| *** tosky has quit IRC | 00:06 | |
| dhellmann | mriedem : is it possible to close a story without closing its tasks? | 00:59 |
|---|---|---|
| clarkb | dhellmann: no the story will show up in queries for open stories until all tasks are closed | 01:03 |
| clarkb | prometheanfire has requested that this be modified so that the story doesn't show active for projects where all the tasks for that project are closed | 01:04 |
| *** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-tc | 01:07 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 01:09 | |
| mriedem | dhellmann: i wondered about that too, but wasn't sure how to word 'close the story and any open tasks' without going into...what should you say about the tasks that weren't completed | 01:32 |
| smcginnis | It probably makes sense to keep things open so it's apparent there is still work that should be done for that effort. | 01:32 |
| mriedem | well, from my pov, i won't be tracking the story in train if these straggling projects actually do merge their change to close their task | 01:34 |
| mriedem | one option is just removing the incomplete tasks... | 01:35 |
| smcginnis | Yeah, not saying the champions should do any more past the cycle. | 01:35 |
| gmann | or other option is to say "Close the original story with all tasks closed and move open tasks under new story which stay open with projects as an owner" | 01:35 |
| gmann | champions should not own those story for non-complete projects | 01:36 |
| fungi | dhellmann: clarkb: to clarify, the general "state" of a story is inferred (and calculated on the fly) from the state of all its tasks. what we're looking at altering is the project-specific and project-group-specific story list views to filter that story state calculation so it's only based on the states of tasks for projects relevant to that particular view | 01:46 |
| fungi | that comes closer to how launchpad's project-filtered bug lists worked since they showed you a heuristic inference of that project's collective bugtask states (across all series for that project which had a bugtask) | 01:49 |
| mriedem | i replied on the change with some suggested wording | 01:50 |
| mriedem | and now it's time for me to eat ice cream on the couch and conclue the original stargate from the 90s with my 7 year old | 01:50 |
| mriedem | *conclude | 01:50 |
| mriedem | spoiler: they smoked cigarettes in movies in the 90s | 01:50 |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 01:51 | |
| *** mriedem_afk has quit IRC | 01:59 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 02:01 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 02:08 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 02:08 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 02:17 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 02:24 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 02:35 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 02:38 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 03:11 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 03:18 | |
| *** dtruong has quit IRC | 03:21 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 03:48 | |
| *** dtruong has joined #openstack-tc | 04:03 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 04:06 | |
| *** penick has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** scas has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** dtruong has quit IRC | 04:45 | |
| *** penick has joined #openstack-tc | 04:53 | |
| *** scas has joined #openstack-tc | 04:53 | |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc | 05:07 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 05:09 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 05:33 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 05:34 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 05:39 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 06:03 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 06:05 | |
| *** ricolin_ has quit IRC | 06:09 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 06:09 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 06:10 | |
| *** zbr has joined #openstack-tc | 06:14 | |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has quit IRC | 06:15 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 06:32 | |
| *** lxkong has quit IRC | 06:52 | |
| *** Luzi has joined #openstack-tc | 06:54 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:08 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:09 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:10 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:10 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:11 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:12 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:13 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:13 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:14 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:15 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:16 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:16 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 07:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:18 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:19 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:19 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:20 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:21 | |
| *** lxkong has joined #openstack-tc | 07:21 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 07:21 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 07:22 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 07:23 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 07:36 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 07:37 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 07:41 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 07:42 | |
| evrardjp | mriedem I expect to see the mc hammer pants on next summit now. | 07:52 |
| evrardjp | thanks for the closure document | 07:52 |
| evrardjp | gmann: I agree on we should not force campions to own those stories for projects forever. | 07:54 |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 07:55 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 07:55 | |
| evrardjp | Can we instead create a "Community goals unfinished stories tasks" thingy, so we can pile them up there, and basically see trends of what's going on? | 07:55 |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 07:55 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 08:04 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 08:27 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 08:44 | |
| *** adriant has quit IRC | 08:47 | |
| *** adriant has joined #openstack-tc | 08:48 | |
| asettle | Morning o/ | 08:50 |
| *** cosss_ has quit IRC | 08:51 | |
| *** cosss_ has joined #openstack-tc | 08:51 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 08:55 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 08:56 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 08:57 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 08:58 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 08:59 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 08:59 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:00 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:01 | |
| evrardjp | morning | 09:01 |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:02 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:02 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:03 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:04 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:05 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:05 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:06 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:07 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:08 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:08 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:09 | |
| mugsie | o/ | 09:10 |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:10 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:11 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:11 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:12 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:13 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:14 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:14 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:15 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:16 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:18 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:19 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:20 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:20 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:21 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:22 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:23 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:23 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:24 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:25 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 09:25 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:26 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:26 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:27 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:28 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:29 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:29 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:30 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:31 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:32 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:32 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:33 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:34 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:35 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:35 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:36 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:37 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:38 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:38 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:39 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:40 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:41 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:41 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:42 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:43 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:44 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:44 | |
| bauzas | evrardjp: my personal take on goals (which I tried to say in some candidacy threads) is that we shouldn't ask for projects knowing if they can be done by one cycle | 09:45 |
| bauzas | if that's needing more than one cycle after discussing it in the PTG, fine by me | 09:45 |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:45 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:46 | |
| bauzas | because OSc feature on par with the project CLIs is IMHO very important for our users | 09:46 |
| bauzas | if some projects only need one cycle for the feature parity, good good | 09:46 |
| bauzas | if some others need more, then OK too | 09:47 |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:47 | |
| bauzas | even if we don't know *yet* how many of those projects will need more than one cycle | 09:47 |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:47 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:48 | |
| ttx | what we've seen in the past is that setting a goal without some sort of deadline was not very effective. | 09:49 |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:49 | |
| ttx | It was easier to rally behind a "Train release goal" than a TC mandate to work on something | 09:49 |
| ttx | But I agree that sometimes a release cycle is not the best unit of time | 09:50 |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:50 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:50 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:51 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:52 | |
| *** ianw is now known as ianw_pto | 09:52 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:53 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:53 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:54 | |
| evrardjp | We can have larger goals, split into smaller milestones, all achievable in a certain unit of time. I have an opinion about not hardly link goals to cycles, but that's a side point for that discussion I guess. | 09:55 |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:55 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:56 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:56 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:57 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:58 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 09:59 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 09:59 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:00 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:01 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:02 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:02 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:03 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:04 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:05 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:05 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:06 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:07 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:08 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:08 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:09 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:10 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:11 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:11 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:12 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:13 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:14 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:14 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:15 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:16 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:17 | |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has joined #openstack-tc | 10:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:17 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:18 | |
| *** zbr has quit IRC | 10:18 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:19 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:20 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:20 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:21 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:22 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:23 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:23 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:24 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:25 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 10:25 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:26 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:26 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:27 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:28 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:29 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:29 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:30 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:31 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:32 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:32 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:33 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:34 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:35 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:35 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:36 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:37 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:38 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:38 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:39 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:40 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:41 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:41 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:42 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:43 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:44 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:44 | |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 10:45 | |
