| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 00:35 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 00:40 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:00 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:04 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 01:06 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:12 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:16 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 01:33 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 01:36 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 01:42 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 01:42 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 01:47 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:49 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:54 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 01:56 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 01:57 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 01:58 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 01:58 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 01:59 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 01:59 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:01 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has joined #openstack-tc | 02:01 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:02 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has quit IRC | 02:02 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:03 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:03 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:04 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:04 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has joined #openstack-tc | 02:06 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:06 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:07 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has quit IRC | 02:07 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:08 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:08 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has joined #openstack-tc | 02:09 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:09 | |
| *** ian_ott_ has quit IRC | 02:10 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:10 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:11 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 02:11 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 02:12 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 02:18 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 02:22 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 02:25 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 02:52 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 02:59 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** rosmaita has quit IRC | 03:10 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:12 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 03:30 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 03:35 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 03:57 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 04:01 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 04:07 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 04:10 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 05:18 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 05:19 | |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 05:19 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 05:23 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 05:52 | |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 05:53 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 05:58 | |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 05:59 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 06:05 | |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 06:05 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 06:13 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 06:31 | |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc | 06:33 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 06:35 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 06:36 | |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 07:02 | |
| *** guvnah has quit IRC | 07:03 | |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 07:04 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 07:07 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 07:07 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 07:11 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 07:12 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 07:32 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 07:46 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 07:51 | |
| *** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc | 07:52 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 07:57 | |
| *** jaosorior has quit IRC | 08:10 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 08:16 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 08:21 | |
| *** ricolin_ has quit IRC | 08:34 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 08:34 | |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc | 08:35 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 08:39 | |
| *** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc | 08:54 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 08:54 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 08:55 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 08:59 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 09:00 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 09:09 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 09:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 09:34 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 09:50 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 09:50 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 09:52 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 09:52 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 09:53 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 09:53 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 09:53 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 10:04 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 10:08 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 10:14 | |
| dims | o/ | 10:29 |
|---|---|---|
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 10:43 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 10:47 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 10:48 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 10:53 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 11:14 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 11:18 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 11:22 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 11:53 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 11:57 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 11:59 | |
| openstackgerrit | Chason Chan proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Note that tox need python3-dev or python-dev https://review.openstack.org/573206 | 12:01 |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 12:03 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 12:08 | |
| *** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc | 12:18 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 12:21 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 12:34 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 12:38 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 12:39 | |
| *** ian_ott has joined #openstack-tc | 12:47 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 12:55 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 12:57 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 12:58 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 13:00 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 13:01 | |
| *** ricolin_ has quit IRC | 13:01 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 13:03 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 13:34 | |
| mnaser | bonjour | 13:37 |
| smcginnis | bon matin | 13:37 |
| dtroyer | bon bon | 13:38 |
| * dtroyer is hungry | 13:38 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 13:39 | |
| smcginnis | :) | 13:40 |
| mnaser | well twitter is broken | 13:42 |
| mnaser | maybe if they ran openstack | 13:42 |
| smcginnis | Some would argue twitter has been broken for a long time now. ;) | 13:50 |
| mnaser | back in my days we had a fail whale | 13:51 |
| mnaser | :< | 13:51 |
| dhellmann | without twitter, how do we find out about outages?! | 13:53 |
| mugsie | rss and google reader? | 13:54 |
