03-04 06:01:37 UTC - Dominic Kim: Is this because of cli version mismatch?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551679297001300

2019-03-04 06:01:52 UTC - Dominic Kim: I installed the latest cli from 
openwhisk cli repo.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551679312001600

2019-03-04 06:02:10 UTC - Dominic Kim: It seems `gwUrl` is replaced by 
`gwUrlV2`?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551679330002000

2019-03-04 06:14:40 UTC - Dominic Kim: I found the reason.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551680080002300

2019-03-04 06:14:58 UTC - Dominic Kim: The default parameter of my `apimgmt` 
package was missing.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551680098002800

2019-03-04 06:15:00 UTC - Dominic Kim: ```
{
"key": "gwUrlV2",
"value": ""
}
```
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p155168013000

2019-03-04 06:15:23 UTC - Dominic Kim: I think it is supposed to be 
automatically generated by ansible.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551680123003500

2019-03-04 06:15:33 UTC - Dominic Kim: I don't know why it is missing..
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551680133003800

2019-03-04 06:21:32 UTC - Dominic Kim: It has gone with the clean redeployment 
:joy:
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TP33Y2U/p1551680492004300

Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes

[Carlos Santana]

Both nodejs and actionloop PRs are merged

-- Carlos

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 10:36 AM Carlos Santana  wrote:

>
> For the nodejs bump PR I'm waiting for travis, if a committer sees the
> green check by Travis before go ahead and merge it.
>
> For the actionloop PR looks good same thing, waiting on Travis to merge.
>
> We definitely need a Bot that handle comment commands (ie /merge) ala
> ProBot or DerekBot :-)
>
> -- Carlos
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 8:22 AM Michele Sciabarra 
> wrote:
>
>> No there are no runtimes using v2 actionloop, yet. Probably the first
>> will be rust and the new java.
>>
>> --
>>  Michele Sciabarra
>>  mich...@sciabarra.com
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original message -
>> From: David P Grove 
>> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes
>> Date: Monday, March 04, 2019 2:08 PM
>>
>>
>> Rob's PR to update the PHP version has been merged.
>>
>> We need to update the end year in all our notice files from 2018 to 2019
>> (I
>> will submit PRs today).
>>
>> There's a pending PR [1] to bump NodeJS version to pick up latest security
>> fixes that should merge today.
>>
>> We should get the update to the actionloop in [2] merged.
>>
>> Do downstream runtimes that use the actionloop need updates for [2] that
>> we
>> need to wait for?
>>
>> Is there anything else we need to wait on before we can proceed?
>>
>> --dave
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs/pull/114
>> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go/pull/72
>>
>> On 2019/02/21 17:19:51, Rodric Rabbah  wrote:
>> > If you've contributed to one of these runtime repos please take a moment
>> to>
>> > read this and also review the runtime repo that you've worked on.>
>> >
>> > Do you (or anyone) have any reason to delay a release of the following>
>> > runtime repositories as in, for example, are there any outstanding pull>
>> > requests and patches to land? If not, I will start the release on
>> Monday>
>> > 2/25.>
>> >
>> > Runtimes (10 repos):>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-docker>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-dotnet>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-java>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-php>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-python>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ruby>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-swift>
>> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ballerina>
>> >
>> > -r>
>> >
>>
>>

-- 
Carlos Santana

Re: [Bi-Weekly Tech Interchange] Call for agenda topics

[Tyson Norris]

I would like to share details on a forthcoming PR to enable better invoker 
integration with cluster managed (mesos/k8s) action containers. I don't have 
the PR open yet, but plan to by sometime tomorrow. 
Unfortunately I have a Dr appt on March 20, so cannot volunteer - but possibly 
April 3rd. 

Thanks
Tyson

On 3/4/19, 8:16 AM, "Rodric Rabbah"  wrote:

Hi, our next *tech interchange* is in two day.s If there is a topic you'd
like to discuss with the community, or some work you'd like to share,
please reply to this email so that I can add you to the agenda.