| *** Bhujay has joined #openstack-tc | 10:46 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 10:55 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 10:57 | |
| *** zbr has joined #openstack-tc | 10:57 | |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has quit IRC | 10:59 | |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has joined #openstack-tc | 11:17 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|bbl | 11:19 | |
| *** zbr has quit IRC | 11:19 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 11:20 | |
| *** zbr has joined #openstack-tc | 11:46 | |
| *** zbr has quit IRC | 11:46 | |
| *** zbr has joined #openstack-tc | 11:48 | |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has quit IRC | 11:48 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 12:27 | |
| dhellmann | tc-members: I could use a couple of quick code reviews, if you have a minute today: https://review.openstack.org/641466 and https://review.openstack.org/641468 | 13:12 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Update TC members for Train cycle election results https://review.openstack.org/641171 | 13:24 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: automatically derive the release team PTL for delegating those changes https://review.openstack.org/641465 | 13:24 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 13:30 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-tc | 13:32 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 13:34 | |
| dhellmann | tc-members: reminder that we have a meeting in ~15 minutes here in channel | 13:45 |
| mnaser | \o/ | 13:45 |
| gmann | o/ | 13:45 |
| asettle | o// | 13:45 |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 13:46 | |
| ricolin | o/ | 13:47 |
| fungi | yup | 13:47 |
| ttx | you can use the next 15min to fill https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DEN-Train-TC-brainstorming with session ideas | 13:47 |
| fungi | or go find more caffeine | 13:47 |
| ttx | Trying to come up with topics right now | 13:47 |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 13:48 | |
| mnaser | dhellmann: +w those two patches after checking it locally, i like it | 13:50 |
| ttx | I'm hesitating to propose yet another session on part-time / casual contributors | 13:55 |
| ttx | I think that is an essential question, but past forum sessions around that were not very useful | 13:55 |
| ttx | probably because it's a topic that is more easily tackled at project team level | 13:56 |
| * mnaser queues the final countdown | 13:59 | |
| evrardjp | o/ | 14:01 |
| * mugsie is lost somewhere in the building, will join when he finds his desk | 14:01 | |
| * bauzas sits on the back near the radiator | 14:01 | |
| fungi | is it that cold? | 14:01 |
| ttx | o/ | 14:01 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: show the owner of each patch in status report https://review.openstack.org/641468 | 14:01 |
| bauzas | that's where bad kids are, right? | 14:01 |
| bauzas | (jk) | 14:02 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: add vote list to status report https://review.openstack.org/641466 | 14:02 |
| asettle | fungi, yes. It is. | 14:02 |
| fungi | bauzas: the bad kids are skipping | 14:02 |
| asettle | Them winds about. | 14:02 |
| ttx | dhellmann: are you starting the meeting? | 14:02 |
| fungi | we can all draw straws | 14:03 |
| mnaser | doug should be starting it, let's give him a few minutes | 14:03 |
| fungi | a straw poll | 14:03 |
| * jroll is here but has to step away for a few :( | 14:03 | |
| * dhellmann is wrapping acall | 14:03 | |
| dhellmann | #startmeeting tc | 14:04 |
| dhellmann | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/002231.html agenda for this meeting | 14:04 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Mar 7 14:04:10 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dhellmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:04 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:04 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 14:04 |
| dhellmann | #topic roll call | 14:04 |
| dhellmann | tc-members (new and old) please indicate if you are present for the logs | 14:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "roll call (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:04 | |
| dims | o/ | 14:04 |
| mnaser | bonjour o/ | 14:04 |
| lbragstad | o/ | 14:04 |
| zaneb | \o/ | 14:04 |
| gmann | o/ | 14:04 |
| jroll | \o | 14:04 |
| asettle | o/ hola | 14:04 |
| ricolin | o/ | 14:04 |
| evrardjp | o/ | 14:05 |
| mugsie | o/ | 14:05 |
| fungi | aloha | 14:05 |
| dhellmann | o/ | 14:05 |
| dhellmann | ok, we have 11 of 13 so far so we have quorum. | 14:05 |
| cdent | i'm here for nostalgia | 14:06 |
| dhellmann | #topic TC election results | 14:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "TC election results (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:06 | |
| dhellmann | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/641171/ | 14:06 |
| dhellmann | I workflowed the patch to update the membership this morning, and updated the gerrit group yesterday | 14:06 |
| dhellmann | if anyone has trouble using the rollcall vote, let me know | 14:06 |
| fungi | thanks! | 14:06 |
| evrardjp | thank you dhellmann | 14:06 |
| dhellmann | thank you to cdent, dims, and smcginnis for serving on the TC! | 14:07 |
| dhellmann | welcome asettle, jroll, and ricolin as new members! | 14:07 |
| dhellmann | and welcome back mugsie, mnaser, ttx, and zaneb, thank you for continuing to serve | 14:07 |
| mnaser | \o/ | 14:07 |
| asettle | :D | 14:07 |
| zaneb | and thanks also bauzas and flwang | 14:07 |
| asettle | Thanks pal | 14:07 |
| ricolin | dhellmann, thanks! happy to be here | 14:07 |
| dhellmann | yes, good point, zaneb | 14:07 |
| bauzas | heh was a pleasure to run | 14:07 |
| dims | welcome to the new tc members! | 14:07 |
| ttx | \o/ | 14:07 |
| lbragstad | welcome :) | 14:07 |
| evrardjp | welcome | 14:08 |
| evrardjp | and thanks everyone | 14:08 |
| bauzas | and congrats to the new elected members one more time :) | 14:08 |
| asettle | Thank you all :) | 14:08 |
| ttx | bauzas: next time let me know you'll run ni advance, so that I can safely skip! | 14:08 |
| dhellmann | #topic new chair for train | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | As I mentioned last month, I will stepping down as chair. | 14:09 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "new chair for train (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:09 | |
| bauzas | I'm not sure to run again but i note ;) | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | We have mnaser's self-nomination to act as chair. | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | I would like to have the chair either selected or the voting started by the end of today. | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | If anyone else wants to run, now is the time to announce it. | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | If we have no other candidates, we can approve mnaser during the meeting. | 14:09 |
| dhellmann | ok, everyone please go cast a rollcall vote on that application | 14:10 |
| dhellmann | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/641405/1 | 14:10 |
| evrardjp | hesitating to do a bad joke about furniture right now. | 14:10 |
| *** dtantsur|bbl is now known as dtantsur | 14:10 | |
| ttx | evrardjp: there is no bad time for a furniture joke | 14:10 |
| asettle | evrardjp, don't leave us hanging man | 14:12 |
| ricolin | good, now I'm waiting for that joke haha | 14:12 |
| * bauzas won't say anything about Belgian jokes | 14:13 | |
| dhellmann | looking for jroll and evrardjp to cast their votes... | 14:13 |
| * jroll just returned, sorry | 14:13 | |
| evrardjp | still thinking :) | 14:13 |
| jroll | +1'd | 14:14 |
| ttx | evrardjp: I think your launch window just closed | 14:14 |
| dhellmann | ok, there we go | 14:16 |
| dhellmann | thank you, mnaser, for volunteering to chair | 14:16 |
| gmann | thanks mnaser | 14:16 |
| fungi | thanks a ton mnaser! | 14:16 |
| evrardjp | congratulations mnaser | 14:17 |
| dhellmann | I'll finish out this meeting, and then mnaser will pick up duties from there | 14:17 |
| asettle | Yay mnaser | 14:17 |
| ttx | congrats mnaser | 14:17 |
| mnaser | thank you all, look forward to serving as chair for the upcoming session | 14:17 |
| ricolin | mnaser, congrats | 14:17 |
| fungi | or condolences ;) | 14:17 |
| mugsie | mnaser: RIP any free time you may have had left :) | 14:17 |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 14:17 | |
| mugsie | but thanks for stepping up | 14:17 |
| lbragstad | thanks mnaser! | 14:17 |
| asettle | I expect big things mnaser | 14:18 |
| mnaser | :) | 14:18 |
| ttx | mugsie: he did not have nay free time left already, so nothing lost | 14:18 |
| ttx | any* | 14:18 |
| dhellmann | indeed | 14:19 |
| * dhellmann thought ttx was working on his 18th century english accent | 14:19 | |
| dhellmann | ok, let's start with old business | 14:19 |
| dhellmann | #topic project team evaluations based on technical vision | 14:19 |
| ttx | aye aye sir | 14:19 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "project team evaluations based on technical vision (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:19 | |
| dhellmann | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/001417.html | 14:19 |
| dhellmann | last month cdent took the action to "republish the projects review vision notion" | 14:19 |
| dhellmann | is there anything new to report this month? | 14:19 |
| cdent | there was a lot of discusson in email, (on the new thread), but not much actionable | 14:20 |
| dhellmann | I think TheJulia was also working on this? | 14:20 |
| dhellmann | ok. do we have a next step to record, is this an ongoing thing, or is it "done"? | 14:21 |
| TheJulia | I have noticed some projects have taken to drafting such documents | 14:21 |
| cdent | #link feb thread on that http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002524.html | 14:21 |
| dhellmann | oh, thanks, I linked to the old thread there | 14:21 |
| TheJulia | But only in passing, I simply have not had time to look. | 14:21 |
| dhellmann | should we carry it over to next month and check in again? | 14:21 |
| evrardjp | I have asked some projects I am involved in to react on this, but didn't actively query for feedback every week. I probably should | 14:21 |
| zaneb | I have been meaning to review/comment on stuff that has come up, but the elections, travel &c. sucked up all of the time I would have had to do that | 14:22 |
| dhellmann | perhaps someone else wants to volunteer to help with this? | 14:22 |
| evrardjp | carry on to next month? | 14:22 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: sounds reasonable unless someone else wants to take a look across the community. Maybe it would be a good thing to check for with health assessments | 14:22 |
| evrardjp | TheJulia: ++ | 14:22 |
| evrardjp | TheJulia: I think it would be wise as an additional thing to query | 14:23 |
| fungi | yeah, i'm good with the idea that we got the ball rolling down hill and the rest of the community is picking it up | 14:23 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : sorry, carry the agenda item over to the next meeting and discuss it again | 14:23 |
| gmann | TheJulia: good idea about adding it in health check | 14:23 |
| fungi | it makes for a good touchpoint in health checks and as a guiding document when evaluating fit for new projects | 14:23 |
| TheJulia | Yeah, another project just mentioned that they had just uploaded theirs into review, so seems like the ball is rolling | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: sorry, I meant I was okay with it... :p | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | but not with 100% certainty | 14:23 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : ah, sorry, I thought my idiom wasn't clear | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | yup, got it afterwards :p | 14:24 |
| fungi | i don't think the tc really has any further actions to take on it unless the community brings them to us in the form of edits or future discussions? | 14:24 |
| evrardjp | fungi: true | 14:24 |
| jroll | fungi: agree, I think all we can do is encourage folks to do it | 14:25 |
| TheJulia | I concur | 14:25 |
| fungi | it seems like they're starting to encourage each other to do it at this point | 14:25 |
| fungi | so smells like success to me | 14:25 |
| mnaser | i think it would be good for someone to compile a list of the projects that have done it | 14:25 |
| jroll | maybe worth tracking, but not sure it needs formal follow-up. I guess quick reviews of the uptake for another month or two doesn't hurt, though | 14:25 |
| mnaser | perhaps slot in somewhere inside openstack/governance to link out to those documents/reviews generated? | 14:26 |
| dhellmann | oh, interesting, yeah | 14:26 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: collaborative edit on etherpad or something? | 14:26 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: oh good idea there, better than etherpad | 14:26 |
| asettle | If a formal follow-up is required, nothing to say it can't be an in person discussion point at the forum. | 14:26 |
| mugsie | I like that idea | 14:26 |
| evrardjp | mugsie: which one? | 14:26 |
| cmurphy | might be worth a reminder email, i feel like it would have gone in one ear and out the other if i wasn't so much following the tc activity | 14:26 |
| mnaser | etherpad might be hard to find and navigate. i think slotting it somewhere in the governance repo might be useful so that other projects that want to write up their own can see how others have done it | 14:26 |
| mugsie | links off the o.o/goverance | 14:27 |
| TheJulia | fungi: that is a good observation, I do agree. | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | cmurphy : good point | 14:27 |
| evrardjp | cmurphy: I think that's what indeed happened | 14:27 |
| asettle | +1 | 14:27 |
| jroll | cmurphy: +1 | 14:27 |
| jroll | are we just encouraging teams to do this, or requiring? | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | ok, so it sounds like we want a reminder email and to compile links to existing work. who wants to volunteer to do that? | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | encouraging | 14:27 |
| * jroll assumes the former | 14:27 | |
| jroll | ok, thanks | 14:27 |
| * dhellmann wonders where all of the active "go getters" who just ran in the election are when it comes time to volunteer | 14:28 | |
| mnaser | i think we have two action items: slot in a spot in openstack/governance to add them, and use the review that adds it in there to say "hey, thanks projects who did this, we've added your to this document, and for projects that haven't done it, you've got some examples" | 14:28 |
| fungi | and add to the forum ideas pad if it's not there already (thanks asettle!) | 14:28 |
| gmann | adding the forum sessions and explain/remind teams why and what they should do | 14:28 |
| gmann | yeah | 14:28 |
| asettle | fungi, gmann - writing up a short thing now | 14:28 |
| gmann | thanks | 14:28 |
| fungi | you rock | 14:28 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: I, for one, am trying to avoid getting to involved in this one for fear that the vision will be seen as just my thing | 14:29 |
| mnaser | so asettle is going to write the reminder | 14:29 |
