| JayF | tc-members: meeting in an hour | 16:57 |
|---|---|---|
| dansmith | JayF: just for your and others' information, today is my last day in the office for the year | 17:57 |
| dansmith | and thus my last meeting, obviously | 17:57 |
| JayF | ack, lets get that in the meeting logs in open discussion if you don't mind | 17:57 |
| dansmith | yep, I will, just FYI in case it matters for earlier things on the agenda | 17:58 |
| dansmith | before I drop that bomb at the end when we're out of time | 17:58 |
| * JayF jots a note to assign all action items to dansmith for things we want to table /s | 17:58 | |
| dansmith | fine with me until jan :) | 17:59 |
| JayF | #startmeeting tc | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Nov 28 18:00:07 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is JayF. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 18:00 |
| JayF | #topic Roll Call | 18:00 |
| JayF | o/ | 18:00 |
| gmann | o/ | 18:00 |
| frickler | \o | 18:00 |
| JayF | Welcome to the weekly meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee. A reminder that this meeting is held under the OpenInfra Code of Conduct available at https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct. | 18:00 |
| JayF | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee. | 18:00 |
| JayF | There are no noted absenses in the agenda for today's meeting. | 18:00 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:00 |
| jamespage | o/ | 18:00 |
| rosmaita | o/ | 18:00 |
| knikolla | o/ | 18:00 |
| JayF | Going to wait until :05 or until all TC members have checked in | 18:00 |
| dansmith | o/ | 18:01 |
| JayF | Aight, going to get started. We have 8 that is quorum. | 18:04 |
| JayF | #topic Follow up on tracked action items | 18:04 |
| spotz[m] | o/ | 18:05 |
| rosmaita | 9! | 18:05 |
| JayF | ping? | 18:06 |
| JayF | okay, sorry, wifi network went down locally, but I appear to still have wired connectivity | 18:06 |
| JayF | #info Rosmaita to propose amendment to unmaintained branch resolution allowing a single review group | 18:07 |
| JayF | #info Rosmaita to email mailing list about progress implementing unmaintained branch resolution | 18:07 |
| JayF | rosmaita: I grouped these together since they are related; do you have an update? | 18:07 |
| * rosmaita actually did all his action items for once | 18:07 | |
| rosmaita | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/900940 | 18:07 |
| rosmaita | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/ZYAZG43BLJJVXCYZVPYQX5733BYDVVNL/ | 18:08 |
| rosmaita | so, no response to the email, so i guess everyone is on board | 18:08 |
| knikolla | #success rosmaita did all his action items | 18:08 |
| opendevstatus | knikolla: Added success to Success page (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Successes) | 18:08 |
| rosmaita | :) | 18:08 |
| JayF | That governance change appears to have wide consensus; please make time to review it if you haven't and I will take a pass at landing eligible governance patches this afternoon. | 18:08 |
| rosmaita | the resolution has achieved ripeness, and i think has enough votes to pass | 18:08 |
| gmann | amendment to resolution looks good to me, thanks rosmaita for preparing that | 18:09 |
| dansmith | jsut added one more | 18:09 |
| rosmaita | \o/ | 18:09 |
| JayF | Is there anything further we should mention about unmaintained branches before moving on? I don't believe we have another agenda item for it. | 18:09 |
| jamespage | ditto (and I managed to actually hit the right option this time) | 18:09 |
| JayF | What is our next step, assuming this governance change lands in the next hour or two | 18:09 |
| rosmaita | i think just to help the release team get this implemented | 18:10 |
| JayF | Is someone on TC doing or helping coordinate that work? | 18:10 |
| rosmaita | and i guess we need opendev infra team to set up the meta-acl for gerrit | 18:10 |
| frickler | that should be a patch to project-config | 18:11 |
| fungi | yes, if you can get me details on what you need i can propose a patch | 18:11 |
| rosmaita | great | 18:11 |
| JayF | Instead of hashing those details out here, can someone take the action to work with fungi on this? | 18:11 |
| fungi | it'll just be an edit to the existing gerrit/acls/openstack/meta.config acl file | 18:11 |
| JayF | And we can move on? | 18:11 |
| rosmaita | #action rosmaita work with fungi on the gerrit meta-acls | 18:12 |
