| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Add firewall rules for NTP in RHEL/Centos https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939202 | 07:53 |
|---|---|---|
| ianychoi | vlevnjnvkhinkikbjvf | 08:03 |
| ianychoi | (Oops.. some random keys were pressed - sorry) | 08:05 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Add firewall rules for NTP in RHEL/Centos https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939202 | 08:06 |
| frickler | tc-members: ^^ maybe some redhat people can review this bunch of rhel-related docs updates? I really have no clue about the details there | 08:51 |
| * noonedeadpunk no idea about firewall-cmd either | 08:52 | |
| noonedeadpunk | seems these are coming from RDO team if not mistaken? | 08:53 |
| frickler | the recent two committers are using gmail addresses, so difficult to tell | 08:54 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Add firewall rules for NTP in RHEL/CentOS https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939202 | 09:05 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 09:06 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 09:12 |
| jrosser | noonedeadpunk: the origin could be this https://review.opendev.org/c/x/stackalytics/+/938471 | 09:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | o_O smth is getting merged to stackalyticks still | 09:25 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 09:48 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 10:07 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Chubinidze proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 10:07 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-manuals master: Etcd for Ubuntu 24.04 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939071 | 13:52 |
| opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Ubuntu: Use etcd-server package https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939239 | 14:07 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-manuals master: More clear instructions for Client installation for Ubuntu https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939207 | 14:14 |
| noonedeadpunk | tc-members: gentle reminder, a weekly TC meeting will happen in around 43 minutes | 17:17 |
| spotz[m] | Stackalytics still gets merges but it does take a bit of time sometimes. Also remember stacklytics.io is the correct URL | 17:22 |
| spotz[m] | s/stacklytics/stackalytics/ | 17:22 |
| fungi | and if there's anything https://openstack.biterg.io/ is lacking that you miss from stackalytics, do let me know | 17:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | #startmeeting tc | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Jan 14 18:00:08 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. 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 |
| noonedeadpunk | 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 |
| noonedeadpunk | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Roll Call | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 18:00 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:00 |
| gtema | O/ | 18:00 |
| spotz[m] | \o/ | 18:00 |
| bauzas | o/ | 18:00 |
| gmann | o/ | 18:00 |
| cardoe | o/ | 18:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | courtesy ping frickler | 18:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, let's move on then | 18:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | we obviously do have a quorum | 18:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Last Week's AIs | 18:05 |
| frickler | o/ | 18:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | From the last week I do recall the only action point, which was on me, regarding proposing a solution to not well maintained projects, which have significant impact on representation openstack as a project | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | like openstackdocstheme | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | though I failed again to come up with a suggestion | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | I will try to take some time and write some things down for discussion during this week | 18:07 |
| bauzas | cool | 18:07 |
| cardoe | gtema was going to fix up the docs theme enough to move us forward. | 18:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | #action noonedeadpunk to write a proposal on dealing with poorly maintained repos that can't be deprecated/retired | 18:08 |
| cardoe | Then we were gonna talk about trying out a stock theme but the issue was who had the time? | 18:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | yes, and also who can vote on changes | 18:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | as currently there's nobody to review them | 18:08 |
| gmann | during holidays it was not discussed much, but I added a topic to add gtema in openstackdocstheme core list so that he can maintain it | 18:09 |
| gtema | Just a tiny bit. Update of bootstrap is there, but switch to Semi-Stock theme requires still work | 18:09 |
| gmann | there was no objection but it needs to be finalized by oslo team | 18:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | frankly - I'd try come up with a list of projects who don't comply with latest theme and tried to address them | 18:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | as if our main issue is that everyone look different... | 18:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | but yeah, dunno | 18:10 |