Bi-weekly Tech Interchange call details:
- Zoom: 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fmy%2Fasfopenwhiskdata=02%7C01%7Ctnorris%40adobe.com%7C076ba1d0ef344afd30d708d6a0bcd131%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636873130153557267sdata=UGCob9juU6Bv2sgzO548p86fA%2BWwSsw%2Fv6kfQWTOhNE%3Dreserved=0
- Wednesday March 6
11AM EST(Eastern US)
5PM CET (Central Europe),
4PM UTC, 12AM CST (Beijing)

Bonus: If you volunteer early to host the March 20 call, you will win a
prize of distinction.

-r

[Bi-Weekly Tech Interchange] Call for agenda topics

[Rodric Rabbah]

Hi, our next *tech interchange* is in two day.s If there is a topic you'd
like to discuss with the community, or some work you'd like to share,
please reply to this email so that I can add you to the agenda.

Bi-weekly Tech Interchange call details:
- Zoom: https://zoom.us/my/asfopenwhisk
- Wednesday March 6
11AM EST(Eastern US)
5PM CET (Central Europe),
4PM UTC, 12AM CST (Beijing)

Bonus: If you volunteer early to host the March 20 call, you will win a
prize of distinction.

-r

Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes

[Carlos Santana]

For the nodejs bump PR I'm waiting for travis, if a committer sees the
green check by Travis before go ahead and merge it.

For the actionloop PR looks good same thing, waiting on Travis to merge.

We definitely need a Bot that handle comment commands (ie /merge) ala
ProBot or DerekBot :-)

-- Carlos

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 8:22 AM Michele Sciabarra 
wrote:

> No there are no runtimes using v2 actionloop, yet. Probably the first will
> be rust and the new java.
>
> --
>  Michele Sciabarra
>  mich...@sciabarra.com
>
>
>
> - Original message -
> From: David P Grove 
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes
> Date: Monday, March 04, 2019 2:08 PM
>
>
> Rob's PR to update the PHP version has been merged.
>
> We need to update the end year in all our notice files from 2018 to 2019 (I
> will submit PRs today).
>
> There's a pending PR [1] to bump NodeJS version to pick up latest security
> fixes that should merge today.
>
> We should get the update to the actionloop in [2] merged.
>
> Do downstream runtimes that use the actionloop need updates for [2] that we
> need to wait for?
>
> Is there anything else we need to wait on before we can proceed?
>
> --dave
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs/pull/114
> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go/pull/72
>
> On 2019/02/21 17:19:51, Rodric Rabbah  wrote:
> > If you've contributed to one of these runtime repos please take a moment
> to>
> > read this and also review the runtime repo that you've worked on.>
> >
> > Do you (or anyone) have any reason to delay a release of the following>
> > runtime repositories as in, for example, are there any outstanding pull>
> > requests and patches to land? If not, I will start the release on
> Monday>
> > 2/25.>
> >
> > Runtimes (10 repos):>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-docker>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-dotnet>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-java>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-php>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-python>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ruby>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-swift>
> > - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ballerina>
> >
> > -r>
> >
>
>

Re: Welcome new Committer Olivier Tardieu

[Olivier Tardieu]

Thanks to everyone!

Olivier



From:   "Matt Rutkowski" 
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date:   03/04/2019 09:51 AM
Subject:Re: Welcome new Committer Olivier Tardieu



Welcome Olivier!

Kind regards,
Matt 




From:   Carlos Santana 
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date:   02/27/2019 03:18 PM
Subject:Re: Welcome new Committer Olivier Tardieu



Woot !! Welcome Olivier

-- Carlos

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:35 PM Rodric Rabbah  wrote:

> Welcome Olivier!
>
> -r
>
> > On Feb 27, 2019, at 3:34 PM, David P Grove  wrote:
> >
> >
> > OpenWhiskers,
> >
> > Yes! Another new Committer!
> >
> > Based on his ongoing and valuable contributions to the project, the
> > OpenWhisk PPMC has elected Olivier Tardieu as a Committer and as a 
PPMC
> > member and he has accepted the invitation.
> >
> > Please join me in welcoming him to his new role on the project!
> >
> > --dave
>


-- 
Carlos Santana

Re: Greetings

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi Matt,

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 7:04 PM Matt Sicker  wrote:
> ...my name is Matt Sicker, and I've recently volunteered