| jroll | asettle: thanks! | 14:29 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : that's reasonable | 14:29 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: in teams.py for example? | 14:29 |
| asettle | Hey yo what | 14:29 |
| mnaser | :P | 14:29 |
| asettle | "join the TC" they said | 14:29 |
| fungi | so for adding to governance we likely need an externalized discussion on where to extend the data model (please not in-meeting) | 14:29 |
| TheJulia | lol | 14:29 |
| asettle | "you won't be bullied into writing emails" they said | 14:29 |
| mnaser | evrardjp: the details are to be discussed, we just want to find someone to own that action | 14:29 |
| dhellmann | fungi : or we could just link from the vision page itself | 14:29 |
| jroll | I'm happy to help with this, but am traveling next week so it'll be the following week at the earliest | 14:29 |
| TheJulia | asettle: "it will be fun" they said ?:) | 14:30 |
| asettle | ^^ ditto, I'm afraid. I'm off 10 - 18 for SUSE | 14:30 |
| evrardjp | jroll: welcome to the club | 14:30 |
| fungi | dhellmann: hah, i said please not in meeting! (that gets us yet another different place we list arbitrary projects/deliverables) | 14:30 |
| asettle | TheJulia, you asking who said that or why I'm already making those comments? :p | 14:30 |
| dhellmann | ok, I think we have a couple of volunteers then. I'll leave it for mnaser to follow up with asettle and jroll on this | 14:30 |
| asettle | Cool | 14:30 |
| TheJulia | asettle: no, more remarking similar discussions | 14:30 |
| jroll | wfm, thanks in advance for the reminder mnaser :P | 14:30 |
| dhellmann | anything else before we move on? | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | #action mnaser follow up with asettle and jroll on reminder and placement of links for vision alignment docs | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | #topic defining the role of the TC | 14:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "defining the role of the TC (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:31 | |
| dhellmann | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Technical_Committee_Tracker#Next_steps_in_TC_Vision_.2F_defining_role_of_the_TC | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | last month we talked about syncing with zaneb when he returned from the volcano | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | and that we needed to do that before settling on next steps | 14:31 |
| ttx | ohai | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | ttx, TheJulia, cdent, do you have an update on this? | 14:31 |
| ttx | We merged a small change iirc around the wording for technical direction | 14:32 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add Mohammed Naser nomination as chair https://review.openstack.org/641405 | 14:32 |
| dhellmann | ah, yes, we did | 14:32 |
| cdent | good change | 14:32 |
| zaneb | I feel like we've had some good discussions on the ML about this over the course of the election | 14:32 |
| cdent | #link giant thread: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/001711.html | 14:32 |
| ttx | which was the only major missing point expressed | 14:32 |
| cdent | and the election discussion was _very_ good | 14:32 |
| fungi | i blame cdent for the election discussion | 14:33 |
| ttx | cdent: would you say other changes are needed to capture that discussion? | 14:33 |
| * cdent accepts that blame | 14:33 | |
| ttx | I felt like it reinforced the current wording more than it objected to it | 14:33 |
| cdent | not at this stage, no, but I'm expecting a lot from the newly elected people :) | 14:33 |
| * cdent accepts the blame for setting high expectations | 14:33 | |
| ttx | Now is a good moment to re-explain that it is meant as a living document | 14:33 |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 14:34 | |
| ttx | basically, our role can evolve or be precised. | 14:34 |
| dhellmann | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/role-of-the-tc.html | 14:34 |
| * jroll needs to read back through that doc and the ML discussion | 14:35 | |
| ttx | BUT at this point I'd focus on doing a better job at the described role, rather than necessarily in evolving it | 14:35 |
| dhellmann | it sounds like this is an ongoing discussion, but can come off of the tracker for now, then? | 14:35 |
| ttx | "Defining global technical goals" for example is not somethign we excel at | 14:35 |
| ttx | while it is part of our role | 14:35 |
| ttx | which is why I followed-up with a Forum session proposal | 14:35 |
| dhellmann | yes, I agree there | 14:35 |
| ttx | I'm not very inspired today and time is running out, so feel free to evolve the proposal in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DEN-Train-TC-brainstorming | 14:37 |
| dhellmann | so, next steps are the forum session? | 14:37 |
| dhellmann | or is it safe to remove this from the tracker? | 14:37 |
| ttx | I'd say next step forum session | 14:37 |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:37 |
| ttx | actually... | 14:37 |
| mugsie | well, it is a different thing to defining the role | 14:37 |
| mnaser | ttx, diablo_rojo: fyi, from a foundation/organization pov .. it could be nice if we somehow could be slotted a seperate time for our sessions so PTLs can easily attend. | 14:38 |
| ttx | I would close the "define role" task and open a new "how to drive technical change" one? | 14:38 |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:38 |
| mnaser | our = TC | 14:38 |
| mugsie | it is work on how we do the thing we said we are supposed to do effectvily | 14:38 |
| jroll | ttx++ | 14:38 |
| evrardjp | +1 on mnaser | 14:38 |
| dhellmann | #action ttx close the role defining task and create a "driving technical change" task | 14:38 |
| ttx | The role is defined, the task is more on how to do a better job at one of the facets of our role | 14:38 |
| evrardjp | agreed with ttx too | 14:38 |
| zaneb | +1 | 14:39 |
| ricolin | +1 on that | 14:39 |
| dhellmann | do we have a second volunteer to help ttx with that forum session? | 14:39 |
| fungi | having 0% overlap with other forum sessions is probably not achievable. ptls are going to need to delegate folks to attend one or the other in some cases | 14:39 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: help how so? moderate? | 14:39 |
| fungi | we basically have a total of 2.5 days for forum sessions | 14:39 |
| dhellmann | let's stay on topic please | 14:39 |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : yes, plan and moderate | 14:39 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: I can help | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | thanks zaneb | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | #undo | 14:40 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #action ttx close the role defining task and create a "driving technical change" task | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | #action ttx and zaneb close the role defining task and create a "driving technical change" task | 14:40 |
| TheJulia | I was going to say that I'm likely a risk to try and commit to help ttx as I'm already over-committed. | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | #undo | 14:40 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #action ttx and zaneb close the role defining task and create a "driving technical change" task | 14:40 |
| ttx | zaneb: I'll do the task update dance | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #action ttx and zaneb close the role defining task and create a "driving technical change" task and forum session | 14:41 |
| * dhellmann will get it right eventually | 14:41 | |
| dhellmann | ok, we have a few more topics to cover | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #topic keeping up with python 3 releases | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | stand by for paste bomb | 14:41 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "keeping up with python 3 releases (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:41 | |
| zaneb | ttx: ack, thanks | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | we had several tasks for this last month | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #info gmann raise the topic of porting legacy jobs to bionic on the mailing list | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #info fungi to propose flag day for proposing moving centrally managed jobs to bionic | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #info fungi propose a default node flag day to switch to ubuntu bionic | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | #info TheJulia investigate PTI updates for Train | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | is there anything else to be done for either stein or train? | 14:41 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: we only need to update the page to say it is the same for train AFAIK. I looked everything up during the last meeting and haven't had time to actually put the patch in | 14:41 |
| zaneb | there's a *lot* of confusion around Stein because we didn't announce anything at the start of the cycle | 14:41 |
| zaneb | I think we really need to come up with some sort of statement on what to do | 14:42 |
| zaneb | even if it's "you're on your own until Train opens" | 14:42 |
| TheJulia | s/same for train/same as stein as for train/ | 14:42 |
| dhellmann | we're getting very close to the cut-off deadline for the release, so I agree we should clarify | 14:43 |
| dhellmann | who wants to take the lead on resolving the stein question? | 14:43 |
| dhellmann | (we'll talk train next) | 14:43 |
| zaneb | I think we actually need to talk Train first, and work back | 14:43 |
| * dhellmann feels his chair powers waning | 14:43 | |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:44 |
| evrardjp | zaneb: please clarify? | 14:44 |
| TheJulia | zaneb: yes, clarity ++ | 14:44 |
| asettle | ^ | 14:44 |
| mnaser | i think those best placed to take an action moving forward are those who have been working on this topic | 14:44 |
| TheJulia | yes, but it is clear we have differing expecatations and understandings | 14:44 |
| zaneb | like, if we know what it's going to look like for Train, then it's pretty easy to tell people where we're heading and therefore what they should do right now | 14:44 |
| gmann | you mean to consolidate the items we are doing in stein as overall or as python3 work | 14:44 |
| TheJulia | so we need to resolve that before we move off the topic, otherwise we risk the same thing happening in the next meeting | 14:44 |
| dhellmann | that makes sense | 14:45 |
| mnaser | should we call for an ad-hoc meeting to _discuss_ the python3 issue? | 14:45 |
| evrardjp | fine for me mnaser | 14:45 |
| zaneb | right now we don't know if the Bionic migration will get completed before Train opens, so we don't know what will fall out of the formula in the resolution | 14:45 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : that works for me, do you want to set that up? | 14:45 |
| TheJulia | zaneb: but did we not do that with the PTI and the documentation related to it? | 14:45 |
| *** mriedem_afk is now known as mriedem | 14:46 | |
| mnaser | yes, i can set it up. i think this is something we need to flush out asap. can i get some times that work for those that were involved in this? | 14:46 |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:46 |
| dhellmann | #action mnaser to set up a meeting to discuss the python 3 transition plans for stein and train | 14:46 |
| gmann | +1 on ad-hoc meeting | 14:46 |
| fungi | i'm free at 1700z today | 14:46 |
| zaneb | if we assume that gmann will be successful in getting everyone migrated to Bionic, then we can announce the release goal for Train ~now | 14:46 |
| dhellmann | we have 3 more topics, so let's do the planning in office hours | 14:47 |
| dhellmann | #topic Train cycle goals selection update | 14:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Train cycle goals selection update (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:47 | |
| dhellmann | lbragstad and evrardjp, how is that process going? | 14:47 |
| lbragstad | at this point, we have two goals in review making it easier for us to use the normal review flow with Gerrit | 14:47 |
| lbragstad | evrardjp and I sent a note to the mailing list summarizing next steps | 14:47 |
| lbragstad | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003549.html | 14:47 |
| lbragstad | and it is generating discussion | 14:48 |
| dhellmann | it looks like we really only have 2 contenders for train, then? | 14:48 |
| lbragstad | correct | 14:48 |
| lbragstad | at least up to this point | 14:48 |
| dhellmann | with the possibility of the platform upgrade item from the last topic | 14:48 |
| dhellmann | maybe that's a third | 14:48 |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:48 |
| lbragstad | fwiw - those two goals were the ones with the most pre-work done | 14:48 |
| dhellmann | #action tc-members review candidate goals and provide feedback | 14:49 |
| mnaser | do we have reviews that we want to link to? | 14:49 |
| mnaser | or a topic, or something to point to | 14:49 |
| dhellmann | #link project deletion goal proposal https://review.openstack.org/639010 | 14:49 |
| dhellmann | #link openstack client goal proposal https://review.openstack.org/639376 | 14:50 |
| lbragstad | ++ thanks dhellmann | 14:50 |
| dhellmann | lbragstad , evrardjp : do you have anything else on this topic? | 14:50 |
| mnaser | do we also have an ideal timeline to have this merged by? | 14:50 |
| lbragstad | we sent the timeline in a previous email about the goal selection process for train | 14:51 |
| lbragstad | but let me find the date | 14:51 |
| ttx | I feel like both had valid objections posted on them already that need to generate another patchset | 14:51 |
| dhellmann | lbragstad , evrardjp : perhaps it would be good to remind the goal champions of those timelines | 14:51 |
| lbragstad | mnaser we'd like to have the goals merged, if possible, by the end of this month | 14:51 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: fair | 14:51 |
| mnaser | ok, great, will keep in mind. thanks | 14:52 |
| lbragstad | that gives teams 4 weeks to work the goals into their PTG schedules | 14:52 |
| dhellmann | #action lbragstad and evrardjp to remind champions for proposed goals of the approval deadlines | 14:52 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser follow-up with progress of goal merging in 2 weeks | 14:52 |
| lbragstad | the last thing we want is to merge something *right* before we're all in denver and not be able to leverage face-to-face time | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | remember that having a goal approved by the end of the month needs to include the time that patch needs to sit open for comments | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | ok, good | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | yeah, I think we wouldn't do that | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | in our last few minutes... | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | #topic forum planning | 14:53 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "forum planning (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:53 | |
| dhellmann | gmann has started collecting ideas for forum sessions we need to ensure happen | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DEN-Train-TC-brainstorming | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | who is planning to attend? | 14:53 |
| dhellmann | remember the joint leadership meeting is the sunday before the summit | 14:53 |
| smcginnis | o/ | 14:53 |
| mugsie | o/ | 14:53 |
| asettle | o/ | 14:53 |
| zaneb | o/ | 14:53 |
| TheJulia | o/ | 14:53 |
| lbragstad | o/ | 14:53 |
| jroll | I won't be at the summit, unfortunately :( | 14:53 |
| ricolin | o/ | 14:53 |
| ttx | o/ | 14:54 |
| gmann | o/ | 14:54 |
| dhellmann | #link board meeting schedule https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation#OpenStack_Board_of_Director_Meetings | 14:54 |