| mugsie | oh, wait. :( | 13:54 |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 14:06 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 14:24 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 14:46 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 14:48 | |
| mnaser | tc-members: office hours in 5 minutes if you want to wrap anything up on your hands :) | 14:55 |
| fungi | that sounds like something which would make it hard for me to type | 14:56 |
| smcginnis | https://media0.giphy.com/media/2UqUzGqNMgl0VhQ80Z/giphy.gif | 14:57 |
| mnaser | not what i was thinking of but sure smcginnis :p | 14:57 |
| smcginnis | Could make for a much more exciting office hour. :D | 14:58 |
| * dims hands boxing gloves for mnaser to type with during office hour | 14:58 | |
| * fungi practices his crane stance | 14:58 | |
| mnaser | frthods oksd jawsd rtfk dxk | 14:58 |
| mnaser | sorry dims i cant use them | 14:59 |
| smcginnis | heh | 14:59 |
| * dhellmann hopes no one intends to switch to ceremonial combat for selecting leaders | 14:59 | |
| * dhellmann also just finally watched Black Panther | 14:59 | |
| dims | :) | 14:59 |
| * fungi suddenly think of the st:tos episode "amok time" | 14:59 | |
| smcginnis | Hah, I was actually thinking of Wakanda on that one. | 14:59 |
| smcginnis | Could be one way to increase Summit attendance. | 15:00 |
| cmurphy | o/ | 15:00 |
| fungi | #startmeeting tc | 15:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Jun 7 15:00:19 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is fungi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 15:00 |
| fungi | #topic Office Hour | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Office Hour (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:00 | |
| dhellmann | o/ | 15:00 |
| mnaser | o/ | 15:00 |
| smcginnis | o/ | 15:00 |
| fungi | #chair cmurphy smcginnis dims dhellmann mnaser | 15:01 |
| openstack | Current chairs: cmurphy dhellmann dims fungi mnaser smcginnis | 15:01 |
| smcginnis | Oh good, I was wondering if you could do multiple at once. | 15:01 |
| fungi | yeah, i wanted to find out | 15:01 |
| zaneb | o/ | 15:01 |
| fungi | #chair zaneb | 15:01 |
| openstack | Current chairs: cmurphy dhellmann dims fungi mnaser smcginnis zaneb | 15:01 |
| mnaser | i'm not sure if this ended up being discussed outside office hours | 15:02 |
| smcginnis | I was hoping we could discuss some goals - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-June/131099.html | 15:02 |
| mnaser | but last office hours cdent had some questions regarding dhellmann's summary about the AT&T comments (http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2018/tc.2018-06-06-01.00.log.html#l-17) | 15:02 |
| dhellmann | I think the response there in the log was accurate. It was a one-off comment and there was no real discussion. | 15:03 |
| smcginnis | It's been brought up to me in different contexts since that recap. | 15:03 |
| smcginnis | That's what I recall. | 15:03 |
| fungi | yeah, jbryce later confirmed there had been no prior discussion of that among the board members | 15:03 |
| mugsie | o/ | 15:03 |
| fungi | that is just sort of came flying in out of nowhere | 15:03 |
| fungi | #chair mugsie | 15:04 |
| openstack | Current chairs: cmurphy dhellmann dims fungi mnaser mugsie smcginnis zaneb | 15:04 |
| mnaser | (i think it would probably be good for us to bring in the out-of-office-hours comments and discussions into it so anyone reading them can catch up) | 15:04 |
| smcginnis | Probably doesn't warrant more than a head tilt and a sigh. | 15:04 |
| mugsie | smcginnis: ++ | 15:04 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : ++ | 15:04 |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| dhellmann | yeah, at this point I wouldn't worry about it, but I'm glad to know people were actually reading my emails :-) | 15:04 |
| mnaser | other than that, i don't think there was anything from last office hours (afaik), so maybe we can dive into smcginnis subject of goals | 15:05 |
| dhellmann | I have something to bring up, too, which may also be long. Maybe we can time-box the goals discussion? | 15:05 |
| fungi | sure | 15:05 |
| mnaser | any other subjects so we can scope out time? | 15:05 |
| dhellmann | oh, good idea | 15:06 |
| cdent | I've thought about the att&t contribution thinng a bit more since making that earlier comment and re-realized there's a danger in perceiving contribution to openstack the project as the same domain as openstack the wider foundation | 15:06 |
| dhellmann | so I want to start talking about how we're going to divy up project teams to check in with them | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | We don't need to select goals today, but I did want to make sure they were kept fresh in peoples minds as something we need to think about before we get too close to the end of this cycle. | 15:06 |
| dhellmann | I don't expect us to actually come up with the split, or groupings, or whatever today, but I want to start thinking about the process | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | cdent: Oh, that's a good point. Especially now. | 15:07 |
| mugsie | I have one topic that someone brought to me, but I think it will just spin out into a ML thread, so it will be more of "lets think about this" | 15:07 |
| mugsie | mainly - do we want to add openstack client to the help wanted list | 15:07 |
| dhellmann | that's a good one to consider | 15:07 |
| mnaser | cool, so we have: release goals, checking in with teams, (personally, not more than a few minutes) organizational diversity suggestion, openstack client as help wanted | 15:07 |
| smcginnis | dhellmann: I wonder if we can get a list of all teams sorted by some sort of size ranking, then just assign TC members in order down the list so we each take on a balances set of teams. | 15:08 |
| mnaser | 10 minutes each starting now to leave us a bit of extra time for each subject? | 15:08 |
| smcginnis | Start with goals? | 15:08 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : that might work. I want to do the pairing thing, and I didn't assume we'd have the same pair checking with all the same teams, but maybe I'm over thinking it | 15:08 |
| dhellmann | yeah, let's start with goals | 15:08 |
| mnaser | #topic stein goal selection | 15:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "stein goal selection (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:09 | |
| mnaser | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-June/131099.html | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | OK, wanted to make sure everyone saw that post ^ | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | Not as much response on it than I thought we might get after the Summit discussion. | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | Matt has some good responses. | 15:09 |
| mnaser | i made a mental ack of "this makes sense" in my head but never replied | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | So that was my assumption about how quiet it was - that I just proposed a good set. :D | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | But the cold upgrade vs upgrade checking I could go with either. | 15:10 |
| smcginnis | It was a close one for me picking one of the two when I came up with the strawman. | 15:10 |
| dhellmann | yeah, mriedem's comments about the python 3 thing were what spurred me to start those tox patches, to try to get a sense of how much work might be involved | 15:10 |
| smcginnis | dhellmann: Good to see most of those appear to be mostly painless so far. | 15:10 |
| dhellmann | do we want to do more than 2 goals? | 15:10 |
| mnaser | so mriedem helped clarify a little bit about the two different things in cold upgrade here | 15:10 |
| mnaser | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-June/131113.html | 15:11 |
| mugsie | yeah - I like cold upgrade as a goal, but we would need to build / update tooling | 15:11 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : yeah, and the ones that failed had relatively minor fixes | 15:11 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : would we? we do *have* grenade, even if people don't like it | 15:11 |
| mugsie | yes, we need to update the plugin style of grenade | 15:11 |
| dhellmann | ok | 15:11 |
| mnaser | do we want to see how much work python3 involves to decide if we want to do assert:supports-upgrade OR the upgrade check CLI? | 15:12 |
| smcginnis | Grenade doesn't do strictly cold upgrades though, right? | 15:12 |
| mugsie | I get that QA supported teams don't see it as an issue, but it is | 15:12 |
| dhellmann | I wonder if that's something we can work with the QA team to help with this cycle? | 15:12 |
