| fungi | apparently some release numbers can also offend... https://discuss.python.org/t/20817/ | 02:08 |
|---|---|---|
| dasm|off | > Oops! That page doesn’t exist or is private. | 02:58 |
| opendevreview | Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/election master: Remove python-dev from bindep https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/863829 | 09:50 |
| *** diablo_rojo_phone is now known as Guest702 | 10:39 | |
| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 11:04 | |
| fungi | dasm|off: yeah, looks like it got deleted (perhaps by the author?) shortly after it was posted. to summarize, a concern was raised that python having a 3.11 release reminded people of the fukushima earthquake which occurred on march 11, and so the request was made to use a different version number | 12:19 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/project-team-guide master: Clarify project deprecation guide https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/863084 | 13:55 |
| *** dasm|off is now known as dasm | 14:11 | |
| frickler | tc-members: we just talked a bit in #opendev about storyboard and the intention of several openstack projects to move away from it. maybe someone of you wants to orchestrate that a bit to reduce the fragmentation of the actions happening? https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23opendev/%23opendev.2022-11-07.log.html#t2022-11-07T15:33:49 | 17:06 |
| frickler | see also https://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/service-discuss/2022-October/000370.html in case you missed that so far | 17:07 |
| frickler | IIUC ironic already decided to move back to LP, sdk, nova(placement) and octavia are strongly wanting to move, too | 17:09 |
| gmann | frickler: yeah we are aware of the situation and ML thread. I think the discussion is going on there and in PTG, many projects decided to move from SB to LP which i think is all ok and it is project decision. | 17:22 |
| gmann | or you want TC to step up and finalize like 'One tool for OpenStack instead of two for bug/feature tracking' things? | 17:23 |
| frickler | gmann: that exactly the question. the initial plan was for all of openstack to move, some faster, some slower. with that plan having failing, having a consistent bug tracker for openstack might be a reasonable goal still | 17:24 |
| frickler | *to move to SB | 17:24 |
| frickler | meh, /me can't type properly anymore | 17:25 |
| dansmith | I thought the only consistency concern was opendev and the identity provider | 17:25 |
| gmann | I remember 'moving to SB' did not make as a goal in past due to various reason | 17:25 |
| dansmith | given that at one point it looked like SB was going to be forced upon us, as one of those who didn't want that, I'm not sure forcing any specific thing will really be met with enthusiasm | 17:26 |
| dansmith | if most everyone is going to choose LP anyway, that's probably good enough for me | 17:26 |
| gmann | But I agree having a consistent bug tracker instead of two and when we know things are not moving forward for SB, making LP seems good to me too | 17:27 |
| frickler | my concern is people who are not part of the OpenStack teams that are affected by this, but not involved in the decision about it | 17:27 |
| gmann | do we know ho many projects using SB? | 17:27 |
| gmann | *how | 17:28 |
| clarkb | gmann: you can grep that info out of openstack/project-config/gerrit/projects.yaml | 17:28 |
| gmann | sure | 17:29 |
| JayF | dansmith++ I don't see anything but pain behind dictating one solution :) | 17:29 |
| dansmith | yup | 17:29 |
| frickler | I count 208 repos, not sure to how many projects that may map | 17:30 |
| frickler | to | 17:30 |
| frickler | maybe 25 by manual counting of https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project_group/list | 17:32 |
| JayF | Ironic resolved at the PTG to send all their projects back to LP; I have to do some of the planning for that migration | 17:32 |
| dansmith | and nova | 17:33 |
| frickler | also one group the TC would directly need to decide about, fwiw https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project_group/governance | 17:33 |
| frickler | that's another thing the TC might coordinate: have some tooling for migrating back? | 17:34 |
| clarkb | right part of the reason I started that thread was that a number of projects seem to be making this decision but without any coordination | 17:35 |
| clarkb | either among themselves or with opendev. Seems like working together can help make things better | 17:35 |
| clarkb | and more generally if a tool started by openstack to meet openstack specific needs isn't doing that we should have a broader discussion | 17:36 |
| gmann | with my manual counting it is ~30 projects including 4-5 SIG | 17:36 |
| gmann | and most of the projects might have very low traffic or none and not observing if SB is concern for them like trove, vitrage, patrole etc | 17:39 |
| gmann | frickler: governance has stopped SB for tracking things since couple of year, I usually use etherpad for tracker which is much easy and less time consuming as per the TC neeed - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Technical_Committee_Tracker | 17:43 |
| gmann | but yes we should clean and clear about using SB or not | 17:43 |
| frickler | gmann: and possibly delete those projects on SB if they are not longer used | 17:43 |
| *** dasm is now known as dasm|off | 22:27 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!