| fungi | i'll be there | 14:54 |
| dhellmann | o/ | 14:54 |
| evrardjp | Will be there | 14:54 |
| dhellmann | jroll :-( | 14:54 |
| gmann | yeah we have good amount of forum ideas. deadline is 10th which is sunday so i will say we propose or give feedback on existing topic by today and start proposing on site by tomorrow. | 14:54 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: is it morning BoD, afternoon Joint meeting? | 14:54 |
| mugsie | jroll: :'( | 14:54 |
| dhellmann | mugsie: I don't have a schedule yet | 14:55 |
| mugsie | gmann: sounds like a good timeline | 14:55 |
| dhellmann | I'm sure Alan will share that with mnaser as soon as it is available | 14:55 |
| smcginnis | Likely something like that schedule based on past ones. | 14:55 |
| dhellmann | pro tip: set a watch on that foundation page in the wiki for notifications of updates | 14:55 |
| mnaser | afaik it's a full day type of thing, but no hard schedule yet | 14:55 |
| *** Bhujay has quit IRC | 14:56 | |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: thanks for the tip | 14:56 |
| dhellmann | gmann : ok, that's important, if we need to be giving the feedback today | 14:56 |
| gmann | i will remind moderators (or ask for moderators if any topic missing ) to do that tomorrow. | 14:56 |
| dhellmann | #action tc-members review forum proposals today/tomorrow in time to meet the selection deadline | 14:57 |
| mnaser | small note | 14:57 |
| mnaser | has anyone booked travel yet, by the way? would people be open to coming a day before (say, saturday) to have something similar to what we did last time in denver? | 14:57 |
| gmann | one topic is "U goal discussion" as PTG and summit merged so we should discuss in this summit ? | 14:57 |
| gmann | otherwise next physical meetup will be around start of U cycle | 14:57 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : I've booked my flight, but could probably change it | 14:57 |
| smcginnis | I plan on arriving Saturday. | 14:57 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: booked my flight, can't change it. | 14:57 |
| dhellmann | although that's going to make for a *very* long week | 14:57 |
| mugsie | mnaser: I would be | 14:57 |
| lbragstad | mnaser i'll be in sometime on saturday | 14:57 |
| evrardjp | I arrive Saturday afternoon | 14:58 |
| gmann | mnaser: i will be there on sat but for OUI training | 14:58 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: I booked my flight and could also possibly change if needed, I think I'm already arriving on saturday and I'm also in boston the week following :\ | 14:58 |
| fungi | i haven't booked yet but intend to get in on saturday | 14:58 |
| zaneb | I'll be there early and likely have time on Sat afternoon/evening | 14:58 |
| mnaser | alright, well, i'll bring up an ML thread and we can discuss options, we would need to involve foundation staff for logistics | 14:58 |
| mnaser | sat might not even be possibly logistically | 14:58 |
| asettle | mnaser, haven't booked but would do the Saturday anyway I'd say. Jet lag + Alex = No | 14:58 |
| mnaser | but i assume folks are interested in something like that, right? | 14:58 |
| mugsie | yeah, I think the last one in DEN was useful | 14:58 |
| TheJulia | there is no rule saying we can't concur someplace with enough room to chat, it just might not be a meeting roomm. | 14:58 |
| dhellmann | perhaps we could at least meet for a long dinner on saturday? | 14:59 |
| mugsie | TheJulia: ++ | 14:59 |
| dhellmann | a dinner worked well in barcelona | 14:59 |
| evrardjp | sounds like a good idea. | 14:59 |
| asettle | +1 to that | 14:59 |
| zaneb | +1 | 14:59 |
| TheJulia | A dinner oriented meeting does seem like a much better idea | 14:59 |
| * dhellmann lands at 7:00 PM local time and will be hungry | 14:59 | |
| mnaser | cool. i'll bring this to ml / office hours | 14:59 |
| ricolin | +1 | 14:59 |
| * dhellmann may already be hungry | 14:59 | |
| mugsie | yeah, depending on how flights work out going west | 14:59 |
| dhellmann | ok, one more quick item | 15:00 |
| mnaser | bunch of hangry TC members | 15:00 |
| mnaser | what could go wrong | 15:00 |
| mnaser | but go on | 15:00 |
| ricolin | I will do the aquarium diving thing on saturday, but that's not conflict with dinner for sure | 15:00 |
| dhellmann | #topic OIP review process | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OIP review process (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:00 | |
| dhellmann | 2 days ago the board approved the Open Infrastructure Project acceptance criteria/process | 15:00 |
| dhellmann | part of the process includes consulting with leadership of existing projects, including the TC | 15:00 |
| dhellmann | jbryce has asked us to think about how we would want that consultation step to work | 15:00 |
| dhellmann | I don't think we need to give an answer right this second, but please spend some time thinking about it | 15:00 |
| dhellmann | #action tc-members think about a process for handling consultations on OIP applications | 15:00 |
| * mnaser will engage with osf staff to how we can do this best | 15:00 | |
| dhellmann | I know many people have many opinions on this one, so I look forward to the future discussion | 15:01 |
| dhellmann | #topic next meeting | 15:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "next meeting (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:01 | |
| dhellmann | #info the next TC meeting will be 4 April 2019 1400 UTC in #openstack-tc | 15:01 |
| dhellmann | If you have suggestions for topics for the next meeting, please add them to the wiki at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda_Suggestions | 15:01 |
| mugsie | we also need to look out for the OIP execustive session review thread | 15:01 |
| mugsie | executive* | 15:01 |
| dhellmann | Thank you, everyone! I have enjoyed serving as chair for the last 2 terms and I look forward to continuing to serve as a TC member through Train. | 15:01 |
| lbragstad | dhellmann i'd like to say thanks for the outstanding job you've done as the TC chair | 15:02 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: thanks for serving | 15:02 |
| mnaser | indeed, thanks once again | 15:02 |
| ttx | best chair ever! | 15:02 |
| jroll | ++ | 15:02 |
| fungi | thanks dhellmann! | 15:02 |
| bauzas | thanks dhellmann | 15:02 |
| zaneb | much appreciated dhellmann | 15:02 |
| asettle | Thank you dhellmann !!! | 15:02 |
| TheJulia | thanks dhellmann | 15:02 |
| evrardjp | thanks dhellmann | 15:02 |
| gmann | dhellmann: thanks. great serve as chair with great leadership. | 15:02 |
| ricolin | thanks dhellmann! I think you doing a super great job | 15:02 |
| dhellmann | thank you all very much, that means a lot | 15:03 |
| dhellmann | and we're just a tiny bit over time here, so let's... | 15:03 |
| dhellmann | #endmeeting | 15:03 |
| *** 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/" | 15:03 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Mar 7 15:03:17 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:03 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-03-07-14.04.html | 15:03 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-03-07-14.04.txt | 15:03 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-03-07-14.04.log.html | 15:03 |
| fungi | and now we take you to our office hour, already in progress | 15:03 |
| ttx | I have an extra topic but can discuss in office hour | 15:04 |
| fungi | dhellmann: on the openstack vision project reviews, i'm worried that sticking links for them somewhere other than reference/projects.yaml will mean yet one more place we have a partial duplicate list of projects | 15:04 |
| ttx | We have a "Meta SIG" that is tasked with doing adminsitrative approval of SIGs and furthering their adoption | 15:05 |
| ttx | The governance of that is that we have one TC and one UC member as co-chairs | 15:05 |
| ttx | If they ever disagree, we ask the Executive director of the Foundation to cast the deciding vote | 15:05 |
| ttx | (but then, we never disagree) | 15:06 |
| fungi | has the uc delegate been updated since the turnover there? | 15:06 |
| ttx | I did fill at role until now. I'm happy to continue if we have no volunteer, but I'am also happy to rotate if anyone else is interested! | 15:06 |
| ttx | fungi: in progress | 15:06 |
| mugsie | I saw something in the uc meeting logs ... let me look | 15:06 |
| ttx | They should decide it at their next meeting | 15:06 |
| ttx | if not done already | 15:06 |
| ttx | I know ricolin feels strongly about SIGs for example | 15:07 |
| ricolin | I am! | 15:07 |
| ttx | so if you want the role, or have questions about it, just let me know | 15:07 |
| ttx | Reference: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180319-sig-governance.html | 15:08 |
| ricolin | ttx I'm more than happy to help on this task for sure | 15:08 |
| mugsie | I think Matt stepped into the meta sig role from the UC (looking at logs) | 15:10 |
| ttx | mnaser: how do you want to proceed for that decision ? Just switch to ricolin and be done with it, or anything more formal? | 15:10 |
| mugsie | http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/uc/2019/uc.2019-03-04-16.00.log.html#l-45 was how the UC did it :) | 15:11 |
| fungi | on the topic of the default node switch to ubuntu-bionic, i've posted http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003584.html to get feedback on doing it the middle of next week | 15:11 |
| ttx | mnaser: oh, I'll just propose a change to governance-sig updating co-chairs and ask that TC members +1 it. | 15:13 |
| dhellmann | fungi : that's a good point | 15:15 |
| dhellmann | (about the linking thing) | 15:15 |
| gmann | fungi: to be clrear- default node switch will 1. move all base functional job on bionic 2. infra own job ? | 15:15 |
| fungi | gmann: apologies, i'm unable to parse your question(s) | 15:16 |
| * mnaser is just about to get off a call and review buffer | 15:16 | |
| lbragstad | mnaser dhellmann http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003587.html | 15:17 |
| dhellmann | lbragstad : thanks! | 15:17 |
| *** cdent has left #openstack-tc | 15:17 | |
| fungi | gmann: i'm proposing that "we" switch any jobs which aren't specifying a node type explicitly to from ubuntu-xenial to ubuntu-bionic, who will write that change isn't yet decided | 15:18 |
| gmann | fungi: i mean currently we have tox functional jobs and legacy jobs running on xenial . what all these jobs are migrated by default node switch | 15:18 |
| fungi | gmann: if they don't explicitly list ubuntu-xenial as their node type then they would switch. one way to avoid that is to update them to specify ubuntu-xenial if they can't support running on ubuntu-bionic | 15:19 |
| gmann | fungi: does that include legacy base job also? - legacy-dsvm-base | 15:19 |
| fungi | i don't personally think it should include legacy-dsvm-base but it's worth debating | 15:19 |
| gmann | yeah, because I am doing it as part of legacy job migration and with testing patch to projetcs - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/639096/ | 15:20 |
| gmann | most of the legacy jobs are derived from it | 15:20 |
| fungi | for me anything called "legacy" in our job configs is a sign it's a frozen result of migration from zuul v2, unmaintainable and not to be altered further | 15:20 |
| mnaser | ttx: looks like the governance-sig change option seems to make sene | 15:21 |
| gmann | fungi: ok, make sense. | 15:21 |
| mnaser | tc-members: we would like to schedule an ad-hoc meeting regarding python3 to come up with a final decision. how's everyone's schedules looking like, and hopefully involving gmann fungi and TheJulia as they've worked on it a lot | 15:22 |
| fungi | gmann: but as i said, i'm open to discussing it, the infra team just can't offer a lot of help troubleshooting alterations to legacy job definitions | 15:22 |
| fungi | and altering them is at least as likely to result in unintended side-effects owing to their inscrutability | 15:23 |
| mnaser | i think it would be good to have a more structured meeting around an intro of the current state of things, and then a discussion with an end goal and actionable items to follow up on | 15:23 |
| gmann | ok. let's do legacy-dsvm-base as part of https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/legacy-job-bionic and rest all without-nodeset-define job goes into your change | 15:23 |
| mnaser | i think the reason we're not getting a lot of people volunteering to help on this is because maybe they haven't been able to follow it as much | 15:23 |
| asettle | mnaser, unfortunately not great. Sunday I'm off to Nuremberg for teaming for a week and not back until the 18th. I'll be a bit MIA next week, now I mention it out loud. But I can't imgaine my input regarding Python 3 is invaluable. I will read the logs after if we're on IRC. | 15:23 |
| zaneb | mnaser: I am flexible within EST zone | 15:23 |
| fungi | mnaser: i've got a call at 1800-1900z today but am open otherwise | 15:23 |
| mugsie | I am out tmorrow -> tuesday UTC morning, but good other than that | 15:24 |
| openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/governance master: add a note to notify the community when the TC chair changes https://review.openstack.org/641695 | 15:24 |
| evrardjp | out next week | 15:24 |
| mnaser | for those who aren't available soon, do you feel strongly about the topic that you'd like us to cater for your schedule or you're okay delegating the rest of our tc to conclude this? :) | 15:24 |
| mnaser | totally okay if you absolutely need to be there | 15:24 |
| gmann | mnaser: anytime during CST work for me. tough weekend also ok for me :) | 15:25 |
| jroll | mnaser: I don't have strong opinions on the topic, and am fairly open after march 18 to discuss | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : I am happy to advise but trust others to resolve this | 15:25 |
| gmann | *though | 15:25 |
| mugsie | I would like to be there, but if I have to read logs, and follow up on the ML thats fine | 15:25 |
| mnaser | yeah, python3 isn't my expertise, so i'll just mostly defer and coordinate. but i think this has to be done sooner than later | 15:25 |
| evrardjp | like mugsie | 15:25 |
| mnaser | it's stalled a little while :< | 15:25 |
| dhellmann | we might also say that we just didn't get this done in time for stein and decide what makes sense for train | 15:27 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: +1 | 15:28 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: I think that's what we've been saying, but it has led to confusion (although deciding what we're doing for Train may alleviate that somewhat) | 15:28 |
| mnaser | well we need to say "something" at the end of the day :) | 15:29 |
| bauzas | honestly, I said this morning we shouldn't be afraid of having a goal needing more than one cycle | 15:29 |
| bauzas | and py3 is super important | 15:29 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : ok, well, we did clarify the thing about 3.5 and 3.7, right? | 15:29 |
| mnaser | now that i think of it | 15:30 |
| dhellmann | bauzas : this specific topic is about ensuring that we clearly declare which version of python we will use for testing for a given cycle. | 15:30 |
| mnaser | i think having timezones in the list of TC members might be very useful. | 15:30 |
| bauzas | dhellmann: gotcha | 15:30 |
| fungi | mnaser: i dunno, my timezone isn't a clear indicator of my availability. but maybe i just keep strange hours | 15:30 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: sort of. we clarified that 3.5 wouldn't be needed for RHEL 8. but it's still needed until we get off Ubuntu Xenial. and we don't know for sure when that will be | 15:31 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : good idea. we could take that opportunity to turn that file into a yaml file, too, now that we have a library in the repo to serve as a public API for reading the data | 15:31 |