| mugsie | smcginnis: it depends on how you set up the plugin, and what functions you hook into | 15:12 |
| dhellmann | maybe the first step is having someone describe what would actually need to change | 15:12 |
| smcginnis | ++ | 15:12 |
| mriedem | grenade is very strict too, | 15:12 |
| smcginnis | I get the concept, but admit I am not 100% on the fine details of what needs to happen there. | 15:13 |
| mriedem | no one is working on a non-grenade thing for plugin projects, | 15:13 |
| mnaser | maybe we can do something like push up a py3 job to nova and see how bad it breaks as a general idea of how things look like? if it is going to be a lot of work, then maybe asking devs to add py3 support AND build grenade toolong for upgrades.. that's a lot | 15:13 |
| mriedem | but at the same time, grenade keeps a very consistent / rigid order on upgrades | 15:13 |
| mnaser | s/toolong/tooling/ | 15:13 |
| mriedem | which i think is a good thing | 15:13 |
| mnaser | at the same time, i think for most projects the upgrade is going to be a database sync and a service restart | 15:13 |
| smcginnis | mriedem: Yeah, at least we can show a pattern that is known to work. | 15:13 |
| dhellmann | yeah, a big piece of feedback was that operators needed to have that order information | 15:14 |
| mriedem | right, we don't want the plugin tooling for upgrade testing to be so pluggable that projects can change their upgrade order every release | 15:14 |
| * mnaser has personally used grenade to see how upgrades worked to help in upgrades | 15:14 | |
| dhellmann | if the hard part of the upgrade goal is fixing our test tool, that feels like something we ought to do before we start the goal | 15:14 |
| mugsie | mnaser: yeah, basically - grenade aslo creates resources, and checks if they exist post upgrade | 15:14 |
| mnaser | it's very much a great self-documenting thing to see what is done for the service to upgrade cleanly | 15:15 |
| dansmith | mugsie: I meant to catch up with you after that session, but can you summarize what the grenade problem is? | 15:15 |
| smcginnis | Thinking about it, I think the upgrade check would have a bigger press "splash" than cold upgrade. | 15:15 |
| dhellmann | I have to admit I don't know much about how grenade works, so having more detail about where it is difficult to integrate with would be good | 15:15 |
| dansmith | designate has plugins in tree and they seem to run | 15:15 |
| smcginnis | "OpenStack added tools to help ensure upgrades will work" sounds like a bigger win than "OpenStack can be upgraded" :) | 15:15 |
| mugsie | yeah - and it took us 2-3 weeks of full time dev to get it to even run | 15:16 |
| mriedem | https://docs.openstack.org/grenade/latest/readme.html is a good starter | 15:16 |
| dansmith | mugsie: that doesn't sound like a fundamental problem to me ;) | 15:16 |
| mriedem | once you got it going, is it in maint mode though? | 15:16 |
| mnaser | mugsie: would you say it was just harder to get started because of the lack of docs? | 15:16 |
| mugsie | mnaser: yup | 15:17 |
| dansmith | it's a hard thing to do.. one person for two weeks doesn't seem at all outrageous to me | 15:17 |
| mugsie | and it all being opaque bash plugins | 15:17 |
| dansmith | regardless of the tool | 15:17 |
| mugsie | dansmith - I would for an upgrade goal for small projects | 15:17 |
| mriedem | yeah the phase stuff in devstack/grenade isn't super obvious without docs, i think devstack is better on the phase / plugin docs | 15:17 |
| mnaser | maybe we can have a very simple drop in skeleton plugin | 15:17 |
| mriedem | but the -qa team is also happy to help with questions i think | 15:17 |
| dhellmann | do we have enough people who understand the tool and have time to help people with it that we could have a small team listed in the goal document? | 15:17 |
| mriedem | i know sdague always was | 15:17 |
| dansmith | https://github.com/openstack-dev/grenade/blob/master/PLUGINS.rst | 15:18 |
| dims | we tweak grenade stuff at release boundaries, does not take much if i remember right | 15:18 |
| mugsie | I am sure someone with 2 -3 weeks could have ripped mox3 out of nova for example | 15:18 |
| mnaser | that just does a db sync | 15:18 |
| dansmith | that is pretty decent I thought.. it's a flow, with steps | 15:18 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : time check? | 15:18 |
| fungi | i'd wager that it took longer than a couple weeks to get nova, cinder, glance and so on working in grenade... that just happened to coincide with writing grenade itself | 15:18 |
| mnaser | (fyi, 2 minutes more just to keep us in time) | 15:18 |
| mriedem | mugsie: "I am sure someone with 2 -3 weeks could have ripped mox3 out of nova for example" heh not really | 15:18 |
| dansmith | mugsie: you should take that challenge :P | 15:18 |
| mriedem | no one wants to review mox removal | 15:19 |
| mnaser | i'd like us to maybe look into some action items out of this.. do we want to maybe reach out and ask devs? | 15:19 |
| mugsie | heh - I have enough time scale issues :D | 15:19 |
| mnaser | do we want someone to look into investigating grenade and how easy or not it is to implement | 15:19 |
| mnaser | to help us decide if we want to do upgrade tooling or actual upgrade jobs | 15:19 |
| dansmith | well, I'd like to talk to people that have actual problems with missing things in grenade, | 15:19 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : like I said, I think a good first step is to detail what's hard, so we can figure out what to change | 15:19 |
| dansmith | I can't promise to fix them or have answers, but I'd like to hear what they are | 15:19 |
| mnaser | (my deployer hat sees a lot more value in CI jobs that do upgrades) | 15:19 |
| dhellmann | if that means more docs, or 1-on-1 helpers, or whatever | 15:19 |
| mriedem | mugsie: i don't suppose there was anything written down or bugs filed about issues with grenade while trying to integrate with it? | 15:19 |
| smcginnis | OK, times up on this topic. | 15:20 |
| mugsie | eh, I think there was ... let me look | 15:20 |
| mriedem | like, "this key thing isn't doc'ed at all" | 15:20 |
| mnaser | mugsie: as someone who's first hand dealt with this, could you maybe have a stripped down version to look at? | 15:20 |
| dhellmann | it would also be useful to put together a list of the projects that would have to work on this goal | 15:20 |
| * smcginnis feels like we've given up one meeting now for three meetings | 15:20 | |
| mriedem | anyone that doesn't run grenade voting | 15:20 |
| mnaser | but if mugsie doesn't have the time to do that right now | 15:20 |
| mnaser | we can defer decision making to another time | 15:20 |
| mnaser | we all have an idea in our mind | 15:21 |
| dhellmann | yeah, I think we have a few next steps | 15:21 |
| mnaser | but maybe we should dive into dhellmann's topic for now :) | 15:21 |
| mugsie | https://github.com/openstack/designate/tree/master/devstack/upgrade | 15:21 |
| dhellmann | who's going to drive this one? | 15:21 |
| dhellmann | the goal, that is | 15:21 |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 15:21 | |
| dhellmann | if we have a volunteer, maybe that person could report back next week? | 15:21 |
| mugsie | I can get a list of the issues we had with grenade together, if that would help | 15:22 |
| dhellmann | ++, thanks mugsie | 15:22 |
| mriedem | that would be an excellent start | 15:22 |
| mnaser | #action mugsie gather list of grenade implementation issues to evaluate upgrade goal | 15:22 |
| fungi | "report back next week" definitely makes this not-meeting seem more and more like a meeting ;) | 15:22 |
| dhellmann | is there 1 grenade job? or do different projects use different names for that job? | 15:22 |
| smcginnis | mugsie: If we could add notes to our goal backlog etherpad, I think that would be good to capture it there. | 15:22 |
| mugsie | smcginnis: ++ | 15:22 |
| dhellmann | fungi : the report could go to the mailing list | 15:22 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : ++ | 15:23 |
| mnaser | looks like we got something! | 15:23 |
| mnaser | onto the next? | 15:23 |
| dhellmann | cool | 15:23 |
| smcginnis | ++ | 15:23 |
| dhellmann | so, checking in on project health | 15:23 |
| * dtroyer reads scrollback… | 15:23 | |
| fungi | i do wonder whether designate's struggle to get undocumented grenade plugin testing was due to it being the first team to undertake such a challenge | 15:23 |
| mnaser | #topic checking in with teams | 15:23 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "checking in with teams (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:23 | |
| dhellmann | fungi : likely | 15:23 |
