| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Cleanup policy popup leads list https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/941148 | 00:53 |
|---|---|---|
| hemanth | <fungi> "hemanthn is already on for..." <- Hi freyes will be nominating himself for Charmed OpenStack PTL, thanks! | 10:43 |
| frickler | hemanth: freyes: the time for self-nomination has passed, there needs to be an appointment made by the TC instead. I think we will discuss this in the TC meeting this evening. thanks for the feedback anyway | 10:47 |
| freyes | hi frickler , ack, thanks, is there anything I should do before the TC meeting to express my intention to step in? | 12:48 |
| frickler | freyes: at one point, you will need to propose a change similar to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/928881, but I think it is too early for that now, since we will need https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/942507 merged first | 12:56 |
| freyes | I understand, thanks, frickler | 12:57 |
| bauzas | gouthamr: I won't be able to join today's TC meeting, I have another appointment at same time | 16:04 |
| gouthamr | bauzas: ack, ty for letting me know | 16:04 |
| gouthamr | fungi: /me is late to the discussion.. when's the openinfra newsletter going out? | 16:06 |
| fungi | gouthamr: tomorrow i think | 16:14 |
| gouthamr | fungi: thanks, we'll discuss some more regarding the elections during the tc meeting today | 17:00 |
| gouthamr | tc-members: gentle reminder that our weekly meeting will be held on this channel in ~59 mins | 17:01 |
| mnasiadka | gouthamr: I don’t know if it’s expected - but I won’t be able to join todays meeting - I’m a bit down with rsv-like virus - trying to get better before my flight to LA on Thursday | 17:11 |
| gouthamr | oh no, sorry to hear that mnasiadka | 17:11 |
| gmann | gouthamr: I will also won't be able to join today due to conflict with other meeting | 17:24 |
| gmann | marked my absence in wiki page too | 17:24 |
| gouthamr | ++ thanks gmann | 17:24 |
| cardoe | I've got a conflict today as well. | 17:53 |
| gouthamr | ack cardoe | 17:54 |
| gouthamr | i guess we won't have quorum.. | 17:54 |
| gouthamr | we'll see | 17:54 |
| fungi | it's not as if the tc typically conducts any official votes in-meeting which require quorum | 17:55 |
| gouthamr | true | 17:55 |
| fungi | and it has quorate meetings far more frequently than the charter requires | 17:56 |
| gouthamr | #startmeeting tc | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Feb 25 18:00:08 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. 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 |
| gouthamr | 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 |
| gouthamr | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | #topic Roll Call | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 18:00 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:00 |
| gtema | o/ | 18:00 |
| mharley[m] | o/ | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | noted absence: g m a n n, c a r d o e, s p o t z, b a u z a s | 18:01 |
| frickler | \o | 18:02 |
| gouthamr | i think that's everyone, thank you for joining.. lets get started | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | #topic Last Week's AIs | 18:04 |
| spotz[m] | Here for the start any ways:) But will fade away in 20 | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | we took an AI regarding the electoral roll generation to include TC repos | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | i proposed extra-acs as an example to the tc-repos | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/942296 (Add Extra-ACs to the tech committee repos) | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/941612 (Add tc repositories for electoral roll generation) | 18:07 |
| gouthamr | i need some reviews on the extra-acs | 18:08 |
| gouthamr | that's all for this AI.. | 18:08 |
| gouthamr | next one, EOL transition process for unmaintained branches | 18:08 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/941458 (Transition unmaintained/wallaby to EOL) | 18:09 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/942201 (Transition unmaintained/xena to EOL) | 18:09 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/942218 ([8] Transition unmaintained/yoga to EOL) | 18:09 |
| gouthamr | ^ thanks for posting these, frickler | 18:10 |