| gmann | i think if we finish the majority of the things it is good. for example: we move all base and most of the jobs to bionic and if something is rally breaking then project can adopt to run that job on xenial as exception. that should not stop us to mark our tasks as complete. | 15:31 |
| mnaser | fungi: we can just mark your timezone as utc :) | 15:31 |
| fungi | hah | 15:31 |
| dhellmann | bauzas : so you're right, but I think it's likely to be easier to settle this question, even though we have to discuss it each cycle. We got away with not doing it for a long time while 2.7 was the only real answer. | 15:31 |
| bauzas | which versions are run for most of the projects jobs ? | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | some mix of 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 | 15:32 |
| fungi | bauzas: it probably depends on how you want to measure that | 15:32 |
| bauzas | for Nova, it's 3.6 | 15:32 |
| bauzas | (and 3.5 IIRC) | 15:32 |
| gmann | bauzas: yeah and 3.7 in-progress | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | we said stein needed to be 2.7 and 3.6 | 15:33 |
| dhellmann | https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/runtimes/stein.html | 15:33 |
| dhellmann | I guess there was a question about 3.5 because not everyone was on 3.6 yet? and that has something to do with the bionic transition? | 15:33 |
| bauzas | what I mean is that what's not tested is not supported | 15:33 |
| dhellmann | yeah, this isn't about support, it's about setting direction to decide what should be tested in the first place | 15:33 |
| fungi | to me it has less to do with the python release and more to do with the platform on which we're testing. the default python3 on our ubuntu-bionic images is 3.6 but it's really "ubuntu bionic python3" not "python 3.6" | 15:34 |
| bauzas | I see | 15:34 |
| dhellmann | so we've said to teams they should be testing 3.6. zaneb pointed out why we might also need to include 3.5, but we have the necessary transition in place, too so maybe not? | 15:34 |
| gmann | mnaser: you want to do quick doodle for checking TZ for py3 ad-hoc meeting ? | 15:34 |
| dhellmann | fungi : that's fair, too, although I'm not sure we want to be trying to track the differences on individual platforms :-/ | 15:35 |
| mnaser | gmann: if you have a few spare secs, wanna do that? i'm just gonna get the TZ info in so we can more easily find times to propose | 15:35 |
| *** Luzi has quit IRC | 15:35 | |
| gmann | mnaser: sure. will do | 15:35 |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-tc | 15:35 | |
| fungi | in much the same way the default python2 on bionic is 2.7.15 (vs xenial's 2.7.12) | 15:35 |
| mnaser | i don't know if folks would even be available today :) | 15:35 |
| gmann | i will include today and tomorrow both | 15:35 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: retrospectively applying the resolution, we need to keep py35 until everybody migrates to Bionic (can remove it for stable/stein if that happens by the release) | 15:36 |
| mnaser | gmann: ++ | 15:36 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : yeah, ok, that seems like a simple enough solution for stein | 15:36 |
| fungi | zaneb: problem is "everybody migrates to bionic" doesn't have a clear definition either | 15:36 |
| zaneb | we also said that py37 is coming and this it wouldn't hurt to add py37 jobs | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | it really seems to me that these transitions, when they happen, need to be treated as a goal and tracked that way | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | or at least tracked, if we use some other process | 15:37 |
| fungi | when do we consider that migration actually done? when all official deliverables' "standard" jobs (and what jobs are "standard" for that matter?) are at least run on bionic? or only run on bionic? | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : let's focus on saying "should" (or "must") for now and get to "may" later | 15:38 |
| zaneb | fungi: yeah. in future we'll ideally have a goal spelled out at the beginning of the cycle and tracked, with a definition of done and what will happen to you if you don't get it done | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | we're doing goal planning right now, so do we want one for this for train? | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | fungi : at least seems reasonable | 15:38 |
| zaneb | yes. for every release from now on really. | 15:38 |
| fungi | in the past at least, we just said "we're switching" and expected everyone to test what they could reasonably in advance and fix what they couldn't test in advance afterward | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | I feel like a flag day change is really the only way to do it for standard jobs. | 15:39 |
| dhellmann | if teams have custom jobs, updating those would be up to them | 15:39 |
| fungi | and if teams pin certain jobs to older images, we don't really know unless they tell us | 15:39 |
| dhellmann | I wonder if we could do something to make master jobs on older images fail automatically | 15:40 |
| dhellmann | "after the 2nd milestone, any job using xenial to test master will fail" | 15:40 |
| dhellmann | the alternative, I guess, would be to not use versioned image names at all. then if something is pinned to "ubuntu" or "centos" it gets updated automatically. although that breaks stable branches. | 15:41 |
| fungi | if all official openstack projects moved to a dedicated zuul tenant we could maube enforce that in the base job for that tenant | 15:42 |
| fungi | but short of that, projects are able to define their own jobs to include or exclude whatever roles they like | 15:42 |
| gmann | mnaser: https://doodle.com/poll/9dpc9zxek5mdsg8p | 15:42 |
| gmann | tc-members please vote for timing of python3 ad-hoc meeting: https://doodle.com/poll/9dpc9zxek5mdsg8p | 15:43 |
| openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/governance master: members: convert to yaml https://review.openstack.org/641700 | 15:47 |
| mnaser | gmann: thats such a neat service | 15:49 |
| mnaser | thanks for putting it together | 15:49 |
| mnaser | looks like we have 6 people in at 4pm est ~5 hours, i'll give it an hour or two more and lock it in unless we have a drastic change | 15:54 |
| gmann | +1 | 15:54 |
| mugsie | 9pm UTC? | 15:54 |
| mnaser | according to my math yes | 15:55 |
| mnaser | gmann: do you want to push out a quick email with the needed tags to the ml? | 15:55 |
| fungi | thanks, adding myself a reminder for 2100z | 15:56 |
| gmann | mnaser: sure. | 15:56 |
| mnaser | i'll confirm the time in an hour or so if we don't have any more changes | 15:56 |
| * mnaser runs off to run errands | 15:57 | |
| * zaneb updates calendar | 15:57 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 15:59 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 16:00 | |
| gmann | http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003594.html | 16:08 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 16:08 | |
| mnaser | thanks gmann | 16:18 |
| gmann | np! | 16:19 |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 16:26 | |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-tc | 16:27 | |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 16:54 | |
| lbragstad | mugsie if i take an initial crack at rewriting #3 on the help most needed list to fit this format (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/637025/) would you be willing to review or correct me? | 16:59 |
| *** dtruong has joined #openstack-tc | 17:03 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| mriedem | jamesmcarthur: what does it take to get a project mentioned in the forum submission tools list of "OpenStack Projects Mentioned"? | 17:08 |
| mriedem | b/c placement isn't in there but it's a separate project now https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/projects/placement.html | 17:08 |
| ttx | in the spirit of using free tools, I'll point out that framadate.org is an open source and openly-hosted Doodle equivalent :) | 17:08 |
| jamesmcarthur | You've come to the right place :) | 17:08 |
| jamesmcarthur | mriedem: I'll take care of adding it for you. | 17:08 |
| mriedem | jamesmcarthur: great thanks | 17:08 |
| jamesmcarthur | mriedem: Happy to help! | 17:09 |
| lbragstad | mnaser feel free to ping me prior to the python3 meeting today | 17:14 |
| *** dtroyer has left #openstack-tc | 17:19 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 17:22 | |
| mriedem | hmm, so thinking out loud about this proposed goal for OSC CLI thingies, | 17:23 |
| mriedem | i'm not sure if it would be useful to have a nova-specific forum session about actually getting some of that work done, or maybe that's just ptg fodder, although we talked about it in denver and nothing came out of it | 17:23 |
| mriedem | i'm sure the forum session would be, "should we do this? yes. who is going to work on it? crickets." | 17:24 |
| bauzas | the problem is about resources | 17:24 |
| bauzas | again and again | 17:24 |
| bauzas | if we have owners, cool cool | 17:24 |
| mriedem | well, part of the problem there is we have no plan | 17:24 |
| bauzas | but maybe a TC goal is a good signal for companies | 17:24 |
| mriedem | companies schmumpanies | 17:24 |
| mriedem | they don't care | 17:25 |
| bauzas | well, https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/compute-api-microversion-gap-in-osc already has notes | 17:25 |
| mriedem | so maybe a session could be, target closing the gaps to 2.25 and assign owners | 17:26 |
| mriedem | and talk through them to see if there are some we actually don't need to do | 17:26 |
| * bauzas nods | 17:28 | |
| fungi | strikes me as more ptg than forum, but i could see it being a little of both | 17:32 |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 17:34 | |
| mriedem | i think i'm looking for people that don't normally show up in the nova room at the ptg | 17:35 |
| mriedem | and i don't want to slot time for it at the ptg again honestly | 17:35 |
| jamesmcarthur | mriedem: Placement is now up on the list of tags | 17:35 |
| mriedem | jamesmcarthur: thanks again | 17:35 |
| jamesmcarthur | np | 17:35 |
| bauzas | fungi: we can discuss on the PTG about what or how work for having OSC supporting some nova microversions, but we also need users at the forum that we don't usually get at the PTG for at least knowing their own PITAs they have when they use OSC | 17:37 |
| bauzas | sorry for PITA, let's say pain points | 17:37 |
| mriedem | i think i'm basically looking for like a slotted time with mordred in the room to just bounce this off of | 17:39 |
| jroll | pita is delicious, no need to apologize for it | 17:39 |
| mriedem | since i know he's dealt with this in shade and the sdk | 17:39 |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| fungi | ahh, yes, user feedback on what to prioritize in closing the feature parity gap does strike me as squarely forum material | 17:42 |
| fungi | getting mordred to wander into an arbitrary room at the ptg, on the other hand, is also not too hard | 17:43 |
| fungi | just have to bait the lure appropriately | 17:43 |
| bauzas | ah, dtroyer isn't in the room now | 17:43 |
| bauzas | mriedem: do you remember what dean was telling about some OSC changes for supporting microversion discovery when we had the sydney forum session ? | 17:43 |
| mugsie | lbragstad: definitly, that would be great - thanks | 17:43 |
| clarkb | fwiw I really like the way shade (or that subset of the sdk now) handles microversions | 17:43 |
| bauzas | no notes were taken from it https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SYD-forum-nova-osc | 17:44 |
| * bauzas won't provide a sad panda gif | 17:44 | |
| clarkb | I think it maps onto the user facing cli well too. Basically don't make the user think about them. Use microversions when the user requests a feature that requires a microversion | 17:44 |
| mriedem | damn where is the openstack-dev archive again? | 17:45 |
| mriedem | google continues to fail me | 17:45 |
| bauzas | yup, users shouldn't care of microversions unless they explicitely ask for it | 17:45 |
| clarkb | mriedem: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/ | 17:45 |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 17:45 | |
| mriedem | thanks | 17:46 |
| bauzas | huhu site:http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/ works with google | 17:46 |
| fungi | yeah, the main downside we've noted with list deletions is that the archives are no longer included in the normal list index. i suggested we could programmatically generate an index of retired list archives by comparing what we have on disk with what's configured in mailman | 17:55 |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 17:58 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 18:01 | |
| openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/governance master: members: convert to yaml https://review.openstack.org/641700 | 18:06 |
| *** zbr|ssbarnea has joined #openstack-tc | 18:11 | |
| *** zbr has quit IRC | 18:13 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 18:19 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 18:20 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 18:24 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 18:29 | |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of documentation owners https://review.openstack.org/641750 | 18:32 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 18:33 | |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of documentation owners https://review.openstack.org/641750 | 18:37 |
| *** mriedem_afk is now known as mriedem | 18:40 | |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of goal champions https://review.openstack.org/641773 | 19:40 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of documentation owners https://review.openstack.org/641784 | 20:03 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of Glance https://review.openstack.org/641784 | 20:03 |
| *** dtroyer has joined #openstack-tc | 20:07 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 20:23 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has joined #openstack-tc | 20:23 | |
| fungi | ptl election update: we've got candidates for 16 out of 63 teams so far (25%) | 20:23 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of Designate https://review.openstack.org/641790 | 20:26 |
| lbragstad | mugsie ^ i shuffled a bunch of bits around and attempted to keep things relatively bite-sized... i likely missed a bunch | 20:26 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of Glance https://review.openstack.org/641784 | 20:28 |
| jroll | business value: users hate remembering IP addresses. operators hate manually updating DNS. :P | 20:28 |
| lbragstad | wfm | 20:28 |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 20:35 | |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 20:42 | |
| fungi | jroll: technically speaking, dns came about so we could stop copying massive /etc/hosts files over uucp nightly | 20:44 |
| fungi | so we *did* have a solution to the remembering ip addresses problem ;) | 20:45 |
| zaneb | business value of designate is that OpenStack can actually address a market where real apps are deployed, and they can be updated with cloud deployment patterns. without it you're deploying toy applications that nobody uses, or you're calling up the IT department every time something changes, or you're not able to make major changes to its infrastructure at all despite running on a 'cloud' platform | 20:46 |
| jroll | heh, fair enough :) | 20:46 |
| mriedem | lbragstad: comment on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/641773/ but lgtm | 20:46 |
| fungi | jroll: rfc 952 and 953 are fun reading | 20:47 |
| fungi | also i was exaggerating with uucp, by then most sites were relying on ftp anyway | 20:47 |
| fungi | and i guess rfc 606 and 608 were the earliest official references but lacked sufficient standardization | 20:50 |