| JayF | #undo | 18:12 |
| opendevmeet | Removing item from minutes: #action rosmaita work with fungi on the gerrit meta-acls | 18:12 |
| JayF | #redo | 18:12 |
| JayF | #action rosmaita work with fungi on the gerrit meta-acls | 18:12 |
| JayF | I didn't think anyone but the person who started the meeting could do that :) | 18:12 |
| rosmaita | :D | 18:12 |
| JayF | Thanks for that | 18:12 |
| JayF | #topic Gate Health Check | 18:12 |
| JayF | How is the gate? | 18:12 |
| JayF | Things have been mostly calm on the Ironic side. Some failures that we tracked down to real issues in one of our libraries, contained to Ironic-related projects. | 18:13 |
| gmann | one failure there in novaclient fucntional job with neutron new rbac enabled | 18:13 |
| dansmith | really not great on the nova side | 18:14 |
| gmann | we have enabled neutron rbac by default in devstack and that broke novaclient job, not sure why but it is disabled in that job and worked around | 18:14 |
| dansmith | I'm at 14 rechecks for a patch that has been approved for weeks | 18:14 |
| dansmith | many of the failures are related to volume tests, per usual, but some other instabilities have also crept up, but no giant smoking guns that I've seen | 18:15 |
| JayF | Is there anything at a TC level we can or should do? I would say can we raise awareness but if it's bad enough to need >a dozen rechecks; I imagine there's decent awareness. | 18:16 |
| dansmith | well, tbh, I think most people are happy to recheck 20 times to get their patches in | 18:16 |
| gmann | I am sure those are not blind recheck | 18:16 |
| dansmith | so awareness is maybe not enough | 18:16 |
| dansmith | gmann: mine aren't for sure, except for yesterday when zuul wasn't loading log results, so it was hard to examine for root cause | 18:17 |
| gmann | i think we know what failing like volume tests and need someone to deep dive into those | 18:17 |
| gmann | dansmith: yeah | 18:17 |
| dansmith | agree.. before last week, the cinder grenade phase was failing for me a *lot* | 18:17 |
| dansmith | haven't seen that yet this week, but the resize vol-backed test has bitten me a few times | 18:18 |
| frickler | there was an issue with cinder, grenade and tooz, I added that as dedicated agenda item | 18:18 |
| rosmaita | the grenade seems to fail after it creates the third volume and then tries to ssh into the server | 18:18 |
| rosmaita | at least that's what i've seen a few times | 18:19 |
| rosmaita | but i don't know what's happening to the server | 18:19 |
| dansmith | rosmaita: okay I haven't seen that, it's usually waiting for the volume to become in-use, but that was 2+ weeks ago | 18:19 |
| dansmith | it' | 18:19 |
| dansmith | it's meaning "what I was seeing" | 18:19 |
| dansmith | anyway, agree with gmann that some deep dive is needed for sure | 18:20 |
| rosmaita | well, there is something bad happening during that phase | 18:20 |
| dansmith | I'm pretty burned out on that stuff myself, as I spent months on it after I came back from holiday break this jan, when things were really bad | 18:20 |
| JayF | Unless folks in the TC want to dig this personally, I'd suggest putting some of these research results out onto the list and trying to recruit additional help. | 18:20 |
| dansmith | so I hope someone else can really jump in while I'm out | 18:20 |
| JayF | We've gotta try to increase the number of people engaged with these kind of problems, and the only way I know to try and do that is to increase communication around them. | 18:21 |
| dansmith | I'm worried that the pain level has to be higher before people will really care, but .. yeah | 18:21 |
| gmann | true | 18:22 |
| JayF | I agree, based on the results of the similar approach I took with eventlet, but ensuring folks know where status is IMO is part of what we're supposed to do | 18:22 |
| JayF | we can only do the work of 9 people, and there's a heck of a lot more to do to keep things going than that | 18:22 |
| dansmith | that's not true | 18:22 |
| dansmith | I know for a fact that gmann can do the work of three people :P | 18:22 |
| gmann | you should know that I am getting old :) | 18:23 |
| JayF | :) moving on | 18:23 |
| JayF | #topic Leaderless projects | 18:23 |
| JayF | Well, one of those three gmann's gets to lead this topic :D | 18:23 |
| JayF | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2024.1-leaderless | 18:23 |