| mriedem | fungi: ironic was first i think | 15:23 |
| fungi | ahh | 15:23 |
| dhellmann | "early" | 15:23 |
| mriedem | dtantsur: would be the person to ask, or jroll | 15:24 |
| dims | dhellmann : here's a easy way to find the grenade playbooks - http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=PROJECTS.*grenade&i=nope&files=.*%2F*.yaml&repos= | 15:24 |
| mugsie | yeah, and there is still only 5 or 6 teams who have one now | 15:24 |
| dhellmann | dims : thanks | 15:24 |
| dtroyer | the fact that Grenade is still useful at all is a miracle to me, and says how much sdague did to get it there… FIWI, it took over 2 months to get a basic clean run when we wrote it | 15:24 |
| mnaser | so | 15:24 |
| mnaser | i liked smcginnis idea about splitting projects up across members :) | 15:24 |
| dhellmann | do people want me to assign them out? or do we want volunteers? | 15:24 |
| smcginnis | Seems like it would be good to spread the load. | 15:25 |
| mnaser | not to say we 'pick and choose' but perhaps some of us that are more involved in specific communities can volunteer for specific ones | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | we should also talk about exactly what we mean so we're all doing the same sort of checking | 15:25 |
| smcginnis | I'm fine with being assigned. | 15:25 |
| mnaser | and the leftovers could be split? | 15:25 |
| dims | dhellmann : fine with being assigned | 15:25 |
| * dtantsur appears from the shadows | 15:25 | |
| fungi | is there a more detailed proposal as to what we'd do with the projects we're each assigned? survey them? hang out in their channels and weekly meetings? something else? | 15:25 |
| smcginnis | mnaser: Oh, true. Like I should probably have cinder and probably glance. | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : yeah, I actually want our PTLs to not be our (only) point of contacts on things, because I want a different perspective | 15:25 |
| mnaser | ++ | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | fungi : good question | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | I was thinking at least read the meeting logs. Maybe monitor their major announcement emails. | 15:26 |
| mnaser | so when saying check in, just maybe look at meetings? go through their reviews and see if things are healthy.. irc? | 15:26 |
| dhellmann | Talk to the PTL about whether they are experiencing any issues we can help with? | 15:26 |
| dhellmann | Generally to get a sense of things. | 15:26 |
| dtantsur | not sure if it's still important or not, but we have two working grenade plugins in the ironic world | 15:26 |
| fungi | your friendly neighborhood tc contact | 15:26 |
| zaneb | should we write a script (as in movie script, not python script) or something for the initial contact? | 15:26 |
| dhellmann | I had at least 2 cases at the summit where someone mentioned a "long standing" issue between 2 teams. I want us to find those before they become long standing. | 15:26 |
| mnaser | i agree | 15:26 |
| dims | makes sense dhellmann | 15:27 |
| smcginnis | Some things to check - are they still holding regular meetings, are patches getting reviewed and merged, is the PTL aware of any issues. | 15:27 |
| mnaser | having more of a presence and being more reachable is important | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | fungi : right. like a liaison. :-) | 15:27 |
| fungi | aha, so more things like brokering inter-team relationships | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : a list of questions/topics might be good. it doesn't have to be very formal, but it should be consistent | 15:27 |
| smcginnis | And being a known contact point for them if they need help. | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : those are good things, too | 15:27 |
| mugsie | yeah, knowing that you can reach out to $people seems like a good thing | 15:27 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: ++ | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | we do have this frequent conversation about whether projects are active enough to stay on the official list | 15:27 |
| mnaser | and $people is not a group or a mailing list but someoen that you spoke to personally | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | right | 15:27 |
| mnaser | so they might understand situations much more intimately | 15:27 |
| mnaser | i like it | 15:27 |
| mugsie | Like back in the old days when teams and PTLs would have a sync with ttx once a week? | 15:28 |
| fungi | conversely, we don't want to give teams the impression they can only reach out to their designated tc representative, right? | 15:28 |
| mugsie | (maybe not once a week though) | 15:28 |
| mugsie | fungi: ++ | 15:28 |
| mnaser | i also think we should pair up on this | 15:28 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : it doesn't have to be that often, but I want to make sure people know they can come to someone if they're experiencing an issue | 15:28 |
| dhellmann | fungi : sure | 15:28 |
| smcginnis | fungi: Right, but some might not even realize they *can* reach out to someone on issues. | 15:28 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : yes, definitely | 15:28 |
| mriedem | are we talking about tc guidance counselors? | 15:28 |
| smcginnis | Hah! | 15:29 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : yeah, that seems to be the problem in the cases I had at the summit | 15:29 |
| smcginnis | Time check | 15:29 |
| mnaser | i think we're all in agreement and seem to have a clear idea of really checking health of a team | 15:29 |
| mnaser | 3-4 minutes or so | 15:29 |
| fungi | i'm all for this kinder, gentler technical committee | 15:29 |
| mnaser | do we want to discuss ways to split this up? | 15:29 |
| dhellmann | #action dhellmann make a list of project teams and TC member assignments | 15:29 |
| smcginnis | I like the idea | 15:29 |
| mugsie | and pro-active tc :) | 15:29 |
| smcginnis | Maybe we sign up for specific projects, then out of the remaining we divy up assignments? | 15:30 |
| dhellmann | sure, we could do that | 15:30 |
| dhellmann | #undo | 15:30 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #action dhellmann make a list of project teams and TC member assignments | 15:30 |
| mriedem | nova wants mnaser then | 15:30 |
| mriedem | i'll call it | 15:30 |
| dhellmann | #action dhellmann make a list of project teams for TC members to volunteer for | 15:30 |
| mriedem | he has candy in his office | 15:30 |
| mnaser | :> | 15:30 |
| fungi | time to bikeshed what metric we're using to divvy them up "by size"? (number of contributors? amount of code churn? number of deliverables? number of core reviewers? something else?) | 15:30 |
| dims | dang! mriedem does not like me anymore | 15:31 |
| dhellmann | fungi : I'm not sure the size matters? | 15:31 |
| mnaser | fungi: we can bikeshed once we have leftovers? | 15:31 |
| smcginnis | ^d^d^d^d | 15:31 |
| fungi | oh, sounded like you had initially said something about trying to sort them by some means | 15:31 |
| mnaser | i'm sure we all have projects that are within our areas of interest | 15:31 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Zuul update for Ansible 2.5 in progress. Scheduler crashed as unexpected side effect of pip upgrade. Will be back and running shortly. | 15:31 | |
| dims | mnaser right i am trying to get out of my comfort zone | 15:31 |
| dhellmann | fungi : I don't want the same 2 TC members paired for every team, and I don't want the PTL to be the primary contact from the TC. Other than that, I'm open to any other ways to group things. | 15:32 |
| mnaser | dims: hence the idea that we get some that we pick, but the rest we'll get assigned :) | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | the smaller teams may actually be harder to get in touch with, fwiw | 15:32 |
| dims | ++ | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | that has been my experience from the release team, anyway | 15:32 |
| mnaser | i think we've reached a good point, do we want to speak briefly about the next topic now? | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | ++ | 15:32 |
| mnaser | ETIMEOUT no responses other than dhellmann | 15:33 |
| mnaser | #topic organizational diversity | 15:33 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "organizational diversity (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:33 | |
| fungi | yeah, i think i misread initially. no worries. was trying to juggle following two meetings and some maintenance at the same time | 15:33 |
| mnaser | so, i posted a thread about this which has gathered a lot of interesting feedback | 15:33 |