| fungi | "Now that we finally have an official list of host names, it seems about time to put an end to the absurd situation where each site on the network must maintain a different, generally out-of-date, host list for the use of its own operating system or user programs." | 20:51 |
| fungi | though rfc 597 is where an official list of host names is first formally proposed | 20:53 |
| fungi | as distributed in the periodic arpanews publication | 20:54 |
| smcginnis | Too bad there was never a hostfilev6 where everyone could send yearly reminders about how the available unique names would soon be depleted. | 20:55 |
| mnaser | tc-members: our small ad-hoc python3 meeting is happening in 2 minutes (cc lbragstad gmann mugsie zaneb fungi dhellmann -- those who put down times they are available) -- i setup https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/python3-meeting with a quick small agenda | 20:58 |
| mnaser | please feel free to add/remove if necessary | 20:58 |
| fungi | i'm around, thanks for organizing! | 20:58 |
| lbragstad | o/ | 20:59 |
| fungi | smcginnis: i think they had room for 38^24 names, so probably nowhere near running out before dns was invented | 21:00 |
| mnaser | #startmeeting tc-python3 | 21:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Mar 7 21:00:04 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mnaser. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc-python3)" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc_python3' | 21:00 |
| mnaser | #topic rollcall | 21:00 |
| mnaser | o/ | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "rollcall (Meeting topic: tc-python3)" | 21:00 | |
| mnaser | people are excited about python3 | 21:00 |
| mnaser | sweet | 21:00 |
| fungi | i have a feeling the excitement is more about !python3 | 21:01 |
| fungi | er, !python2 | 21:01 |
| mnaser | #topic introduction | 21:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "introduction (Meeting topic: tc-python3)" | 21:01 | |
| mnaser | can someone give us a brief about what's been happening? we all know python3 is going away, but just how far we've gotten, what's gotten done,? | 21:01 |
| zaneb | o/ | 21:02 |
| smcginnis | Someone have the link to dhellmann's tracking page? | 21:02 |
| gmann | o/ | 21:02 |
| mnaser | (and really, why we've needed to have this meeting too, considering i think a lot of tc and community members maybe hasn't been able to follow up as much with this | 21:02 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : do you mean this? https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Python3#Python_3_Status_of_OpenStack_projects | 21:02 |
| smcginnis | dhellmann: Yep, thanks. | 21:02 |
| mnaser | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Python3#Python_3_Status_of_OpenStack_projects | 21:03 |
| zaneb | so I understand it this meeting is about which versions of Python3 to test in Train/Stein | 21:03 |
| dhellmann | that really only tracks test jobs for any version of python 3 | 21:03 |
| mugsie | o/ | 21:03 |
| zaneb | not about which projects have migrated to python 3 | 21:03 |
| mnaser | i'm just trying to make our meeting notes somewhat consumable by a our community | 21:03 |
| zaneb | so, as a reminder we passed a resolution on how we'll make these decisions starting with Train | 21:03 |
| zaneb | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20181024-python-update-process.html | 21:04 |
| zaneb | the answers should fall out of that without us having to apply too many judgement calls | 21:04 |
| fungi | pretty sure we need to test python 2.7.15 and 3.6.something in stein at a minimum. depending on what rhel 8 releases with and what opensuse leap have that may need extending further? | 21:04 |
| fungi | er, s/stein/train/ | 21:04 |
| zaneb | but it does rely on us doing it at the beginning of a cycle and setting up goals and expectations | 21:04 |
| zaneb | we were too late to do that for Stein | 21:05 |
| zaneb | I think in this meeting we should get to the point where we know what we're doing for Train | 21:05 |
| fungi | yeah, basically whatever minor python versions are the default python and python3 for the three platforms we list there | 21:05 |
| gmann | yea, but we at least start from Stein what and how much we can do like latetst distro thing | 21:05 |
| zaneb | and that will help us to provide guidance for what projects should do right now in Stein | 21:05 |
| mnaser | makes sense, so zaneb you're suggesting we come up with something for train, but start working on it in now | 21:06 |
| mnaser | so we don't necessarily ship with that goal, but at least we'll be ready for it by then | 21:06 |
| mugsie | that gives us the time to get things in place, so seems like a solid route forward | 21:07 |
| fungi | retroactively applying stein we need to test 2.7 because that's what ubuntu 18.04 and centos 7 have for default python2, and python 3.6 because that's the default python3 on ubuntu 18.04 (those platforms chosen because they were the latest lts for each distro at the start of the stein cycle) | 21:07 |
| zaneb | we need to start preparing the Train goal now. but also we need to know what it's going to say so that we know what makes sense to do in the meantime before this process kicks in | 21:07 |
| zaneb | fungi: can we please deal with Train first? | 21:07 |
| fungi | sorry, gmann asked to start with stein | 21:07 |
| dhellmann | are we changing distros for train? | 21:08 |
| fungi | after i started with train | 21:08 |
| mnaser | we still need to figure out stein, otherwise, we'll ship something that will be problematic for deployers | 21:08 |
| fungi | but i'm happy to be quiet and let you all decide which you want to talk about first | 21:08 |
| mnaser | gmann: is this why you put the idea of porting legacy jobs to bionic? | 21:08 |
| gmann | yeah, we have half of the jobs testing bionic and half xenial. | 21:08 |
| gmann | yeah | 21:09 |
| zaneb | so there are 3 bullet points in the resolution. let's go through them one at a time for Train | 21:09 |
| zaneb | 1) The latest released version of Python 3 that is available in any distribution | 21:09 |
| zaneb | I submit that this is py37 for Train | 21:09 |
| zaneb | any disagreement? | 21:09 |
| mugsie | not from me | 21:09 |
| fungi | sounds likely unless centos 8 comes about before then and has python 3.8. doubtful | 21:09 |
| zaneb | 2) Each Python 3 version that is the default in any of the PTI distros | 21:10 |
| mnaser | we don't know what distros will be in train | 21:10 |
| mnaser | i don't think we have a centos 8 release date | 21:10 |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| zaneb | let's assume centos 7 | 21:10 |
| mnaser | python3 doesn't exist on centos 7. | 21:11 |
| mugsie | mnaser: we pick them in advance, so if centos 8 is not released before the start of train, we stick to 7.5 | 21:11 |
| fungi | right, i think the point is we don't know *now* what will be available at the start of the train cycle | 21:11 |
| zaneb | I don't think it actually makes any difference, because we've said we support py27 until U, and py36 is the default on both centos8 and ubuntu bionic | 21:11 |
| mugsie | thats easy then | 21:11 |
| mugsie | unless leap is different? | 21:12 |
| zaneb | So I believe this is py27 and py36 | 21:12 |
| fungi | good point, we can deduce since we know it won't be 3.5 in centos 8 and 3.8 isn't due to release until october | 21:12 |
| zaneb | don't know about leap, but I assume it's py36 | 21:12 |
| zaneb | if it's 37, well, we already put that on the list from (1) | 21:12 |
| mnaser | i think rhel 8 preview had a python version | 21:12 |
| mnaser | " In Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, Python 3.6 is the default." | 21:13 |
| mugsie | it is 36 for leap 15 | 21:13 |
| mnaser | centos 8 being a rebuild, will have 3.6 | 21:13 |
| mugsie | so 36 it is | 21:13 |
| fungi | problem solved then | 21:13 |
| mugsie | 3.6* | 21:13 |
| zaneb | ok, so the list so far is py27, py36, py37 (incorporating both (1) & (2)) | 21:13 |
| zaneb | now for the fun one | 21:13 |
| fungi | train=2.7,3.6,3.7 | 21:13 |
| zaneb | 3) Each Python 3 version that was still used in any integration tests at the beginning of the development cycle. | 21:13 |
| zaneb | soooo | 21:13 |
| fungi | this is up for interpretation as i mentioned before | 21:14 |
| zaneb | the plan is to switch everyone to bionic before Train | 21:14 |
| zaneb | in which case it's only py36, and no changes here | 21:14 |
| fungi | i take it to mean any version that can't be updated in integration tests early in the cycle | 21:14 |
| zaneb | if we didn't manage to get everyone to switch then we'd have to add py35 to the list | 21:14 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| zaneb | fungi: "Testing for these versions can be dropped once all integration tests have migrated." | 21:15 |
| mnaser | just to recap so far, does that mean train will have 2.7, 3.6 and 3.7 so far (and potentially 3.5 if we don't get rid of it this cycle?) | 21:15 |
| zaneb | but at the beginning of a cycle, it's based on the status at the beginning of the cycle | 21:15 |
| fungi | yeah, i'm less and less sure it actually specifies a unique limitation on its own | 21:15 |
| zaneb | mnaser: correct | 21:15 |
| mnaser | #topic Decide on py3 targets for Train + Discuss recommendations for Stein | 21:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Decide on py3 targets for Train + Discuss recommendations for Stein (Meeting topic: tc-python3)" | 21:16 | |
| mnaser | (for my sakes later, let's keep going) | 21:16 |
| mugsie | for unit testing | 21:16 |
| mnaser | does this lead us to discussing the potential idea of porting legacy jobs to bionic? | 21:16 |
| fungi | if it can be dropped later in the cycle then it's unclear to me why it matters that we know it was used at the beginning of the cycle | 21:16 |
| zaneb | mnaser: yes, this would be a good point to discuss that | 21:16 |
| mugsie | fungi: i think it is so we have a clear leist | 21:17 |
| *** whoami-rajat has quit IRC | 21:17 | |
| mugsie | list* | 21:17 |
| mugsie | that we then edit when the migration happens | 21:17 |
| mnaser | #topic porting legacy jobs to bionic <gmann> | 21:17 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "porting legacy jobs to bionic <gmann> (Meeting topic: tc-python3)" | 21:17 | |
| mnaser | this seems like a really big leap | 21:17 |
| mnaser | how much do we risk breaking by this | 21:17 |
| mnaser | how different is 3.5 from 3.6 ? | 21:18 |
| fungi | so rephrasing for my benefit, as i'm still quite confused, "if we can't get all official projects integration tested with the versions we said we require in #1 and #2, then we require that all projects also remain tested on the earlier version" | 21:18 |
| gmann | mostly it should be internal script used | 21:18 |
| mnaser | (fwiw, i think consuming less test resources is always nice, rather than us testing a ton of targets) | 21:18 |
| mnaser | so there's value in that. | 21:19 |
| mnaser | are we more concerned that stuff that's not python wuld break under bionic? | 21:19 |
| zaneb | fungi: yes, as long as there are gates running on py35, another project dropping support for py35 could break that gate | 21:19 |
| mugsie | for the start of train, we will unit test with 2.7, 3.6, 3.7 (and 3.5 if the move to nbionic does not happen) | 21:19 |
| gmann | mnaser: yes that is going to be main blocker. | 21:19 |
| fungi | i guess this is to avoid "the trove effect" we saw at the trusty to xenial transition where all other projects had switched to running jobs on xenial and started merging changes which broke trove because it was still testing on trusty (even months after the release) | 21:20 |
| dhellmann | I think we should clarify that "all projects" statement, though | 21:20 |
| dhellmann | I wouldn't want cloudkitty to require nova to keep py35 tests, for example | 21:20 |
| mugsie | yea. the "integration tests" line makes me think of the integrated gate | 21:21 |
| fungi | in effect, at the trusty to xenial switch we accepted that the trove team's lack of resources to get their jobs updated would not hold up other projects dropping support for trusty | 21:21 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : yeah | 21:21 |
| gmann | and we do not have all project cross integration testing so i cannot think of more than 7-8 projects combination | 21:21 |
| zaneb | yeah. we left it up to the goal champions to define if there would be a hard cutover for laggards | 21:21 |
| dhellmann | the integrated gate is 1 job, right? that's the whole point? | 21:21 |
| dhellmann | or at least 1 set of all the same jobs | 21:22 |
| dhellmann | so those projects would all move at one time | 21:22 |
| mugsie | gmann: well - there is more than that if you take jobs outside of the integrated gate | 21:22 |
| gmann | dhellmann: two, tempest-full and grenade but those are used in small number of projects | 21:22 |
| dhellmann | and other projects could lag but we could say that support for the older images would be dropped at some point | 21:22 |
| zaneb | the problem is, we could organise an orderly transition in Train with lots of advance publicity of when things will break and plenty of time to fix. but if we do we have to unit test py35 in Train | 21:22 |
| mugsie | most of the "non core" projects rely on some of the core services | 21:22 |
| fungi | also i think this is once again conflating platforms and python versions. in the trusty-xenial switch it was still python 2.7 on both sides. what changed was the platform not the python version we were running, and what broke trove was other projects dropping support for features of the old platform or starting to rely on features of the new platform | 21:23 |
| zaneb | alternatively, we can try to ram through the change in Stein at the last minute, in which case we get to drop py35 for Train | 21:23 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : I don't think we want to interpret that rule as meaning that if we start out with something we're not allowed to drop it. | 21:23 |
| dhellmann | I think we want to focus on the end state we want for each cycle, not the start state | 21:23 |
| zaneb | I'm actually in favour of the latter fwiw | 21:23 |
| mugsie | we can drop 3.5 unit testing later in the cycle when it is less likey to break prpjects | 21:24 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: we could drop it once the goal was complete (and we did explicitly say that in the resolution) | 21:24 |
| dhellmann | right | 21:24 |
| dhellmann | so if we don't drop 35 during stein, that doesn't mean we can't drop it during train | 21:24 |
| fungi | i think where the start state matters is that we need to be able to give projects fair warning of what we expect them to be running and so we have to decide at the start of the cycle what the target is and thus can't realistically choose a target which won't be available for use until later in te cycle | 21:24 |
| dhellmann | we should just need to declare the intent | 21:24 |
| zaneb | agreed | 21:25 |
| dhellmann | fungi : yes, good point. we can't *add* something late, but we can drop something | 21:25 |
| fungi | precisely | 21:25 |
| dhellmann | if that's not clear in the "rules" we should fix that | 21:25 |
| *** mtreinish has quit IRC | 21:25 | |
| mnaser | fungi: makes a really good point about mixing things | 21:25 |
| zaneb | we couldn't drop it *from the beginning* but we could announce that we had a plan to drop it during the cycle | 21:25 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : sure. we would want to set a reasonable date for it | 21:25 |
| mnaser | give me a break on this, how hard would it be to run a 16.04 image with py36 .. | 21:25 |
| fungi | so for example, if centos 8 is not available officially at the start of the train cycle, we tell them centos 7 is the target for the train release | 21:25 |
| dhellmann | M1, M2, whatever | 21:26 |
| fungi | even if we expect centos 8 to be available later in train | 21:26 |
| mugsie | fungi: yes, thats how I see it | 21:26 |
| *** mtreinish has joined #openstack-tc | 21:26 | |