| gmann | we have two project PTL appointment proposed for ling time and we should take decision soon i will say in this meeting | 18:23 |
| gmann | sahara: #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/899782 | 18:23 |
| gmann | sahara is marked as inactive but PTL appointment and give them a chance to make it active does not hurt | 18:24 |
| gmann | 2nd is rally: #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/898228 | 18:24 |
| gmann | it has voting in favor and not in favor too but we should decide | 18:24 |
| gmann | I think they are open in gerrit for enough time, I would like to request tc-members who have not voted to do that | 18:25 |
| JayF | Yes, please do, especially since one of those does have a negative vote | 18:25 |
| JayF | I'd really rather not land something with a plurality if it has a negative vote | 18:26 |
| gmann | other 3 project remaining for PTL appointment is no progress, I will send email today to their previous PTL or any active maintained i get to know | 18:26 |
| gmann | JayF: I will say let's get the remaining vote today and we should either merge them or abandon them this week max | 18:26 |
| JayF | Yep, that's extremely reasonable, and abandoning isn't really a choice unless a project without a PTL is an OK state | 18:27 |
| JayF | I don't think "we take no action" is a good state here; we need to land these *or* take some other action to resolve the project's lack of leadership | 18:27 |
| gmann | but better than not deciding about it and PTL volunteer just wait for us to say yes or not to appointment | 18:27 |
| spotz[m] | Having password issues but will vote if I haven’t | 18:28 |
| gmann | especially there is no other candidate or even maitainers | 18:28 |
| JayF | Yeah, you're right, and I appreciate you pointing it out and will take that advice -- I'll land these if eligible to land by EOW, even if only a plurality vote to land if still eligible | 18:28 |
| gmann | thanks. | 18:28 |
| JayF | Is there anything else on leaderless projects before wee move on? | 18:28 |
| gmann | that is all form my side on this. | 18:28 |
| JayF | Next topic was Implementation of Unmaintained branch statuses -- but I think we covered that during action items | 18:29 |
| JayF | so I'm going to skip it | 18:29 |
| JayF | #topic 2024.1 TC Tracker | 18:29 |
| JayF | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-2024.1-tracker | 18:29 |
| JayF | If there are any updated on TC Tracker items; please give them now. | 18:29 |
| JayF | OK, moving on. | 18:30 |
| JayF | #topic Upgrade issue between tooz and cinder | 18:31 |
| JayF | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/901131 | 18:31 |
| JayF | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/L72QU3SR2VFVYOFXVYH74V7HGMQ3YJRU/ | 18:31 |
| JayF | Unsure who added this to the agenda; but there's clearly an issue around Tooz upgrades that broke things, it got reverted but there are still issues here to resolve I believe | 18:31 |
| JayF | frickler: ^ looks like this was your topic | 18:31 |
| frickler | yes, that was me, I wanted to check whether we need to discuss some general guidance regarding interactions between these projects | 18:32 |
| clarkb | naively it seems like tooz could sort out what version of etcd it is talking to then use the appropriate api paths | 18:33 |
| fungi | i.e. support multiple versions of etcd in tooz (noting that coinstalling services that needed those different versions would be challenging still) | 18:33 |
| frickler | yes, that's what https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug/2043810%22 does | 18:34 |
| JayF | I'm looking some stuff up, Ironic had similar failures and fixed it with devstack configuration | 18:35 |
| JayF | mainly because I want to ensure however it gets fixed that we all align in the same direction | 18:35 |
| frickler | having grenade upgrade also etcd would be another option | 18:36 |
| frickler | but also I added the topic before those tooz patches were proposed, so maybe all is well for now. and the next topic is even more interesting ;) | 18:37 |
| JayF | Hmm https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-generic-switch/+/895973 is the change Ironic landed | 18:37 |
| JayF | I think it's in the same realm but not the same mechanism | 18:38 |
| JayF | frickler: it sounds like there's not much else to talk abuot here though, things got moving over the holiday? | 18:38 |
| frickler | ack | 18:38 |
| JayF | #topic Declare projects inactive for lack of ...? | 18:38 |