| gtema | We have few customizations in the theme which are lost if we switch to the stock theme | 18:10 |
| gtema | PDF link, pagination, bug reporting at the very least | 18:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | not so far ago I was questioned why there're no pdf links for deployment guides and some other place... | 18:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | so ppl do use pdfs | 18:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think other place was release notes or specs... | 18:12 |
| gtema | I wanted to come back to the theme today but failed | 18:12 |
| spotz[m] | Don't forget translations and any impacts for that | 18:12 |
| cardoe | So I've used a PDF linking extension before without a custom theme. | 18:13 |
| gtema | Yeah | 18:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | so maintaing theme for now sounds like cheaper solution | 18:13 |
| cardoe | Generated the PDF and uploaded it to a place and just an extension added the link in my TOC | 18:13 |
| gtema | Yes, but the content of the theme is something where we have influence | 18:13 |
| fungi | right, i don't think the suggestion was to replace openstackdocstheme with just a stock theme, but to replace it with a stock theme plus appropriate plugins that we don't have to maintain ourselves | 18:13 |
| cardoe | ^this | 18:13 |
| gtema | Right fungi, this is my understanding as well | 18:14 |
| cardoe | It might be much easier to maintain plugins vs a full theme. | 18:14 |
| fungi | and many of the stock themes still allow simple configuration to pick your preferred color scheme, add logo graphics, etc | 18:14 |
| bauzas | oh sorry my bouncer was AWOL | 18:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | since we don't have an obvious volunteer for replacing the theme right now, I'd suggest trying to fix what we have as patches are around for a while | 18:17 |
| gmann | ++ | 18:18 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Update on unmaintained branches | 18:18 |
| noonedeadpunk | frickler: any updates on the topic? | 18:18 |
| frickler | no from me, still waiting for elodilles to unveil the mystery of what projects they actually want to keep alive | 18:18 |
| frickler | I did see a small number of patches to fix CI errors, but not much. | 18:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | gotcha. | 18:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, let's move on then | 18:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Update on election and changes | 18:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | A resolution to allow longer then 2 weeks election has been merged | 18:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/937741 | 18:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | with that slaweq sent a ML with election dates | 18:21 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/J7E345RKNQW45NMHZLU2V5GYGG3GTPQG/ | 18:21 |
| slaweq | changes in the election repo are also merged | 18:21 |
| gmann | ++ | 18:21 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/938782 | 18:21 |
| slaweq | so we will have election nomination started 1 week earlier then it was planned before | 18:21 |
| slaweq | and then voting will take 3 weeks instead of 2 | 18:21 |
| bauzas | cool | 18:21 |
| noonedeadpunk | great news and thanks for your work! | 18:22 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Status on migrate CI to Ubuntu Noble | 18:22 |
| bauzas | maybe we need some weekly reminder for making sure people don't forget about the election deadlines ? | 18:22 |
| spotz[m] | Yeah that's really the major issue on the election | 18:23 |
| gmann | no major updates on noble migration this week except I am working a few of the doc jobs failure | 18:23 |
| slaweq | last time I was sending reminder emails before nomination period ended - I will do the same this time too | 18:24 |
| slaweq | we are also sending emails with some reminders to the ML | 18:24 |
| gmann | slaweq: ++ | 18:24 |
| bauzas | ++ | 18:24 |
| slaweq | I don't remember exactly how often we do so but we can send probably few more if needed, like every week or so | 18:24 |
| fungi | also including a reminder in the next openinfra newsletter. it was originally going out tomorrow but has been pushed back to monday now | 18:27 |
| fungi | not sure that will help, but maybe it will reach a few people that ml posts don't | 18:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | I kinda wonder what part of newsletter audience can vote on elections | 18:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | thus how much target audience that is | 18:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | anyway, migration to noble topic in gerrit: | 18:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:migrate-to-noble+status:open | 18:29 |
| gmann | yeah, i will continue on the remaining things especially doc job. | 18:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | looks like couple of patches were merged since last time | 18:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | like nova, which could be fixing doctheme I guess | 18:31 |
| gmann | nova one was merged in Nov, it was just some comment on that and it came up in the list | 18:32 |
| gmann | octavia merged a few of them last week | 18:32 |
| noonedeadpunk | ah, it was having a jammy test for nova that landed, ok | 18:33 |