| dhellmann | fungi : I think that's fair. And we can say that projects could optionally add centos 8 jobs but we wouldn't require it. | 21:26 |
| mugsie | sure, if people want to be proactive, thats great :) | 21:26 |
| mnaser | that way we can split the python version <=> ubuntu platform problem | 21:26 |
| fungi | mnaser: again, what we're testing is not actually "python 3.6 on bionic" it's "the python3 which ships with bionic" so compiling our own or using backports isn't really the same thing | 21:27 |
| * mnaser wishes we lived in a world where "python3.6" and "python3.6 that ships with bionic" was the same thing | 21:27 | |
| mnaser | buuut anyways, we've come up with a lot of ideas. does this mean that for stein we'll try to push projects to drop py36, but not aim to drop it in this cycle? | 21:28 |
| fungi | mnaser: or at least, in the past we made the conscious decision that what we test against is the python interpreter provided by each platform we're targeting, not some ideal python x.y interpreter | 21:28 |
| zaneb | mnaser: I think you mistyped that :) | 21:28 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : not drop 3.6, drop 3.5 | 21:28 |
| fungi | mnaser: for stein i think we push to drop 3.5 | 21:28 |
| mnaser | oh yes | 21:28 |
| mnaser | sorry | 21:28 |
| gmann | yeah 3.5 | 21:28 |
| zaneb | so IMHO, no | 21:28 |
| dhellmann | we could do that, but I'm also content to just say they need to include 3.6 | 21:29 |
| zaneb | at the start of the cycle, all tests were on Xenial, so I think 3.5 was a reasonable target for Stein | 21:29 |
| fungi | bullet #3 if i'm interpreting it correctly is that if we can get projects testing 3.6 (that is, bionic) in time for the stein release then they don't need to be running 3.5 (xenial) come release time and we don't need to support both for stable branch testing | 21:29 |
| fungi | which gets dicey if we want to continue maintaining stable/stein after xenial reaches eol | 21:30 |
| zaneb | if we do manage to move completely to Bionic it would be a close-run thing | 21:30 |
| mnaser | bionic ships 3.6, we listed bionic as a platform, does that mean we need to get projects to add py36 as a target in stein? | 21:30 |
| zaneb | but if we manage it then we could tell projects to drop py35 on stable/stein | 21:30 |
| fungi | at the start of the cycle, bionic was available (well before the start of the cycle even) so mograting to xenial was a given based on our past transitions | 21:30 |
| zaneb | mnaser: we do, and we actually *did* make that a goal for Stein | 21:30 |
| zaneb | so, yay for us :) | 21:31 |
| mnaser | sweet. | 21:31 |
| dhellmann | how close did we come to accomplishing it? that's still in progress, right? | 21:31 |
| fungi | we decided to design-by-committee the transition until it's now nearly too late to pull the trigger and be able to drop xenial testing when we drop stable/rocky | 21:31 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: aren't you the goal champion? ;) | 21:31 |
| *** corvus has joined #openstack-tc | 21:31 | |
| dhellmann | not for this, no | 21:31 |
| gmann | yeah, not all projects has started the legacy jobs - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/legacy-job-bionic | 21:31 |
| dhellmann | oh, well, I guess sort of | 21:31 |
| dhellmann | I wasn't worried about the OS, just the python version | 21:32 |
| zaneb | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/stein/python3-first.html#python-3-6-unit-test-jobs | 21:32 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: ahem https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/stein/python3-first.html#champions | 21:32 |
| dhellmann | I like the idea of dealing with the python version unit tests by having a series-specific name template for those | 21:32 |
| fungi | the "python version" is still a red herring here, but i've just about given up convincing anyone of that | 21:32 |
| dhellmann | zaneb : yeah, like I said, just the python version, not the OS version | 21:33 |
| dhellmann | fungi : I understand, but I'm trying to make the point that I didn't do any work to deal with updating the OS version | 21:33 |
| zaneb | right, that was *not* a goal that we set | 21:33 |
| zaneb | although in retrospect we should have | 21:33 |
| fungi | at least from the "what can we reasonably test" end of things, we lose the ability to test what we intended when the platforms which shipped them cease to receive security updates and bug fixes | 21:34 |
| fungi | so the choice we make here has far more bearing on stable branch lifetimes | 21:34 |
| zaneb | fungi: you're bringing this up w.r.t. the issue of continuing to unit test py35 (on Xenial) in stable/stein? | 21:35 |
| dhellmann | so for train, we need to say "3.6 on bionic" right? and 3.7 somewhere? | 21:35 |
| fungi | zaneb: yes, exactly | 21:35 |
| zaneb | fungi: I think that's fair, but also if it turns out we're still running integration tests on xenial by the time Stein releases, then the unit tests are the least of our problems | 21:36 |
| zaneb | and if we're not we can drop the py35 unit tests | 21:36 |
| fungi | as of the rocky release there was already a newer lts distro available so our maintaining use of the old distro in our ci should die with that stable branch, essentially | 21:36 |
| mnaser | we have a lot of similar colors, but it looks like someone has written some conclusions | 21:38 |
| mnaser | how do we feel about those? | 21:38 |
| zaneb | mnaser: that's me | 21:38 |
| fungi | we're running most integration testing on bionic at this stage, right? it's the "legacy" jobs which are still relying on xenial at this point? | 21:38 |
| gmann | L27 on etherpad- we should be conclusive there. either to complete the migration or keep testing all for old ditro | 21:39 |
| mnaser | gmann: might be the best person to answer that | 21:39 |
| gmann | fungi: correct. only legacy jobs on xenial | 21:39 |
| zaneb | fungi: so I think what you're saying is we should force everyone to migrate from xenial->bionic in stein, even though it's at short notice | 21:39 |
| fungi | where short notice is since the beginning of this cycle, yes | 21:39 |
| mnaser | i hate to say it, but i think it might be a very necessary evil, also, i don't think a lot of projects are going to be much suffering out of it | 21:39 |
| gmann | zaneb: yes. but leaving thing tested in mixed way might cause issue on stein deployment | 21:40 |
| mnaser | most apt packages are still there, and i doubt ubuntu 16 => 18 has had a ton of fundamental cahnges for example | 21:40 |
| zaneb | fungi: not disagreeing with you about the solution, but we didn't give them notice | 21:40 |
| mugsie | mnaser: it depends on the projects | 21:40 |
| fungi | before this go-round, the infra team told everyone "okay there's a new lts, everybody get your stuff in order and move" but this time around we (the tc) got to take responsibility for sending that message | 21:40 |
| mugsie | e.g. trusty -> xenial had a completly new powerdns which broke us badly | 21:40 |
| mnaser | gmann: do we know which projects have not yet migrated? | 21:41 |
| mugsie | but we did warn at the start of the cycle | 21:41 |
| mnaser | mugsie: yeah i can imagine that's a scenario where it might happen | 21:41 |
| zaneb | fungi: right, and we didn't send the message until very recently AFAIK | 21:41 |
| mnaser | the thing is, most people will be doing new deploys on 18.04 | 21:41 |
| * mnaser has done plenty of 18.04 rocky deploys and we do it in OSA CI | 21:41 | |
| gmann | mnaser: almost all the projects use 50% of their gate job as legacy job which means xenial | 21:41 |
| gmann | those jobs are either owned by projects or in infra | 21:41 |
| mnaser | but most projects aren't like designate for example, where there is very strong fundamental base on a system service | 21:42 |
| fungi | zaneb: depends on which message. some of us did say well early and repeatedly over the course of the cycle to get it done | 21:42 |
| fungi | the tc didn't make an official proclamation from on high to get it done because we couldn't agree on the words we wanted to use to plan similar transitions which won't happen for a couple more years | 21:43 |
| mnaser | can we try an experimental job across a few major projects with legacy job running? | 21:43 |
| gmann | for example neutron stadium has lot of testing and seems good there - L64 on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/legacy-job-bionic | 21:43 |
| gmann | mnaser: you mean legacy job running with xenial or bionic ? | 21:43 |
| mnaser | legacy job running bionic | 21:43 |
| fungi | mnaser: the problem there is the "legacy" jobs are basically the one-off project-specific stragglers those various teams haven't gotten around to converting | 21:44 |
| zaneb | fungi: we have a mechanism for co-ordinating changes across the whole project and we didn't use it. you can argue that people shouldn't be surprised, but people *will* be surprised | 21:44 |
| zaneb | (I think we should do it anyway) | 21:44 |
| gmann | yeah so converting legacy base jobs on bionic move most of projects gate to bionic | 21:45 |
| fungi | mnaser: so running one or even a few doesn't tell us much, nor does running them on other projects than the ones for which they were specifically written | 21:45 |
| mugsie | and the people who helped create some of these one of jobs are not always around, which makes migrations harder | 21:45 |
| fungi | yes, i would argue that if your team doesn't understand the jobs it's running, those jobs are a liability and better dropped | 21:45 |
| mugsie | yeap | 21:45 |
| dhellmann | at least if no one is willing to figure them out | 21:45 |
| gmann | today i am trying to move the infra owned legacy job to bionic which run on many projests gate | 21:46 |
| gmann | fungi: +10. | 21:46 |
| mnaser | i'd like to propose and ask if there is anyone opposed to removing xenial this cycle (it's painful yes, but anyone who deson't feel its not the right thing) | 21:46 |
| mnaser | err rather who feels it's not the right thing to do, painful or not | 21:46 |
| dhellmann | what does "remove xenial" mean exactly? | 21:47 |
| fungi | gmann: when yuo say "the infra owned legacy job" you specifically mean the legacy devstack-gate job which other projects are inheriting from? that job itself isn't run directly by any project right? | 21:47 |
| mnaser | change the legacy jobs to use bionic | 21:47 |
| gmann | fungi: these - http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/openstack-zuul-jobs/tree/zuul.d/zuul-legacy-jobs.yaml | 21:48 |
| dhellmann | are the legacy jobs the only ones using xenial still? | 21:48 |
| fungi | gmann: oh, jobs plural. you said "legacy job" so i wasn't sure which one you were referring to | 21:48 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: i think converting those legacy jobs will move a huge portion of our jobs | 21:49 |
| fungi | the infra team has also considered those legacy jobs to be basically frozen in time, as they're nigh inscrutable and so not easy to troubleshoot if something goes sideways | 21:49 |
| gmann | in integration testing yes, legacy jobs are the only one using xenial. | 21:49 |
| gmann | fungi: ohk, sorry for typo . | 21:49 |
| gmann | fungi: yeah I am going to give try and see how they behave. most of them are experimental jobs so should give projects times to fix | 21:50 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : I think it will. I'm trying to understand whether it's important to do it. If those are all 1-off jobs for each project, do they affect our ability to say the projects run on bionic? | 21:50 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: well i'm assuming most of those 1 off jobs inherit some sort of base from 'legacy' jobs | 21:50 |
| fungi | which is why for over a year the infra team has urged other teams to stop running legacy jobs in favor of writing newer jobs, because the time would come when they need to make changes (such as, say, running them on a newer platform) | 21:50 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : ok, I don't know how that works so I don't know if that's a safe assumption | 21:51 |
| mnaser | so i'm operating under the assumption that if we change the 'base' job, projects will just start using a different nodeset | 21:51 |
| mnaser | correct me if im wrong gmann | 21:51 |
| dhellmann | what happens if we ignore the legacy jobs? | 21:51 |
| gmann | mnaser: dhellmann yes, majority of them are inherit from 'legacy-base' and 'legacy-dsvm-base' | 21:51 |
| gmann | and i will say 70% | 21:52 |
| gmann | or even more | 21:52 |
| fungi | there is a legacy-dsvm-base job the inherit from, yes | 21:52 |
| dhellmann | would we have any projects with no testing on bionic at all if we did that? | 21:52 |
| dhellmann | (ignored them) | 21:52 |
| corvus | legacy base is pinned to xenial now: https://opendev.org/openstack-infra/openstack-zuul-jobs/src/branch/master/zuul.d/jobs.yaml#L917-L922 | 21:52 |
| zaneb | all Heat jobs are legacy afaik | 21:52 |
| gmann | dhellmann: they do test bionic also which with all new devstack based jobs zuulv3. integrated-gate | 21:52 |
| dhellmann | those 2 statements from zaneb and gmann are contradictary | 21:53 |
| fungi | corvus: thanks! i was still hunting for that line | 21:53 |
| corvus | oh this is a nice url too: http://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/job/legacy-base | 21:53 |
| gmann | i am not sure if heat run integrated-gate or not. | 21:53 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: 'that' in your question was ambiguous | 21:53 |
| *** edleafe_ has joined #openstack-tc | 21:53 | |
| dhellmann | zaneb : sorry, I followed up with () | 21:53 |
| mnaser | forgive me | 21:54 |
| mnaser | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/573228/ | 21:54 |
| mnaser | i don't see any legacy jobs here? | 21:54 |
| mnaser | unless they've just been renamed | 21:54 |
| zaneb | dhellmann: ah, so you did | 21:54 |
| dhellmann | so if we change the base legacy setting, does that just kick this can further down the road? don't we still have to have teams update those jobs? and don't those jobs also run on stable branches that may not work on bionic? | 21:54 |
| corvus | http://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/job/heat-functional-orig-mysql-lbaasv2 -> http://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/job/heat-functional-devstack-base -> http://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/job/legacy-dsvm-base | 21:55 |
| zaneb | mnaser: renamed https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/heat/tree/.zuul.yaml#n2 | 21:55 |
| gmann | mnaser: many of the legacy jobs are renamed so it is hard to judge by name | 21:55 |
| mnaser | ah tricky, okay, yeah, i just saw the zuul inventory file too | 21:55 |
| dhellmann | IOW, maybe the best long term thing is to say that those legacy jobs "don't count" towards testing and ignore them, upgrade all of the non-legacy jobs ("modern"?) and move on | 21:55 |
| mnaser | so what if we moved legacy jobs to non-voting and set nodeset to bionic | 21:55 |
| gmann | dhellmann: good question. the way i am modifyng the legcy base job is 1. they run on bionic in stein onwards adn 2. keep running on xenial < stei | 21:56 |
| fungi | we do have the job inheritance tree we could use to root them all out, but i favor letting teams be responsible for identifying what jobs they need to deal with whether or not they've chosen to rename them | 21:56 |
| gmann | stein | 21:56 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : what impact will changing those jobs have on stable branches? | 21:56 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: it won't, according to the way gmann has had it setup | 21:56 |
| dhellmann | fungi : indeed | 21:56 |
| gmann | mnaser: what ever fail, move it to n-v is the good idea and project fix then make it v | 21:56 |
| dhellmann | ah, sorry, I missed gmann's response there | 21:56 |
| mnaser | so if a project _desparately_ wants to run legacy jobs, they have to mark it voting explicitly | 21:57 |
