| opendevreview | Slawek Kaplonski proposed openstack/governance master: Update potential triggers to consider dropping of the project https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/840856 | 07:44 |
|---|---|---|
| ttx | gmann: yes we had a Bitergia dashboard back then, which had trouble keepign up with OpenStack activity levels -- the whole framework has been rewritten on top of Kibana since then, works much better | 07:54 |
| ttx | See https://zuul.biterg.io/ for the Zuul dashboard for example | 07:54 |
| opendevreview | Slawek Kaplonski proposed openstack/governance master: Define Emerging technology and inactive projects framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/839880 | 09:39 |
| *** whoami-rajat__ is now known as whoami-rajat | 10:40 | |
| *** spotz_ is now known as spotz | 11:55 | |
| *** pojadhav is now known as pojadhav|afk | 12:01 | |
| *** pojadhav|afk is now known as pojadhav | 13:06 | |
| fungi | does anyone recall when or why bug reporting was disabled in launchpad for openstack-manuals? did it have something to do with the dissolution of the tech writing/docs sig? | 13:33 |
| fungi | the openstack-manuals readme still links to that disabled tracker on lp, which is leading to confusion for users wishing to report bugs about the docs | 13:34 |
| *** dasm|off is now known as dasm | 14:01 | |
| fungi | after discussing a bit with stephenfin, i've turned it back on for now | 14:24 |
| fungi | looks like it was disabled at some point after 2021-08-24 since that's the date of the most recently filed bug for it | 14:24 |
| fungi | still no idea by whom not why, however | 14:24 |
| fungi | nor why | 14:24 |
| gmann | fungi: yeah, I was in impression that it was enabled. but good to have it on now. | 15:10 |
| gmann | ttx: +1, thanks for information. | 15:10 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: Changing new release cadence name https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/840354 | 15:48 |
| gmann | tc-members: ttx adding few option on which one (release name or number) to use in development process. I think we need to make it very clear otherwise it can be confusing or release number will just go unused- https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/841800/2/reference/release-naming.rst#36 | 16:32 |
| gmann | I will add this in next meeting agenda too by calling release team . | 16:32 |
| gmann | I think this is last bit we need to get consensus on for release naming things. | 16:33 |
| fungi | gmann: note that the release managers also already discussed it in their meeting on friday. log is here: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2022/releaseteam.2022-05-13-14.00.log.html#l-41 | 16:43 |
| fungi | elodilles was going to confirm with the tc whether it was okay to continue using release cycle names for stable branches | 16:43 |
| gmann | yeah, we can discuss it together to be on same page and document that | 17:02 |
| gmann | or basically the 2nd part you mentioned | 17:10 |
| *** dasm is now known as dasm|off | 21:12 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!