| mnaser | but an idea that has floated around which i was thinking of is linking it to releases | 15:33 |
| mnaser | so once a project makes a release, only then does their status gets 're-evaluated' | 15:34 |
| mnaser | that prevents having someone work on a big report at the end of cycle when we're all really busy | 15:34 |
| mnaser | and we can still somewhat leverage our automation infrastructure, tying into the release process, to have the checks happen | 15:34 |
| smcginnis | mnaser: So are you thinking something added to our release automation that would check that? | 15:34 |
| smcginnis | Hah, yep. | 15:34 |
| mnaser | smcginnis: something in `post` alongside the other jobs | 15:34 |
| mnaser | yep | 15:34 |
| dhellmann | I like the idea of linking it to the development cycle. There are some technical issues with linking it to the release itself. Principally, a team has many deliverables and they aren't all released at the same time. | 15:34 |
| zaneb | does that create an incentive for some projects to never release? :D | 15:35 |
| dhellmann | but we do use them all when checking contribution diversity | 15:35 |
| mugsie | so for team:diverse-affiliation we could have team:diverse-affiliation:rocky ? | 15:35 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : the release team already has a policy of recommending dropping projects that do not release | 15:35 |
| mnaser | mugsie: we have not decided that part yet | 15:35 |
| mnaser | we could look into that | 15:35 |
| mnaser | i was thinking doing this for the 'major' release, but then thought that we can also do this for any milestone releases | 15:36 |
| dhellmann | by "major" do you mean "final" or "service"? e.g., cinder has a server and a client. they aren't released together. | 15:37 |
| mnaser | sorry, by major i meant when we do our 'openstack release', marketing pages are up, etc | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | ok | 15:37 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: is the tag not applied to both separatly? | 15:37 |
| mnaser | tags are applied to teams afaik, not projects/deliverables | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : the tags are applied to the team | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | at least this tag is | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | "team:" | 15:38 |
| fungi | yeah, i think syncing up contributor affiliation diversity stats to just be per-cycle values makes sense | 15:38 |
| smcginnis | And teams can have cycle based and non-cycle based deliverables. | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | yes, that's another good point | 15:38 |
| smcginnis | Hasn't ttx been doing these roughly per-cycle until now? | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | I need to look into how much this is already automated. Maybe the thing to do is put it on the release schedule, to remind someone on the TC to do it? | 15:38 |
| mugsie | we could just time box it - between these 2 date points the team was / was not diverse ? | 15:39 |
| mnaser | i'm not too familiar with the intimate details of how all of this works, i volunteered myself to help out | 15:39 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : I think so | 15:39 |
| mugsie | but the problem with the actual caluclations still remains | 15:39 |
| mnaser | maybe next time we sit down ttx can bring up his knowledge upon us :) | 15:39 |
| dhellmann | yes, that's a separate thing and we should talk about that, too, mugsie | 15:39 |
| mugsie | e.g. I counted as 3 companies for a while | 15:39 |
| mnaser | mugsie: i mean for how much work you put in, don't see whats wrong ;) hah :p | 15:40 |
| mugsie | :D | 15:40 |
| smcginnis | mugsie: You're just a 3x developer. | 15:40 |
| mugsie | 3x the destruction of a normal one? for sure :P | 15:40 |
| smcginnis | :) | 15:40 |
| mnaser | so that's the overall thing, maybe next time when chat ttx will be around to discuss this more | 15:40 |
| dhellmann | for the stats I put together for the meeting in vancouver, I used the affiliation at the time of the contribution. I'm not so sure that works for this meausre. | 15:40 |
| mnaser | i just wanted to have a quick updates and it didnt seem like everyone is too wildly opposed to it :) | 15:41 |
| fungi | are you relying on the affiliation date ranges provided by the foundation member lookup api? | 15:41 |
| fungi | or something else? | 15:41 |
| mnaser | that's it for me if anyone has no other comments we can talk about the last thing which is openstack client as help wanted? | 15:41 |
| fungi | to map affiliation at the time of the contribution | 15:41 |
| dhellmann | fungi : the foundation member api | 15:42 |
| mugsie | but we have teams like searchlight, which are down as diverse, and have 8 commits this cycle | 15:42 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser post suggestion of tying organizational diversity checks to releases | 15:42 |
| dhellmann | right, the question of what to do with those low volume teams is a separate part of this | 15:42 |
| mnaser | are they still releasing? | 15:42 |
| dhellmann | maybe we should wait to decide anything until we've had the health check? | 15:42 |
| mugsie | yeah, afaik they are | 15:42 |
| fungi | searchlight is our only listed maintenance mode team at this point | 15:43 |
| dhellmann | right, we don't expect lots of activity there | 15:43 |
| dhellmann | https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/status_maintenance-mode.html | 15:43 |
| mnaser | if the team behind it was diverse then it should stay that way if there are no new commits (imho) | 15:43 |
| mnaser | because it is still diverse. and commits come from all different organizations | 15:43 |
| mnaser | if one company started doing commits to it now, it'll go back to single vendor, which is also ok | 15:44 |
| smcginnis | I agree - freeze reporting on maintenance mode projects. | 15:44 |
| mnaser | i like that | 15:44 |
| fungi | wfm | 15:44 |
| mnaser | #undo | 15:44 |
| mugsie | yup | 15:44 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/status_maintenance-mode.html | 15:44 |
| mnaser | er | 15:44 |
| mnaser | oh | 15:44 |
| mnaser | #undo | 15:44 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #action mnaser post suggestion of tying organizational diversity checks to releases | 15:44 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser post suggestion of tying organizational diversity checks to releases + freezing reporting on maintenance mode projects | 15:45 |
| mnaser | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/status_maintenance-mode.html | 15:45 |
| mnaser | we have 15 minutes left and maybe it would be good to bring up our last topic that mugsie wanted to talk about | 15:45 |
| mnaser | openstack client as help needed afaik? | 15:45 |
| mugsie | yup - it kind of a foundational part of our UX, and there seems to be issues with review velocity | 15:46 |
| mnaser | #topic openstack client help needed | 15:46 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "openstack client help needed (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:46 | |
| dhellmann | yeah, dtroyer is stretched thin and we've mostly lost stevemar | 15:46 |
| fungi | i saw some of that bubble up in a recent ml thread | 15:46 |
| mugsie | a member of the community pinged me about it last week, and I looked at the backlog | 15:46 |
| mugsie | so, if dtroyer is OK with it I think we need to highlight the resource issues there | 15:46 |
| smcginnis | Since our unofficial goal has been to migrate to osc, I think it definitely needs more resources. | 15:47 |
| smcginnis | Help wanted makes sense to me. | 15:47 |
| mugsie | smcginnis: ++ | 15:47 |
| mnaser | https://review.openstack.org/#/q/(project:openstack/openstackclient+OR+project:openstack/openstacksdk)+is:open | 15:47 |
| dhellmann | do we want to remove anything from the existing top 5 list? or do we want to expand it? | 15:47 |
| dhellmann | https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/help-most-needed.html | 15:47 |
| cmurphy | steve isn't totally gone fwiw https://review.openstack.org/#/q/reviewedby:%22Steve+Martinelli+%253Cs.martinelli%2540gmail.com%253E%22 | 15:47 |
| dhellmann | I did say "mostly" | 15:47 |
| mugsie | https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/python-openstackclient+is:open is more depressing | 15:48 |
| mnaser | https://review.openstack.org/#/q/(project:openstack/python-openstackclient+OR+project:openstack/openstackclient+OR+project:openstack/openstacksdk)+is:open | 15:48 |
| *** srwilkers has joined #openstack-tc | 15:48 | |
| mnaser | as a side idea | 15:48 |
| mnaser | what about organizing 'review-athons' | 15:48 |
| mriedem | i did my part and reviewed one compute osc thing this week :) | 15:48 |