| JayF | #info (list from agenda) Working py311 unit tests, Support for sqla2, Broken CI since 2023.2 release, Do we want/need to look at specific deliverables or only whole projects? | 18:39 |
| frickler | also added by me | 18:39 |
| dansmith | definitely not sqla2 yet, IMHO | 18:39 |
| frickler | my main concern is what we can do to get sqla2 into u-c this cycle | 18:40 |
| dansmith | the other two seem reasonable | 18:40 |
| frickler | if we have projects that do not support sqla2, but depend on global upper-constraints, what other options do we have? | 18:41 |
| gmann | gate broken even due to py 3.11 or any other reason is reasonable way to mark them inactive | 18:41 |
| dansmith | frickler: because it's a lot of work for some projects and 2024.1 won't even be supported on a distro that has 2.0 AFAIK | 18:41 |
| gmann | I think we need to go with community wide goal for sqla2 work and maybe multicycle effort. | 18:42 |
| dansmith | it's fine to have it be a requirement or goal or whatever, but marking a project as inactive because it hasn't crossed that line yet is way too large of a hammer, IMHO | 18:42 |
| dansmith | yeah | 18:42 |
| JayF | While I mostly agree with frickler that we have to draw a line at some point, and it's getting to be that time, it seems late in the cycle to draw that line TBH. | 18:42 |
| gmann | agree, I think we discussed the same in gerrit in some change | 18:42 |
| JayF | and I suspect if we apply the other criteria, we'll catch clearly inactive projects without catching any that might just be late with SQLA 2.0 migrations | 18:42 |
| gmann | marking project inactive on this is little too strong and inconsistent in our process | 18:42 |
| dansmith | yeah | 18:42 |
| JayF | I'm thinking of this like a graduated filter; sqla2.0 is a more fine filter | 18:43 |
| JayF | lets use the larger, coarser filters first | 18:43 |
| JayF | which more clearly say "these should not be in 2024.1" | 18:43 |
| JayF | and perhaps decide (not today; but this cycle) that next cycle is where we draw the SQLA 2.0 line | 18:43 |
| clarkb | (it is R-18 according to the schedule) | 18:43 |
| dansmith | sqla2.0 is a point in time hurdle.. it's a filter right now, but won't be later, where CI brokenness and py$current unit tests are more of a reasonable timeless filter, IMHO | 18:43 |
| frickler | o.k., so I will propose some inactivity marks based on the latter | 18:44 |
| * dansmith notes he's going to have to do his 15th recheck on that patch | 18:45 | |
| frickler | and then I'll add sqla2 planning as a new topic | 18:45 |
| gmann | ++ | 18:45 |
| JayF | frickler++ Thank you for that, I put up (and abandoned) a governance change in that direction last cycle, it may be useful as a starting point or at least to review preexisting discussion | 18:45 |
| frickler | (I'm also not sure that it'll be sqla2.0 still ;) | 18:46 |
| JayF | Anything else on project inactivity before we move on? | 18:46 |
| JayF | #topic Open Discussion and Review | 18:47 |
| JayF | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+repo:openstack/governance | 18:47 |
| JayF | as mentioned earlier; please prioritize governance reviews; I will be making a pass in a couple of hours to land things eligible to land | 18:47 |
| JayF | and it's nice if a majority of us have voted on those changes | 18:47 |
| JayF | dansmith: I think you had something for open discussion | 18:47 |
| dansmith | Just FYI to all, I'm out for the rest of the year starting tomorrow | 18:48 |
| slaweq | dansmith: have a great holiday time :) | 18:48 |
| JayF | Enjoy your holiday! | 18:49 |
| JayF | Are there any other items for open discussion? | 18:49 |
| dansmith | I shall endeavor to do so, thanks | 18:49 |
| gmann | Enjoy! and forget about gate :) | 18:49 |
| spotz[m] | Have a good break | 18:49 |
| dansmith | gmann: trust me, I shan't be thinking about the gate until Jan :) | 18:49 |
| fungi | just don't break the gate! | 18:49 |
| gmann | dansmith: ++ | 18:49 |
| JayF | Last call for items for open discussion | 18:50 |
| JayF | Thanks for coming to the TC meeting; see you all in 1 week for our monthly video meeting o/ | 18:51 |