| gmann | its 'Lightbits CI' running after changes are merged. not sure why | 18:33 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah | 18:33 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, moving on then | 18:34 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic A check on gate health | 18:34 |
| noonedeadpunk | any input on the topic? I haven't witnessed anything too bad lately | 18:34 |
| gmann | seems good. I did not notice any blocker or frequent failure last week. | 18:34 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:35 |
| bauzas | ++ | 18:35 |
| bauzas | ditto here | 18:35 |
| fungi | dockerhub rate limits are still hitting some projects hard | 18:36 |
| fungi | zuul and opendev have been working on mirroring some general images we use for testing our infrastructure into quay to help improve the stability of our own jobs, so it's becoming an established pattern other teams could choose to replicate | 18:36 |
| noonedeadpunk | it's good to know actually | 18:37 |
| fungi | we'll be talking more about it in the opendev weekly meeting just after this, in the #opendev-meeting channel or you can hit us up for details in #opendev later | 18:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | is there any established namespace there or projects are expected to create their own ones? | 18:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, fair, let's discuss outside of the meeting | 18:38 |
| fungi | a little of both i think, that's some of what's still being discussed | 18:38 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic PTG AIs and the TC Tracker | 18:38 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-2025.1-tracker | 18:38 |
| noonedeadpunk | there were couple of updates to eventlet goal lately which apparently need a review | 18:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/931254 | 18:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | are there any other updates with the tracker? | 18:43 |
| gmann | nothing from my side | 18:43 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Open Discussion and Reviews | 18:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | I wanted to raise question of Freezer and it's unmaintained state | 18:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | As milestone-2 passed, project had to release client library | 18:44 |
| fungi | it came up during friday's release meeting too | 18:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | though a proposed patch to releases was obviously commented as project is inactive | 18:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | which results in a chicken-egg situation kinda | 18:45 |
| fungi | if there's an intent for freezer's deliverables to officially be part of the 2025.1/epoxy coordinated release then the deadline for letting the release team know that was last week | 18:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | with my freezer dpl hat on, I can tell that process of getting from inactive state is a bit unclear for me right now | 18:46 |
| gmann | I think state can be change to Active as we are seeing progress and it is release-ready. and there are positive votes in the proposal also. | 18:46 |
| fungi | but that doesn't mean that the freezer maintainers can't add an acl to do their own independent releases until the tc decides they're no longer officially inactive and should be considered for inclusion in a future coordinated release | 18:46 |
| slaweq | gmann++ | 18:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/938938 | 18:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | proposal for active state ^ | 18:47 |
| gmann | noonedeadpunk: there is no hard written criteria but seeing good progress, CI green and having active maintainer are key thing to move project to Active | 18:47 |
| gmann | we could do it before m-2 also so that you would not be stuck in release things | 18:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | there was proposed a new spec yesterday to the project as well: | 18:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-specs/+/939120 | 18:47 |
| fungi | since it's past the release "membership" deadline, i think the tc also needs to decide whether they're asking the release managers to make a late exception or preparing for 2025.2/flamingo inclusion | 18:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | I was actually waiting for this to come before raising to show another interested party first | 18:48 |
| gmann | ok | 18:48 |
| gmann | I am all ok to make a late exception to include it in Epoxy release as it is not too late and if release team is ok for that? | 18:48 |
| noonedeadpunk | well. to have that said, request for client release was sent in time :) | 18:49 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/938780 | 18:49 |
| spotz[m] | Then it might make sense to ask release | 18:50 |
| gmann | but project was not moved to Active state yet right, that is valid concern from release team | 18:50 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah | 18:50 |
| noonedeadpunk | true | 18:50 |
| fungi | basically, while the project is still listed on the governance site as being "inactive" the release team assumes it won't be included | 18:50 |
| spotz[m] | Was the client listed as inactive? | 18:50 |
| fungi | individual deliverables aren't active or inactive, teams are | 18:50 |
| gmann | for exception from TC, do release team need voting in meeting or a resolution to grant release for freezer projects even it is not active before m-2? | 18:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | so the thing is, that there's no "flag" in projects as of today | 18:51 |