| mriedem | adding tags support for servers | 15:48 |
| mnaser | im sure a lot of members in the community can do reviews | 15:48 |
| mriedem | i think the project teams definitely need to be more involved in reviewing their project-specific stuff in osc | 15:48 |
| mriedem | and i'd be happy to help there | 15:48 |
| mugsie | mriedem: ++ | 15:49 |
| mriedem | nova core is alread ydoing this for osc-placement | 15:49 |
| dhellmann | ++ | 15:49 |
| mriedem | we also understand the various microversion implications | 15:49 |
| mugsie | but we need people who can also help projects outside the nova + friends group | 15:49 |
| mriedem | i just need help at times about things like which type of command parent classes to use and such | 15:49 |
| mnaser | forgive this wild suggestion | 15:49 |
| mnaser | do we want to add something as part of the release process to push teams to review all their osc changes for their project | 15:50 |
| mnaser | and work with the osc team to use topics for this thing | 15:50 |
| mugsie | of course - there is another soluton | 15:50 |
| mugsie | push all osc interactions to plugins, and make the teams own them | 15:50 |
| dims | i suppose we can't ask for all-scenarios-must-work ... may be we can say something like all your devstack and grenade plugins should use osc for sure, anything else is a bonus? | 15:50 |
| fungi | i'm not grasping what that would have to do at all with the release process | 15:50 |
| mugsie | then the osc team has a lot less surface area to deal with | 15:51 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : it was designed to work that way, but we found that most developers did not appreciate the importance of UI consistency *and* we ended up with project teams clashing over the command namespaces | 15:51 |
| fungi | how does reviewing topical osc changes relate to release cadence? | 15:51 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 15:51 | |
| mnaser | fungi: so just like how we have certain expectations by milestones for a project to have all their client-based code be in | 15:51 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: its that way for everyone but 4/5 projects already | 15:51 |
| dtroyer | mugsie: for context, that is one reason OSC existed in the first place, those teams could not/would not agree on damn near anything… | 15:52 |
| zaneb | mugsie: ++ | 15:52 |
| mriedem | as a data point,i'll say that even with the small number of osc-placement patches up for review, i have a hard time giving those review time | 15:52 |
| mugsie | dtroyer: sure - but you did a good job of beating them into shape :) | 15:52 |
| mnaser | say.. kinda like requirements freeze time | 15:52 |
| dtroyer | for what it's worth, adopting the SDK once it has a 1.0 release opens the door to a lot of the things people want out of OSC, specitifally microversions | 15:52 |
| smcginnis | No idea if there is a way to automate it, but a semi-regular report to the ML showing each project and its osc support coverage would be interesting to me. | 15:52 |
| mnaser | like the emails smcginnis sends about release countdown | 15:53 |
| mnaser | mentioning "development focus" | 15:53 |
| mugsie | mnaser: that is a hard thing to gather though | 15:53 |
| mugsie | s/mnaser/smcginnis/ | 15:53 |
| fungi | i guess the unfortunate solution of namespacing commands based on which plugin they're in means that subcommands would end up in nonsensical hierarchies based on which team was responsible for them rather than more intuitive groupings | 15:53 |
| smcginnis | mugsie: Yeah... | 15:53 |
| mnaser | and maybe if it's not too much of a pain under the general info "these projects have pending changes in their openstack client code" | 15:54 |
| mugsie | fungi: not really, we added 2 or 3 top level command | 15:54 |
| mugsie | +s | 15:54 |
| smcginnis | mugsie: At one point there was a nice spreadsheet of the gaps with Cinder support, but I believe that was all manual. | 15:54 |
| * dtroyer reading scrollback | 15:54 | |
| zaneb | fungi: there are non-namespaced plugins now AIUI | 15:54 |
| dtroyer | oh, OSC doesn't namespace although it looks like that sometimes | 15:54 |
| dhellmann | fungi : the "namespace" in this sense is the resource name. I think "container" was one where swift was using it before we got magnum, for example. | 15:54 |
| mugsie | https://github.com/openstack/python-designateclient/blob/master/setup.cfg#L90 | 15:54 |
| fungi | mugsie: right, you can _currently_ add whatever top-level commands you want, which is what i was saying... that's what leads to collisions between teams | 15:54 |
| dtroyer | there is a subtle differece that I can explain to anyone who hasn't heard it offline | 15:54 |
| smcginnis | mnaser: Not sure I would want to include that in the release countdown email. Something doesn't feel right about it. But if we had something similar that could work. | 15:55 |
| mnaser | are we looking to help with OSC reviews or making it more functional/adding features? | 15:55 |
| * fungi gives up. this conversation is moving too fast and his points seem to get taken in reverse by the time he can type them | 15:55 | |
| mnaser | :( | 15:55 |
| mriedem | telling project cores "go review osc patches for your resource" is going to end up down a well i think | 15:55 |
| dhellmann | mriedem : we don't need project cores to do it. | 15:55 |
| smcginnis | mriedem: ++ | 15:55 |
| mriedem | need to find liaisons or just people that care | 15:55 |
| dhellmann | right | 15:55 |
| dtroyer | mriedem: as a counter-example, nearly all of the network work was done by the neutron team(s), it is really the only reason it got done | 15:56 |
| mugsie | how about "go review osc patches, or your service will be moved out into a plugin" ? | 15:56 |
| fungi | much like python-novaclient has (or had) different core reviewers than nova | 15:56 |
| mnaser | fungi, mriedem: that's a good point | 15:56 |
| mriedem | i've been saying nova needs to move off novaclient for CLI and into OSC | 15:56 |
| mriedem | that's why i added te community wide goal to close the gap on the OSC CLIs | 15:56 |
| mriedem | i definitely have bought into the unified CLI | 15:57 |
| mriedem | and use it as much as possible now | 15:57 |
| mriedem | including in new nova docs | 15:57 |
| mugsie | mriedem: ++ | 15:57 |
| mriedem | i want to burn "nova boot" from our lexicon | 15:57 |
| mriedem | but, i'm only one person already stretched thin | 15:57 |
| mugsie | we removed our cli when we jumped api versions | 15:57 |
| fungi | does the always-backward-compatible, non-branching nature of osc provide challenges compared to python-novaclient being tied a bit more closely (via branching, et cetera) to the versions of other services which rely on it for integrating with nova? | 15:57 |
| zaneb | presumably if Nova could drop any effort it's putting in to novaclient CLI and redirect it to OSC, it'd be a wash? | 15:58 |
| zaneb | so why isn't that happening? | 15:58 |
| * dtroyer sends mriedem his payola check | 15:58 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 15:58 | |
| mriedem | zaneb: it's come up, but people get hung up on the "but osc has this 60 micorversion gap" | 15:58 |
| zaneb | because the code is owned by the OSC project and not the Nova project? | 15:58 |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 15:58 | |
| zaneb | ah, ok | 15:58 |
| mugsie | fungi: does having plugins help that? | 15:58 |
| mnaser | we have 2 minutes so maybe figuring out a conclusion would be good, or we can defer to the next discussion :) | 15:58 |
| mriedem | no people just want to get their feature into the server, they for the most part don't care about ansillary projects like novaclient, osc, horizon or tempest | 15:58 |
| mugsie | when you install stable/pike, and the stable/pike client, you only get the relevent commands? | 15:58 |
| fungi | i have no clue | 15:58 |
| zaneb | mriedem: so we're waiting for openstacksdk 1.0, really | 15:59 |
| mriedem | this is where maintainers have to care and take on the work | 15:59 |
| dtroyer | fungi: the challenge has been with removing things from client libs (see recent novaclient). we solve that with the switch to SDK once we get a 1.0 release of that | 15:59 |
| fungi | makes sense | 15:59 |
| mnaser | anyone want to propose some sort of action out of this discussion before we wrap up? | 15:59 |
| dhellmann | it sounds like it would be useful to have a list of specific things the OSC team could use help with, as a start. we're going to need that to add it to the help-wanted list anyway, right? | 15:59 |
| smcginnis | Official times up. | 16:00 |
| zaneb | people don't care if they can access their feature with a client?? | 16:00 |