| gouthamr | anything to mention wrt these? | 18:10 |
| frickler | I updated things a bit according to what elodilles wanted. no other feedback | 18:10 |
| gouthamr | ack, ty | 18:12 |
| gouthamr | next up, reviewing CI usage patterns and highlight outliers for optimization | 18:12 |
| gouthamr | slaweq: we took an AI to post your findings to the ML | 18:13 |
| slaweq | ahh, sorry, I forgot to send it | 18:13 |
| slaweq | I will do it tomorrow morning for sure | 18:13 |
| slaweq | sorry about that | 18:13 |
| gouthamr | no problem at all :) | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | project teams are distracted with the Feature Freeze this week anyway | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | so no rush.. i can check back on this next week | 18:14 |
| slaweq | thx | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | that's all the new AIs we had, besides the ones in the TC tracker | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | was anyone else working on any other AIs? | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | sounds like none.. | 18:15 |
| gouthamr | #topic PTG Planning | 18:15 |
| gouthamr | the PTG Planning etherpad is here: | 18:15 |
| gouthamr | #link #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/apr2025-ptg-os-tc (OS-TC Flamingo PTG Etherpad) | 18:16 |
| gouthamr | its got topics and notes from our discussions in the past few weeks | 18:16 |
| gouthamr | please feel free to expand these and throw in new items | 18:16 |
| gouthamr | we have a bit over a whole month to organize the discussions | 18:17 |
| gouthamr | and gather relevant folks | 18:17 |
| gouthamr | that's all that needed to be said about the PTG for now.. | 18:17 |
| gouthamr | any questions/concerns to note regarding $topic? | 18:17 |
| spotz[m] | I will be PTO during the PTG | 18:18 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m]: ah, bummer | 18:18 |
| gouthamr | we'll be sure to record things as usual :) so do enjoy the PTO | 18:19 |
| spotz[m] | I’ll be in the UK bumming around:) | 18:19 |
| gouthamr | nice! | 18:19 |
| mharley[m] | Hi, folks. First time in this room. I’m the candidate for Barbican PTL. | 18:20 |
| mharley[m] | Not sure if this is the right time to mention it or if there will be a specific time to discuss it. | 18:20 |
| fungi | that's the next topic in the agenda, looks like | 18:20 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: ack, ty for joining us.. we'll get to that topic next | 18:21 |
| spotz[m] | Once a Barbicaneer always a Barbicaneer! | 18:21 |
| mharley[m] | TY | 18:21 |
| gouthamr | if you haven't already, do register for the PTG: https://ptg.openinfra.org/ - doing this will add you to an email list for updates | 18:21 |
| gouthamr | and allow the event organizers to gather attendance statistics | 18:22 |
| gouthamr | alright lets move on to the next topic.. | 18:22 |
| gouthamr | #topic 2025.2 Elections | 18:22 |
| gouthamr | ^ i've renamed the topic to begin discussing from the top | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | first off, thanks for all the hard work on the elections slaweq and ianychoi | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | thanks also for new and returning PTLs and TC members | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | slaweq: what election processes are left to complete? | 18:24 |
| gouthamr | i see a couple of changes that need to merge: | 18:25 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/942506 (Close 2025.2 Election Results) | 18:25 |
| spotz[m] | Time I think at least for TC due to campaigning | 18:25 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/942507 (Add TC/PTL results from 2025.2 election) | 18:25 |
| gouthamr | ^ this needs to be rebased since we merged liaisons for Ironic that updated its leadership_type | 18:26 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m]: yes; there was an update made to the previously published election schedule this week | 18:27 |
| gouthamr | s/made/proposed// | 18:27 |
| slaweq | there is no voting needed, so I think that on Thursday we can merge patches propsed by ianychoi and I will send email to conclude the whole process and we should be good I think | 18:28 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 18:28 |
| gouthamr | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/942506/1/configuration.yaml | 18:28 |