| gmann | spotz[m]: it is whole project status but by deliverables | 18:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | the only indicator of inactive is a doc page | 18:51 |
| gmann | *not by | 18:51 |
| gmann | I think resolution will be better for record and history. something like this but this time to allow release | 18:52 |
| gmann | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20240227-remove-murano-from-2024-1-release.html | 18:52 |
| noonedeadpunk | also to have that said - not all clients are still released | 18:52 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/938597 | 18:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | as example | 18:53 |
| fungi | yes, the release managers don't handle releases for deliverables of inactive teams, active teams can have the release managers handle releases for a subset (all, some, or none) of their deliverables | 18:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | but either way, I'd love to get some heading on what to do. Prolonging an inactive state for another release is also an option, though given Epoxy is SLURP - would be good to get into it | 18:54 |
| gmann | I think proposing the exception as resolution can be step forward | 18:56 |
| fungi | what's the upgrade story for freezer? can it be upgraded from the last versions that were included in a coordinated release, or no? | 18:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | ps: also freezer-dr retirement is dependency for getting from inactive state | 18:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/938183/3 | 18:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | fungi: it should be upgradable, yes. No breaking changes were made so far | 18:56 |
| fungi | cool, that helps | 18:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | and feature development plans include some respect of existing deployments | 18:57 |
| fungi | unrelated, i sent a reminder to openstack-discuss about voting in the foundation individual director election: | 18:58 |
| fungi | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/SRW6I7UZSSIJGOPQJEWSPP2HOGMZEL2Z/ Foundation Individual Director election voting underway | 18:58 |
| noonedeadpunk | but also the project was kind of client-oriented, where main heavy lifting was not on api/server side but on scheduler/client (basicaly run by a tenant on vms) | 18:58 |
| noonedeadpunk | #endmeeting | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Jan 14 19:00:07 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-01-14-18.00.html | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-01-14-18.00.txt | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-01-14-18.00.log.html | 19:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | thanks everyone for participating! | 19:00 |
| bauzas | thanks | 19:00 |
| slaweq | o/ | 19:00 |
| gmann | thanks | 19:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | gmann: I'm slightly afraid, that with pace things are reviewed in governance lately, with resolution we can be well late for the release as well though. | 19:01 |
| fungi | do try to get the word out about individual director elections if you have time, we need something like a 10% turnout for a quorate vote | 19:01 |
| gmann | noonedeadpunk: I think it will be more 7 days if no objection on that. it should not be that late | 19:01 |
| fungi | maybe also just give the release managers a heads up that this is on the way so they know to expect it | 19:02 |
| gmann | because Inactive/Active status are more of a indicator about project status we should be little flexible about release etc on those but with TC resolution passed as an exception | 19:02 |
| gmann | fungi: ++ | 19:03 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ gotcha, will do then | 19:03 |
| gmann | retirement of projects are hard stick but inactive process are the best effort idea to make projects active instead of stopping them to be active/released. | 19:04 |
| fungi | yeah, i just also want to make sure the release managers have strong signals from the tc as to what's in or out for each release, so they know the scope of what they're looking at and can plan accordingly | 19:05 |
| fungi | similar to how deciding to declare a project inactive should be done before the same deadline so the release managers know to exclude it | 19:06 |
| gmann | true, if it was late for example during m-3 time it does not make sense to add more work for release team | 19:06 |
| gmann | but if it is very close to m-2 it is ok to grant exception especially considering holiday season in this cycle m-2 duration | 19:07 |
| fungi | makes sense | 19:07 |
| spotz[m] | If reviews of governance are late that is definitely on us to fix | 19:08 |
| gmann | yeah | 19:09 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/governance master: Deprecate ironic-lib https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939278 | 21:16 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Deprecate ironic-lib https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939281 | 21:22 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/governance master: Deprecate ironic-lib https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939278 | 22:02 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/governance master: Deprecate ironic-lib https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939278 | 22:26 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!