> to be one of the mentors for this project

Thank you very much for this, you just doubled the number of mentors
for this podling and it's very welcome!

OpenWhisk is a great project and community, powering some impressive
services, I hope you'll enjoy mentoring it.

-Bertrand

Re: Welcome new Committer Olivier Tardieu

[Matt Rutkowski]

Welcome Olivier!

Kind regards,
Matt 




From:   Carlos Santana 
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date:   02/27/2019 03:18 PM
Subject:Re: Welcome new Committer Olivier Tardieu



Woot !! Welcome Olivier

-- Carlos

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:35 PM Rodric Rabbah  wrote:

> Welcome Olivier!
>
> -r
>
> > On Feb 27, 2019, at 3:34 PM, David P Grove  wrote:
> >
> >
> > OpenWhiskers,
> >
> > Yes! Another new Committer!
> >
> > Based on his ongoing and valuable contributions to the project, the
> > OpenWhisk PPMC has elected Olivier Tardieu as a Committer and as a 
PPMC
> > member and he has accepted the invitation.
> >
> > Please join me in welcoming him to his new role on the project!
> >
> > --dave
>


-- 
Carlos Santana

Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes

[Michele Sciabarra]

No there are no runtimes using v2 actionloop, yet. Probably the first will be 
rust and the new java.

-- 
 Michele Sciabarra
 mich...@sciabarra.com



- Original message -
From: David P Grove 
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes
Date: Monday, March 04, 2019 2:08 PM


Rob's PR to update the PHP version has been merged.

We need to update the end year in all our notice files from 2018 to 2019 (I
will submit PRs today).

There's a pending PR [1] to bump NodeJS version to pick up latest security
fixes that should merge today.

We should get the update to the actionloop in [2] merged.

Do downstream runtimes that use the actionloop need updates for [2] that we
need to wait for?

Is there anything else we need to wait on before we can proceed?

--dave

[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs/pull/114
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go/pull/72

On 2019/02/21 17:19:51, Rodric Rabbah  wrote:
> If you've contributed to one of these runtime repos please take a moment
to>
> read this and also review the runtime repo that you've worked on.>
>
> Do you (or anyone) have any reason to delay a release of the following>
> runtime repositories as in, for example, are there any outstanding pull>
> requests and patches to land? If not, I will start the release on
Monday>
> 2/25.>
>
> Runtimes (10 repos):>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-docker>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-dotnet>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-java>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-php>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-python>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ruby>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-swift>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ballerina>
>
> -r>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] release openwhisk runtimes

[David P Grove]

Rob's PR to update the PHP version has been merged.

We need to update the end year in all our notice files from 2018 to 2019 (I
will submit PRs today).

There's a pending PR [1] to bump NodeJS version to pick up latest security
fixes that should merge today.

We should get the update to the actionloop in [2] merged.

Do downstream runtimes that use the actionloop need updates for [2] that we
need to wait for?

Is there anything else we need to wait on before we can proceed?

--dave

[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs/pull/114
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go/pull/72

On 2019/02/21 17:19:51, Rodric Rabbah  wrote:
> If you've contributed to one of these runtime repos please take a moment
to>
> read this and also review the runtime repo that you've worked on.>
>
> Do you (or anyone) have any reason to delay a release of the following>
> runtime repositories as in, for example, are there any outstanding pull>
> requests and patches to land?  If not, I will start the release on
Monday>
> 2/25.>
>
> Runtimes (10 repos):>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-docker>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-dotnet>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-java>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-php>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-python>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ruby>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-swift>
> - incubator-openwhisk-runtime-ballerina>
>
> -r>
>