| JayF | #endmeeting | 18:51 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Nov 28 18:51:23 2023 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:51 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2023/tc.2023-11-28-18.00.html | 18:51 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2023/tc.2023-11-28-18.00.txt | 18:51 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2023/tc.2023-11-28-18.00.log.html | 18:51 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:51 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/governance master: Update email for James Page https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/902111 | 20:09 |
| JayF | jamespage: ^ fyi; unsure if this is a recent change and gerrit 3.8 made it effectively broken; or if it was a new change and this spot was missed; but would like your +1 on this | 20:09 |
| JayF | for anyone who might need to check-review-status in my stead, you need 902111 for the script to run cleanly | 20:10 |
| JayF | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/898228 tc-members: this change is still 4 votes for; 1 against; 4 abstaining. I'd prefer have a clear majority before landing this if someone can prioritize reviewing this change and making an explicit vote I'd appreciate it. | 20:29 |
| JayF | Actually, miscounted; that one is 5 for, 1 against, 3 abstains. I'll land it after lunch if no further votes. | 20:33 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Resolution to create openstack-unmaintained core https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/900940 | 20:38 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Appoint Andriy Kurilin as Rally PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/898228 | 21:42 |
| tonyb | JayF: it's for sure the change gerrit made. A script I used for that kind of query now returns 'secondary emails not permitted' | 21:48 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Appoint Jerry Zhou as Sahara PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/899782 | 21:49 |
| tonyb | JayF: This will at least require a docs update for the election as until now we'd accept a nomination from primary and secondary addresses, now it'll just need to be primary. | 21:50 |
| fungi | this could also indicate some surprises for election tooling, though we have for ages told candidates to use their preferred address | 21:50 |
| fungi | mainly because a much earlier gerrit api behavior change stopped returning secondary addresses when we query, so they have to make sure their preferred address is included in their foundation profile | 21:51 |
| tonyb | fungi: messages crossed in the ether ;P | 21:55 |
| JayF | happy to be the accidental alpha tester | 22:09 |
| JayF | I think that's how it should work anyway :D | 22:09 |
| tonyb | hehe | 22:16 |
| clarkb | tonyb: fungi JayF fwiw I think ther is a way to give permissions to allow that. I thought it just had to be autenticated but maybe its an acl? at least the changelog implies that it is a permissions based rejection | 23:09 |
| JayF | For my purposes, it's not that hard to just use the primary email for the 9 people on the tc :) | 23:11 |
| JayF | that is not great for electioning | 23:11 |
| JayF | and I'm the liason this time, so I guess I don't get a get-out-of-troubleshooting-free card ;) | 23:11 |
| tonyb | JayF: I agree, but I don't think we'd be happy granting https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/access-control.html#capability_modifyAccount to everyone. | 23:11 |
| JayF | tonyb: we went the other way for the TC fix: we updated reference/members.yaml to contain the primary email | 23:12 |
| tonyb | I'm researching *if* there is a setting on a secondary email address to make it public | 23:12 |
| tonyb | JayF: Yup I think that's the best idea | 23:12 |
| JayF | yeah, I think that's less likely to be a good answer for elections | 23:12 |
| JayF | given we know already that we have a ... almost too effective filter on the electorate already :| | 23:12 |
| tonyb | JayF: if there is a setting to do that then we give $potential_ptl the choice of a) using the primary address ; or b) setting permissions on any/all secondary addresses to be visible (again if that is a thing) | 23:13 |
| JayF | ack; I'm not really super familiar with anything administrative on the gerrit side | 23:17 |
| JayF | I'm happy to help at some time when I'm not in flow for other tasks if you need it, but I suspect I'd just slow you down | 23:17 |
| tonyb | JayF: Thanks. | 23:18 |
| tonyb | I think I'm done for today. I have an early meeting tomorrow. | 23:18 |
| JayF | sounds good, have a good one | 23:19 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!