| fungi | i'll note that there's an openinfra foundation newsletter going out tomorrow and i'd like to congratulate the newly-elected tc members and ptls, but not sure what i should link to at this point, especially if they won't be officially announced until the next day | 18:29 |
| gouthamr | does the new PTL/TC term begin after Epoxy RC1 has been tagged? | 18:29 |
| gouthamr | fungi: yeah :( | 18:30 |
| fungi | technical committee members have traditionally taken their seats as of the next meeting following the election, though i don't recall how we handled it in the past elections where no poll was required | 18:31 |
| gouthamr | yes ^ i was trying to find examples of what we may have done | 18:31 |
| fungi | with ptl's it's a little fuzzy and generally up to the teams, but where there are strong ties to the release cycle they sometimes start at rc1 because things merging to master thereafter are targeting the subsequent release | 18:32 |
| fungi | other teams have approached it more around ptg planning | 18:32 |
| gouthamr | the last time the TC was seated without elections was 2023.2 | 18:32 |
| gouthamr | https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/bobcat/tc.html | 18:32 |
| frickler | IMHO it would make sense to wait until the end of the planned election period, so the cutover would happen at the same time whether an actual election is needed or not | 18:33 |
| gouthamr | ^ i agree | 18:33 |
| gouthamr | imho we don't really need to adjust anything whether or not elections occur.. | 18:34 |
| frickler | so that's for the governance change. the election results change could be merged right away | 18:34 |
| gouthamr | i agree with the officials announcing results when they prefer - for now they've set the date as 2025-02-26 | 18:34 |
| gouthamr | which basically would have been the beginning of the poll period | 18:35 |
| gouthamr | any reason to not do this? | 18:36 |
| slaweq | It can be. I just didn't want to do it while officially we are still in the campaign period | 18:37 |
| gouthamr | this = slaweq and ianychoi can merge the election results in the election repo on 2025-02-26 as they've planned, we merge the governance change after that with enough TC folks voting for it | 18:38 |
| gouthamr | slaweq: makes sense | 18:39 |
| gouthamr | i think we can spell this bit down in the election processes | 18:39 |
| gouthamr | its not unusual for us to skip elections - has happened a few times before | 18:40 |
| gouthamr | and we don't need one off solutions each time this has happened | 18:40 |
| frickler | +1 | 18:40 |
| gouthamr | okay, hearing no objections | 18:41 |
| fungi | for the 2023.2 election, james replaced arne, elections were closed out with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/874970 which merged 2023-02-24, the election configuration for that round had nominations end 2023-02-15 with voting scheduled to conclude 2023-03-08, so the election results were merged during what would have been the campaigning period | 18:41 |
| gouthamr | fungi: sorry about the newsletter - maybe you could still share the anticipation that results of the election will be available a day later :) | 18:41 |
| gouthamr | fungi: ah | 18:41 |
| gouthamr | thanks for finding that.. | 18:42 |
| slaweq | if you are all ok with this, I can merge this election results patch tomorrow morning | 18:42 |
| gouthamr | works for me, it is the date you've mentioned: 2025-02-26 | 18:42 |
| gouthamr | and i can follow up with the governance change.. (please review and +1) | 18:43 |
| frickler | we need to talk about oslo being leaderless due to the DPL reset, so nobody can approve release patches. at the same time there are release critical bug fixes that are waiting for a release | 18:44 |
| mharley[m] | So, my candidacy patch failed in Zuul because the last year I was mostly working on downstream. | 18:44 |
| mharley[m] | For this year, I plan to get more engaged with upstream. | 18:44 |
| gouthamr | thanks, lets switch to this sub-topic of "leaderless" project teams | 18:45 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: can you propose a patch like: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/928881 | 18:45 |
| gouthamr | you can abandon https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/942110 since it cannot merge | 18:45 |