| dtroyer | mugsie: if you install osc stable/pike you get that snapshot in time, yes. you should not have to do that though unless you are not running from a venv | 16:00 |
| * dims heads out for an errand | 16:00 | |
| mugsie | dhellmann: yeah, we need a list I think | 16:00 |
| mriedem | i can figure out what the nova microversion gap is in osc | 16:00 |
| mriedem | that's an action i've been meanning to do anyway | 16:00 |
| mriedem | sign me up | 16:00 |
| dhellmann | #action mriedem figure out the nova microversion gap in osc | 16:00 |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 16:00 | |
| dtroyer | mriedem: remember we don't need to support every microversion, just the ones needed by each command | 16:00 |
| dhellmann | dtroyer : do you have time to put together a list of things the OSC team could use help with in more detail than "reviews"? | 16:01 |
| dtroyer | and sdk goes a long way in helping do that | 16:01 |
| mriedem | dtroyer: sure i know | 16:01 |
| mriedem | lots of microversions in nova are on admin stuff that's not in osc | 16:01 |
| mriedem | which has been another reason people keep doing them in novaclient | 16:01 |
| fungi | i just know that in the past we had this unfortunate dynamic between application developers needing a novaclient which could talk to lots of versions of nova, and other openstack services which needed very specific versions of novaclient for integrating with contemporary versions of nova, and having a separate unified client/sdk for users/application developers was brought up as the way out of that | 16:01 |
| fungi | dilemma | 16:01 |
| fungi | so that we ended up with the inter-service communication libraries and the application developer sdk not being bound to each other | 16:02 |
| clarkb | dtroyer: mriedem that is how shade functioned too fwiw. Basically use the base api for everything unless a specific command needs a newer microversion then use that for that request only | 16:02 |
| dhellmann | fungi : that split may make less sense now that we have more work and fewer people | 16:02 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 16:03 | |
| fungi | right, but if we're going back to one sdk which is used both for inter-service communication and application development, i worry that we'll reintroduce that coupling | 16:03 |
| dtroyer | that split was always due to assumptions in the client libs being not suitable for CLI use… mordred thinks this is reversed for the SDK and is not a problem | 16:03 |
| mnaser | i think we can continue to discuss within the channel but we can probably close out, fungi i'll leave that up to you :) | 16:03 |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 16:03 | |
| fungi | dtroyer: yeah, i suppose if the sdks are first and foremost written for users/application developers, and the services can also use them for inter-service communication if they want, then perhaps that does solve it | 16:04 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: me and a few others (dims TheJulia smcginnis I think) have an action from the meeting in YVR for improving the help wanted listings - should we take OSC as a start case? | 16:04 |
| mugsie | as an action to kick off | 16:05 |
| dtroyer | fungi: also, keeping the dep list for SDK really small helps a lot for co-installability | 16:05 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : it sounds like we need to collect more info first. it might be better to work on the things we've already got on the list? | 16:05 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : and don't forget to pull the board member volunteers into that discussion | 16:05 |
| mugsie | OK - who is collecting info? all I have is "needs reviewers" | 16:06 |
| * mordred reading scrollback | 16:06 | |
| dhellmann | mugsie : we didn't get a volunteer for that. I suspect dtroyer is the best person to talk to, but he may not have time to write it all up | 16:06 |
| mordred | yes- I believe because the sdk is end-user/client oriented _first_ rather than service-to-service first the situation is reversed | 16:07 |
| mugsie | yeah - I definitely won;t have any extra time in the next 7 days for it either :/ | 16:07 |
| dtroyer | I will help as much as I can, but I'm totally interrupt-driven these days :( | 16:07 |
| mordred | the problem with python-*client is that they are service-to-service first and make life harder for end-users who need to touch more than one version | 16:07 |
| mugsie | dtroyer: sure, its the old problem of needing to spend time to get things that give you back time :) | 16:08 |
| * mugsie has to go AFK for a bit | 16:09 | |
| * mordred is allocating personal time to directly helping getting OSC up and on to the sdk - although post-summit has been extra busy so apologizes that hasn't gotten further | 16:09 | |
| mordred | but I'll definitely directly work on it | 16:09 |
| dhellmann | I added OSC to the tracker: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Technical_Committee_Tracker#finding_help_for_the_unified_CLI_team | 16:09 |
| mriedem | you have personal time? | 16:09 |
| mriedem | what a luxury | 16:09 |
| mordred | mriedem: wel | 16:09 |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 16:10 | |
| dhellmann | are we winding down? should we close out the meeting log? | 16:10 |
| smcginnis | Probably, we are over the hour. | 16:10 |
| mnaser | ++ | 16:10 |
| smcginnis | Well over. :) | 16:10 |
| fungi | sure, i was just checking to see if the conversation had died down sufficiently | 16:10 |
| fungi | #endmeeting | 16:10 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Technical Committee office hours: Tuesdays at 09:00 UTC, Wednesdays at 01:00 UTC, and Thursdays at 15:00 UTC | https://governance.openstack.org/tc/ | channel logs http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/" | 16:10 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Jun 7 16:10:52 2018 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:10 |
| mordred | mriedem: I should say "allocating some of the time I am spending on opnestack to this" | 16:10 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2018/tc.2018-06-07-15.00.html | 16:10 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2018/tc.2018-06-07-15.00.txt | 16:10 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2018/tc.2018-06-07-15.00.log.html | 16:10 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: The zuul upgrade to ansible 2.5 is complete and zuul is running again. Changes uploaded or approved between 15:25 and 15:45 will need to be rechecked. Please report any problems in #openstack-infra | 16:11 | |
| mnaser | fungi: i know you mentioned this non-meeting became more of a meeting but i (feel) it was pretty productive overall | 16:11 |
| fungi | yeah, it was | 16:12 |
| mriedem | mordred: heh ok | 16:12 |
| mriedem | trying to think what i was actually planning on working on today... | 16:12 |
| fungi | the third office hour of the week is always way busy compared to the other two mostly just due to all of us being awake at this time of day, so makes it hard to follow the increased discussion activity much less weigh in on anything | 16:12 |
| zaneb | kinda like the meetings used to be :) | 16:13 |
| dhellmann | mnaser did a good job of keeping us on topic and on time | 16:14 |
| dhellmann | but yeah, it did move quickly | 16:14 |
| fungi | yep. thanks mnaser! | 16:14 |
| dims | thanks mnaser! | 16:14 |
| mnaser | :) | 16:14 |
| mnaser | and the zuul issues were all taken care of while we were in the meeting too | 16:14 |
| mnaser | so we didn't lose any time :P | 16:15 |
| fungi | and now zuul is running the most recent ansible release (at least until ansible 2.6 is released, imminently i'm told) | 16:20 |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 16:21 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 16:22 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 16:27 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 16:28 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 16:32 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 16:33 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 16:36 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 16:41 | |
| *** tbarron has quit IRC | 16:46 | |
| *** tbarron has joined #openstack-tc | 16:50 | |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 17:04 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 17:05 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 17:08 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 17:13 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 17:33 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 17:37 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 18:20 | |