| gmann | dhellmann: yeah, stable testing is on xenial | 21:57 |
| mnaser | and if it breaks.. well they have to fix the legacy jobs but at least it won't block their current work | 21:57 |
| dhellmann | ok, so my long-term question still applies. Should we try to fix this, or make them painful and encourage teams to deal with that? | 21:57 |
| mnaser | my opinion is that we should just change the legacy nodeset to bionic and have them all run bionic, if they break, they probably weren't good jobs in the first place | 21:58 |
| mnaser | and the teams can just move those jobs to non voting | 21:58 |
| gmann | dhellmann: it depends . either they migrate that job to zuulv3 which make it on bionic or fix with legacy definition if job is critical | 21:58 |
| zaneb | I'm inclined to agree with mnaser, but I'm not an expert in this area | 21:58 |
| fungi | another alternative to making them non-voting is we let teams decide whether they pin them to xenial on their own if they want to continue running them, and understand that odds are other projects they're testing against may drop xenial support at some point (like what trove experienced when they clung to trusty for months after other projects switched to xenial) | 21:59 |
| mnaser | i'm starting to be more inclined to "you either have to set your jobs to non-voting (why are you running them?) or fix them (might as well as convert to new jobs)" | 21:59 |
| zaneb | fungi: and also that stable/stein will eventually break when infra stops supporting Xenial, right? | 21:59 |
| fungi | legacy-base sets the default node type, but jobs inheriting from it can still override that | 21:59 |
| fungi | zaneb: correct | 22:00 |
| zaneb | that needs to be in the warning | 22:00 |
| gmann | fungi: right so that will be done via audit of project team | 22:00 |
| dhellmann | ok, what's the timing for making that change, given where we are in the cycle? | 22:00 |
| mnaser | btw, xenial doesn't even have packaging for rocky. | 22:00 |
| gmann | i agree with the mnaser idea of making n-v on failed one and leave up to projects | 22:00 |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 22:01 | |
| gmann | fungi: how i do is check the job definition and find any overridden nodeset all the way till base job | 22:01 |
| mnaser | does anyone disagree on us changing default nodeset to bionic? | 22:01 |
| dhellmann | I support changing it | 22:01 |
| lbragstad | same | 22:01 |
| zaneb | +1 | 22:02 |
| * mnaser apologies for infra in advance and hopes that we can help them out with this | 22:02 | |
| gmann | +1 | 22:02 |
| mugsie | +1 | 22:02 |
| mnaser | now the second argument: should we transition jobs to non-voting or voting for legay? | 22:02 |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has quit IRC | 22:03 | |
| mnaser | if we move them to non-voting, they won't fail the gates of downstream users, but they risk merging broken code | 22:03 |
| zaneb | mnaser: I thought we were saying we are leaving that up to projects | 22:03 |
| mnaser | just wanted to get some sort of agreement | 22:03 |
| fungi | gmann: i'm not sure which direction you're talking about. you can check the job browser in zuul to see what nodeset parent jobs of specific jobs set | 22:03 |
| mnaser | we are leaving it to projects = we keep them voing in the base job? | 22:03 |
| mnaser | s/voing/voting/ | 22:03 |
| gmann | if they fail then tell projects that make it n-v to unblock gate of your project or other and fix or leave based on their decision | 22:04 |
| dhellmann | yeah, warn everyone, change the job, let them fix or set to non-voting | 22:04 |
| zaneb | mnaser: yes, and if a project's gate breaks, they can make a job non-voting in their local Zuul config | 22:04 |
| gmann | yeah | 22:04 |
| dhellmann | non-voting or just remove it | 22:04 |
| fungi | we can do it the same day i proposed changing the base default nodeset as well | 22:04 |
| gmann | fungi: yes. that way and checkign job definition if changes are required. | 22:05 |
| mnaser | ok, so legacy jobs will be moved to bionic nodeset and remain voting for master | 22:05 |
| zaneb | fungi: if we put up a test patch for the nodeset change, can projects test it out using Depends-On? they can, right? | 22:05 |
| mnaser | is that accurate? | 22:05 |
| gmann | yeah, initial dadline i set little late (april 1st) but with new way of making n-v it can be early | 22:05 |
| gmann | zaneb: yes, that is how we have started till no | 22:05 |
| gmann | zaneb: project testing that way - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/legacy-job-bionic | 22:06 |
| mnaser | and by doing this, we don't have py35 in train, right? | 22:06 |
| fungi | zaneb: yes, depends-on changes to the openstack-zuul-jobs repository will work | 22:06 |
| mnaser | https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/python3-meeting | 22:07 |
| zaneb | gmann: awesome. so we can give projects a little time to find out the impact (if any) and report back before we break them | 22:07 |
| mnaser | do we agree whats under 'conclusions' | 22:07 |
| fungi | (the change i need to make to the project-config non-legacy base job on the other hand, depends-on doesn't help us) | 22:07 |
| gmann | yeah | 22:07 |
| gmann | mnaser: whats the deadline we should give to projects for legacy job moving ? | 22:07 |
| mnaser | fungi / clarkb might have useful input on that | 22:08 |
| fungi | i vote for wednesday to coincide with the base job change i've proposed | 22:08 |
| mnaser | we don't want to make it too late either | 22:08 |
| gmann | 13th. | 22:09 |
| mnaser | does that date seem to make sense for most? | 22:09 |
| mnaser | we can start sending warnings and give advice on how to test with depends-on | 22:10 |
| fungi | i picked next week because the following week is rc target so would be a bad choice, and after rc is worse because some projects will be branching from rc1 | 22:10 |
| mnaser | anyone opposed or we're okay on that? | 22:10 |
| gmann | all ok seems :) | 22:11 |
| zaneb | it seems very early given that projects _could_ be testing and fixing using Depends-On before we go ahead and possibly break them | 22:11 |
| zaneb | that said, timing argument from fungi is also compelling | 22:11 |
| gmann | but testing effort has been started on Feb 25th | 22:11 |
| mnaser | ok. action items because i'm sure y'all are getting tired | 22:12 |
| gmann | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/003129.html | 22:12 |
| mnaser | Propose openstack-python3-train-jobs Zuul template | 22:12 |
| fungi | well, true, we could push the legacy-base default nodeset change to later if we wanted to give teams longer to depends-on test against it, as i said that isn't the case for the project-config change to the non-legacy base job | 22:12 |
| fungi | since depends-on won't work there | 22:13 |
| mnaser | is openstack-python3-train-jobs necessary? | 22:13 |
| zaneb | fungi: is there an advantage to doing them together? | 22:13 |
| mnaser | or can we tweak the job defn' so py35 doesnt run on master anymore? | 22:13 |
| gmann | fungi: 13th ok as first. giving lot of time to projects end up no action from them :) | 22:13 |
| fungi | zaneb: reducing confusion is the main advantage i foresee | 22:13 |
| mugsie | mnaser: we said that we wouold did it in the resolution | 22:13 |
| zaneb | mnaser: train not stein | 22:13 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : I think we want to get projects used to the idea of updating these settings regularly | 22:14 |
| mnaser | ok cool | 22:14 |
| mnaser | so does anyone wanna pick that up? | 22:14 |
| zaneb | I can take that one | 22:14 |
| mnaser | #action zaneb Propose openstack-python3-train-jobs Zuul template | 22:14 |
| mnaser | Email ML with recommendations for projects in Stein | 22:14 |
| mnaser | i don't wanna throw more work at gmann but i feel he'd be best at taking care of this :) | 22:15 |
| zaneb | I can also take that one if we are agreed on the stuff in the conclusions | 22:15 |
| gmann | this is for py versions ? | 22:15 |
| mnaser | yes, what we have under 'conclusions' | 22:15 |
| mnaser | if zaneb wants to get this, then sure | 22:16 |
| mnaser | #action zaneb Email ML with recommendations for projects in Stein | 22:16 |
| zaneb | I'll take it and let gmann have the next one :) | 22:16 |
| gmann | yeah, that why i did not opt :) | 22:16 |
| mnaser | cool | 22:16 |
| mnaser | #action gmann Notify ML with nodeset base change | 22:16 |
| mnaser | zaneb: i guess your email will put context of todays meeting | 22:17 |
| mnaser | so we probably don't really need an extra update? | 22:17 |
| mnaser | we can just link to the logs here | 22:17 |
| mugsie | i dont think so | 22:17 |
| zaneb | yeah, I can do that | 22:17 |
| mnaser | i think we probably need to update our docs to reflect PTI for train | 22:17 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of Glance https://review.openstack.org/641784 | 22:17 |
| mnaser | which is creating a page similar to https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/runtimes/stein.html | 22:18 |
| mnaser | do we want to hold off on that fro now? | 22:18 |
| mnaser | s/fro/for/ | 22:18 |
| fungi | the contents might even be basically identical | 22:18 |
| zaneb | it's missing Leap | 22:19 |
| mnaser | yep, we added that | 22:19 |
| zaneb | but yeah, I see no reason not to go ahead and copy it now for Train | 22:19 |
| mnaser | anyone want to take up that action with the info from the etherpad? | 22:19 |
| mugsie | o/ | 22:19 |
| mnaser | cool | 22:19 |
| mnaser | thanks mugsie | 22:19 |
| fungi | oh, right leap is new for train | 22:19 |
| mnaser | #action mugsie Update governance repo for Train PTI | 22:20 |
| mnaser | i'm really happy we flushed all this stuff out, took way longer than i thought :) | 22:20 |
| mnaser | but i think it's the best outcome | 22:20 |
| mnaser | thanks for everyone's patience <3 | 22:20 |
| lbragstad | o/ | 22:20 |
| fungi | thanks for putting this together mnaser! | 22:20 |
| mugsie | o/ | 22:20 |
| mnaser | now buy flamesuits when everyone finds out they're switching to bionic | 22:21 |
| mnaser | SURPRISE | 22:21 |
| mnaser | #endmeeting | 22:21 |
| *** 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/" | 22:21 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Mar 7 22:21:07 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:21 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc_python3/2019/tc_python3.2019-03-07-21.00.html | 22:21 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc_python3/2019/tc_python3.2019-03-07-21.00.txt | 22:21 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc_python3/2019/tc_python3.2019-03-07-21.00.log.html | 22:21 |
| zaneb | mnaser: good idea to have a separate meeting for this :) | 22:21 |
| gmann | thanks everyone and mnaser ! | 22:21 |
| mugsie | good night all o/ | 22:22 |
| corvus | mnaser and the rest of the tc: i wanted to bring your attention to this message: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003603.html | 22:22 |
| gmann | mugsie: have good sleep. | 22:22 |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| fungi | corvus: yay! progress | 22:22 |
| mnaser | "we will automatically merge appropriate changes to all branches of all repositories updating .gitreview and Zuul configuration files." i hope this is some sort of hardwire-skip-ci change ;p | 22:22 |
| fungi | yes | 22:23 |
| fungi | it's on me to work that part out | 22:23 |
| corvus | i think there are some decisions the tc can make about project identity and namespace, etc, so good to start thinking about it now | 22:23 |
| mnaser | "* Integrated code searching" | 22:23 |
| fungi | but my plan is the commits will be pushed directly into the backend git repositories on the gerrit server while it's offline | 22:23 |
| mnaser | neat, one of the biggest reasons why i checked github often | 22:23 |
| corvus | mnaser: yeah, we're pretty excited about that. codesearch (hound) is great, but it's even better to have it integrated: https://opendev.org/explore/code | 22:24 |
| fungi | also hound has a few unfortunate shortcomings like not searching branches besides master, lengthy downtime to reindex everything any time we change the list of repos, inexplicable max-files limit issues | 22:26 |
| fungi | granted, we don't necessarily know what shortcomings the search in gitea may have without people trying stuff in it | 22:26 |
| corvus | zaneb: and i think we got all the rewrite rules so that all deep cgit links will redirect properly :) | 22:27 |
| fungi | all we really know is it's not the _same_ shortcomings as hound ;) | 22:27 |
| fungi | corvus: and if we discover any new ones we can always adjust the set of redirect rules | 22:28 |
| fungi | (hopefully whatever else we might have missed doesn't mean more feature patches to gitea upstream) | 22:28 |
| corvus | they merge them quickly :) | 22:29 |
| fungi | that's fore sure true | 22:29 |
| fungi | way faster than openstack's average review time! ;) | 22:29 |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 22:29 | |
| mnaser | does this change mean that openstack infra team is no longer a thing? puts openstack as just another 'tenant' as other projects? | 22:30 |
| fungi | the openstack infra team is, at least for the foreseeable future, an overlapping thing with the opendev team | 22:30 |
| mnaser | and i guess the question regarding the resource access, afaik nodepool isnt tenanted in this sense | 22:31 |
| fungi | there are at least a few services we're going to continue maintaining for the openstack project which we wouldn't include as a part of the opendev suite (at least not in present form) | 22:31 |
| mnaser | so say, if the linux kernel decides to join opendev (yay!) but starts using up all the openstack donated infrastructure | 22:31 |
| mnaser | or at least they were planned to be openstack at least | 22:31 |
| corvus | agree with fungi -- i think there will be a group of people interested in supporting openstack's use of opendev. and there will be people interested in supporting zuul's use of opendev. and starlingx. and airship. and hopefully all those people will work together on opendev, and be the opendev team. | 22:32 |
| fungi | mnaser: those are situations where i expect we'd have lengthy discussions about having them get us a lot of additional resource donations | 22:32 |
| mnaser | heck they can even pay a public openstack cloud to donate resources through, ha | 22:33 |
| mnaser | :P | 22:33 |
| fungi | clarkb's most recent analysis says testing of official openstack deliverables still accounts for 98% of our node utilization | 22:33 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| fungi | so i have a feeling we'll know if we're talking to a project which is going to significantly shift the needle on that | 22:34 |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 22:35 | |
| fungi | (note that official openstack deliverables only account for some 50% of our total repository count) | 22:35 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:36 | |
| clarkb | ya I'd really like to avoid treating that as a bogeyman | 22:37 |
| clarkb | all of our data shows that running an extra python3 version job is tiny use of resources as is adding new top level projects in comparison to the existing heavy hitters | 22:37 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of goal champions https://review.openstack.org/641773 | 22:49 |
| clarkb | http://paste.openstack.org/show/747422/ was today's monthyl breakdown if you want the numbers | 22:51 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Elaborate on the business value of goal champions https://review.openstack.org/641773 | 22:51 |
| lbragstad | fungi the only help needed item i have left is the one you've written it looks like | 22:52 |
| fungi | lbragstad: lovely! | 22:58 |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_away | 23:02 | |
| *** purplerbot has quit IRC | 23:26 | |
| *** purplerbot has joined #openstack-tc | 23:26 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 23:34 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!