| frickler | it needs to be based upon the results patch | 18:46 |
| frickler | which needs a rebase itself first | 18:46 |
| gouthamr | ^ yes | 18:46 |
| mharley[m] | gouthamr: apologies, but I’m a bit confused. So I have to submit a new candidacy patch? Is that what you’re saying? | 18:47 |
| frickler | mharley[m]: not for candidacy but for appointment | 18:47 |
| mharley[m] | I’m out of home now. Sorry if it’s a basic question, but don’t have access to my laptop. | 18:47 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: no, not a candidacy.. if your nomination hasn't merged by the nomination deadline, the TC needs to find/appoint a project lead | 18:47 |
| fungi | different repository | 18:47 |
| fungi | governance instead of election | 18:48 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: and that's done directly on the "openstack/governance" repository | 18:48 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: so when you're able to, follow https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/928881 as an example, and add your details under the "barbican" project | 18:48 |
| mharley[m] | OK, so the action item from my side is to submit a patch in the governance repository as the last link above, right? | 18:49 |
| gouthamr | yes, and abandon your election patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/942110 | 18:49 |
| gouthamr | beware of what frickler just mentioned as well, though | 18:49 |
| mharley[m] | Gotcha. This needs to be done tonight (I’m in Europe), since the merge will happen tomorrow morning. Is that correct? | 18:50 |
| gouthamr | your change to openstack/governance will need to follow the other update we're making: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/942507 | 18:50 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: nope, no rush | 18:50 |
| mharley[m] | I’ll check those links tomorrow then. | 18:50 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: a bit about this process.. do it as soon as you're able.. but, if you delay, we'll ping you :D | 18:51 |
| fungi | the election results change merging tomorrow simply records the outcome of elections the officials oversaw, appointments for missing ptls are a separate process handled by the tc | 18:51 |
| mharley[m] | Understood, gouthamr. | 18:51 |
| mharley[m] | * Understood, gouthamr and fungi. | 18:51 |
| gouthamr | mharley[m]: and when you do have the patch up, the patch will gather reviews for at least a week.. so things will seem to be slow.. its good to keep a watch in case the patch needs to change due to comments, or you need to resolve merge conflicts | 18:52 |
| gouthamr | i do appreciate that you're at the right meeting, asking the right questions :) | 18:53 |
| mharley[m] | My pleasure. Yep, got a participation advice from dmendiza. 😉 | 18:54 |
| gouthamr | frickler: about oslo, | 18:55 |
| gouthamr | frickler: damani and tkajinam are still the release liaisons | 18:55 |
| gouthamr | can you share what's blocked now? | 18:55 |
| gouthamr | frickler: oslo's 2025.2 leadership is uncertain, but, tkajinam did mention that he can continue to be release liaison and assist when possible | 18:56 |
| frickler | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/942681 is one example | 18:56 |
| frickler | so the automatic check doesn't trigger even if tkajinam proposed the change | 18:56 |
| gouthamr | oh :( | 18:57 |
| gouthamr | can you override it/ | 18:57 |
| gouthamr | since this is two processes being at loggerheads with each other | 18:57 |
| gouthamr | we reset the liaisons prior to elections, and don't add them back until after elections.. | 18:58 |
| frickler | well technically I can, but as I said in the release channel, having formal TC approval would seem better to me | 18:58 |
| gouthamr | and the release liaison (or PTL) is necessary to trigger the PTL-Approved vote | 18:58 |
| gouthamr | ack, i can clarify on the patch | 18:58 |
| frickler | ok, thx | 18:59 |
| gouthamr | alright, we're at time | 19:00 |
| gouthamr | we can continue discussing the leaderless projects.. but i think its worth sharing the process on the ML because we had some late nominations that need appointments | 19:00 |
| gouthamr | i don't think we'll resolve the leadership situation with oslo right away though.. i'll add an item to the team's meeting agenda | 19:01 |
| gouthamr | thank you all for attending | 19:02 |