| dhellmann | tc-members: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Technical_Committee_Tracker#Liaisons | 18:22 |
| zaneb | by my count there are 83 Projects/SIGs/WGs on that list | 18:25 |
| dhellmann | I just added 1, so 84 | 18:26 |
| zaneb | that's 13 projects each if we pair up | 18:26 |
| zaneb | I'm concerned that the amount of work required to keep up with all of the things listed for 13 projects is a full-time job in itself | 18:28 |
| dhellmann | http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-June/131293.html | 18:28 |
| dhellmann | yeah, it's definitely a concern | 18:28 |
| smcginnis | I would hope this would end up being 26 emails or IRC pings every six months, but could certainly end up being more than that. | 18:28 |
| dhellmann | but we need to address the health questions somehow. we've been pretty passive at it in the past. | 18:29 |
| fungi | i signed up for 2 sigs and 7 teams i already have ins with, happy to take more (and working groups) by random assignment i guess | 18:29 |
| zaneb | I think talk to the PTL twice a cycle is achievable. that's one project per week | 18:29 |
| fungi | i could have signed up for a few others but didn't (e.g. release management) where i knew there were already better choices on the tc who were likely to take them anyway | 18:31 |
| zaneb | read meeting logs, watch vidoes, read the ML for the project, talk with multiple members of the group continuously... I barely have time to do that for the projects I'm actually working on | 18:31 |
| fungi | zaneb: i'm already used to volunteering for things i don't end up getting done... what's a few more? ;) | 18:32 |
| dhellmann | yeah, that's not meant to be continuously | 18:32 |
| dhellmann | early on it may be to come up to speed | 18:32 |
| dhellmann | but then checking in with one group once a week feels like a reasonable rate | 18:32 |
| dhellmann | and maybe once we've done this a bit, we'll get a feel for what is really needed | 18:33 |
| smcginnis | I bet it would be easy to write a script to at least quickly check that regular meetings are happening. | 18:33 |
| smcginnis | Would still need to take a look at the logs (if not attending real time) to see that they are not on person lamenting how lonely they are. | 18:33 |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 18:33 | |
| dhellmann | not all teams meet any more, so actually having meetings isn't necessarily the point -- scanning the logs will expose issues, and that's what I'm concerned about | 18:34 |
| dhellmann | yeah, true :-) | 18:34 |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 18:34 | |
| dhellmann | there may also be board working groups that I left off of the list | 18:34 |
| dhellmann | I'm looking for a list of those but didn't find one | 18:34 |
| smcginnis | Did we say we wanted two on every project? | 18:37 |
| dhellmann | that's what I would like, yes | 18:37 |
| dhellmann | as a general rule, I don't want us to have only 1 person assigned to anything we're doing | 18:37 |
| dhellmann | at least anything significant like this | 18:37 |
| dims | i took one sig and one wg which i already follow. happy to take random assignments for the rest of my quota | 18:39 |
| smcginnis | Do I remember right that LCOO just posted something about maybe stopping and joining another wg? | 18:40 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : is that you volunteering to keep an eye on lcoo? ;-) | 18:41 |
| smcginnis | Heh, if they are disbanding already, sure. That should be an easy one then. :) | 18:41 |
| smcginnis | What is Ops Tags? | 18:41 |
| dhellmann | I think I've seen some discussion of groups merging, but LCOO met at the summit and talked about their new leadership, so I don't think they are disbanding | 18:41 |
| dhellmann | that's a UC WG to do with operator-defined tags that they manage in another repo | 18:42 |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 18:43 | |
| *** spotz has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 18:46 | |
| *** spotz has joined #openstack-tc | 18:46 | |
| smcginnis | Ah, I was thinking of FEMDC: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-sigs/2018-June/000396.html | 18:51 |
| dhellmann | ah, good | 18:52 |
| dhellmann | so I will remove that one from the list | 18:53 |
| fungi | dhellmann: there are no more "board working groups" as far as i know. if my recollection is correct, the board delegated governance of all their working groups to the uc a year-ish ago? | 18:55 |
| dhellmann | ok. the interop group wasn't on the list I found for the UC | 18:55 |
| fungi | interesting | 18:55 |
| dhellmann | I assumed that meant there was another group somewhere | 18:55 |
| fungi | hogepodge: ^ is the interop wg still directly under the bod, or the uc now? | 18:55 |
| dhellmann | https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee | 18:55 |
| dhellmann | bottom of the page | 18:56 |
| dhellmann | ah, there's a list on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation | 18:57 |
| fungi | ahh, yep, https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation#Committees_.26_Working_Groups | 18:58 |
| fungi | interesting, i thought the committees remained under the board but the working groups had all moved to the uc. i might have been wrong about thaht | 18:58 |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 19:10 | |
| *** mugsie has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| *** mugsie has joined #openstack-tc | 19:21 | |
| *** mugsie has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| *** mugsie has joined #openstack-tc | 19:21 | |
| *** mugsie has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| *** mugsie has joined #openstack-tc | 19:21 | |
| *** mugsie has quit IRC | 19:22 | |
| *** Guest68045 has joined #openstack-tc | 19:24 | |
| *** Guest68045 has quit IRC | 19:24 | |
| *** mugsie_ has joined #openstack-tc | 19:24 | |
| *** mugsie_ has quit IRC | 19:27 | |
| *** mugsie_ has joined #openstack-tc | 19:27 | |
| *** mugsie_ is now known as _mugsie | 19:27 | |
| *** _mugsie is now known as mugsie_ | 19:28 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 19:29 | |
| *** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc | 19:30 | |
| hogepodge | fungi: bod | 19:32 |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| fungi | thanks! | 19:40 |
| fungi | so i guess that confirms it. some working groups did indeed not move under the uc | 19:40 |
| fungi | and i guess that list in the foundation governance wiki is the ones which still fall under the board | 20:04 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 20:17 | |
| mriedem | i would like to report great success on my action item from about 6 hours ago https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/compute-api-microversion-gap-in-osc | 20:17 |
| smcginnis | Great counting mriedem. Pick up a sticker on your way out. :P | 20:18 |
| mriedem | scratch-n-sniff root beer?! | 20:19 |
| smcginnis | You know it! | 20:19 |
| fungi | love me some scratch-n-sniff root beer stickers | 20:30 |
| fungi | and thanks for adding the board working groups. now i've signed up for a couple working groups too | 20:32 |
| fungi | i'm still only a liaison for 11 groups across the set of sigs, wgs and teams, so will likely need some randomly-assigned still | 20:33 |
| * fungi takes a moment to think about how insane that sounds | 20:33 | |
| fungi | moment's over! ;) | 20:34 |
| *** mriedem1 has joined #openstack-tc | 20:47 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| smcginnis | I did less, but I wanted to give others some time to sign up for things before I randomly put my name first. | 20:52 |
| *** mriedem1 is now known as mriedem | 20:58 | |
| *** ian_ott has quit IRC | 21:17 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 21:38 | |
| *** kumarmn_ has quit IRC | 22:10 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 22:11 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 22:16 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 22:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| *** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc | 22:36 | |
| *** edmondsw has quit IRC | 22:41 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 22:44 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 22:52 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 22:55 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 22:56 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 23:36 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 23:43 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 23:51 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