| slaweq | o/ | 19:02 |
| gouthamr | #endmeeting | 19:02 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Feb 25 19:02:27 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:02 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-02-25-18.00.html | 19:02 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-02-25-18.00.txt | 19:02 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-02-25-18.00.log.html | 19:02 |
| fungi | tc-members: (and anyone else who cares) see https://lists.openinfra.org/archives/list/foundation@lists.openinfra.org/message/I2XP4T2C47TEODOH4JYVUZNEWK33R3PN/ with a link to draft governance documents and feedback calls for proposed OpenInfra/LF merge, two calls being held tomorrow at different times or follow up on the foundation mailing list | 19:02 |
| gouthamr | ^ grr | 19:02 |
| fungi | i was saving that for open discussion but we didn't have one this week | 19:03 |
| gmann | frickler: gouthamr: for oslo, if we see in current situation it is leaderless now and we should solve the leadership model which can be PTL or DPL as per how it meet the requirement. If any release is blocking due to that then we should make leadership issue on priority. We can override release things as TC but it should not be preferable or first choice. | 19:03 |
| gouthamr | fungi: yeah :( | 19:03 |
| gouthamr | gmann: oslo isn't leaderless for 2025.1 - the reset was aimed at 2025.2, correct? | 19:04 |
| gmann | it is same question as other leadership project in past where we marked them inactive or not done releases for them unless we find the leaders. If we override that policy for Oslo, then i agree with frickler that it need TC resolution/approval | 19:04 |
| gmann | gouthamr: well, that is another question about from when the new leadership start or the exact timeline of previous and new leadership. We have TC terms starting/ending as per election conclude and not as per cycle start/end | 19:06 |
| frickler | iiuc oslo does have people interested in continuing dpl, just with some change in personnel? | 19:06 |
| gmann | but I agree that for project leadership, we do not have any written term start/end | 19:06 |
| gouthamr | that'd be a weird grey area then | 19:07 |
| gouthamr | lets plug it :) | 19:07 |
| gouthamr | sorry i missed your ping, frickler | 19:07 |
| gmann | oslo DPL model reset to PTL make it clear that we do not oslo meeting DPL requirement | 19:07 |
| gmann | what we should consider until we change or write somthing. what we have mentioned in projects.yaml is the current situation/leadership for any project | 19:08 |
| gmann | and in current doc, oslo is leaderless. | 19:08 |
| gmann | I will not be comfortable to add my +1 as oslo tact-sig liaison now as that is not the role I am in now. | 19:09 |
| fungi | i'd be okay taking that on, as i'm a core reviewer on at least some oslo libs and the current tact sig chair | 19:10 |
| fungi | i guess it would result in me talking to myself even more than i already do? | 19:11 |
| gmann | I am not saying I cannot do that, I am ok to do if oslo is in DPL model. | 19:11 |
| fungi | ah, what liaisons was oslo missing volunteers for? | 19:12 |
| gmann | and i +1 for that role in DPL reset change aslo but overall oslo does not satisfy the DPL model and all liaisons are reset now | 19:12 |
| gmann | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939485 | 19:12 |
| gmann | that is change where it did not met the requirement | 19:13 |
| fungi | so it's missing a volunteer for security liaison, from what i can tell looking at who left a -1 and who didn't | 19:14 |
| gmann | and I think what we should do is to reachout to damani and check if they are still ok for PTL role.I pinged damani in oslo channel also last week but no response on that | 19:15 |
| gmann | security liaison + release liaions if tkajinam is ok to take that role as alone. because there will be change in release liaisons list also | 19:16 |
| fungi | okay, so if a team had more than one volunteer for a single liaison role, one of them disappearing can still block the ability to continue as dpl. i guess i hadn't thought about that possibility/risk | 19:16 |
| gmann | we should not consider one release liaison +1 as either 'continue as alone' or 'continue with other members' | 19:17 |
| JayF | fungi: well, theoretically couldn't oslo team have edited their liasons before the election to resolve this issue? | 19:17 |
| mharley[m] | Me again. Sorry, what is this security liaison about? Any link where I can learn more about it? | 19:17 |
| gmann | no it does not block the DPL model but requirement is liaisons list needs to be refreshed . we cannot continue DPL model when there is no confirmation form all listed liaison | 19:17 |
| JayF | fungi: in the same way that Ironic could've done DPL if we started earlier | 19:18 |
| gmann | watcher is good example on refreshing the liaison and how DPL model reset looks loike | 19:18 |
| gmann | DPL model reset in watcher when not all liaison +1 (DPL reset requirement) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939488 | 19:19 |
| gmann | watcher adopted DPL with active list of liaison https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/940167/1 | 19:19 |
| fungi | mharley[m]: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/distributed-project-leadership.html#required-roles | 19:20 |
| gmann | this can be done by oslo also and if we have DPL model liaisons requirement met then it is good to continue as DPL | 19:20 |
| mharley[m] | Thanks, fungi. | 19:20 |
| gmann | whole idea of DPL reset is 'refresh liaison list and keep it active and up to dated' | 19:21 |
| fungi | mharley[m]: note that's for projects under distributed leadership, not necessary for a ptl project as the ptl is assumed to handle or delegate all of those activities | 19:21 |
| mharley[m] | Understood. | 19:22 |
| gouthamr | oslo, like the projects it manages doesn't sound like a cohesive team to me.. and imho it'll benefit from a lazy consensus approach that liaisons can provide | 19:26 |
| gouthamr | regarding reaching out to damani, i've done that multiple times in the past few weeks, over multiple forums | 19:26 |
| gouthamr | i'm unable to get concrete responses, and it indicates that we have a flaw in our approach if one liaison stepping away can break our processes | 19:27 |
| fungi | it's not even clear to me that oslo benefits from being a team, since it's just sort of been a dumping ground for deliverables that didn't fit anywhere else | 19:28 |
| gmann | gouthamr: its not like that, check watcher example | 19:28 |
| fungi | the only thing the oslo deliverables have in common is that they didn't make sense as deliverables for another team | 19:28 |
| gmann | current active liaison needs to propose the refresh list and our process does not block project to continue DPL | 19:29 |
| gouthamr | gmann: yeah, taht would have worked if the team was actively talking with each other all the time and were on the same page.. on the governance patch, everyone was being nice to each other and were okay with damani proposing themselves as PTL | 19:30 |
| gmann | and why it is important is because liaisons as list for any role is not equal to single liaison taking role as alone | 19:30 |
| gouthamr | so we merged the DPL change in anticipation of a nomination | 19:30 |
| gmann | we merged it because it did not met the DPL requirement | 19:30 |
| gouthamr | which was damani not responding in time? | 19:33 |
| gouthamr | sorry, not pointing fingers - trying to grok how to make this better | 19:34 |
| gouthamr | for the release deliverable that's blocked and for future teams.. | 19:34 |
| gouthamr | one problem i see is that people need to be away for legitimate reasons, and our processes are poorly understood (as tkajinam stated on the patch) | 19:36 |
| gouthamr | what would have avoided the awkward situation is tkajinam and you proposing a patch removing damani as a liaison for the time being and making liaison changes later | 19:38 |
| gouthamr | but, for a team like oslo, i contend that's very hard to determine/do | 19:38 |
| gmann | I am not sure but our process is very easy and simple 'if you are ok to continue to role you listed in DPL, confirm it by +1 on this change/ML/IRC' | 19:43 |
| gmann | if not then we have to refresh the list who is ready to take mentioned roles | 19:43 |
| fungi | that requires some coordination between the people who make up the team, regular communication at least, which it seems like oslo doesn't really have? | 19:44 |
| fungi | though they do seem to be holding weekly meetings, so maybe they do | 19:46 |
| gmann | but oslo has weekly meeting happening every week, this topic is raised there multiple times so I did not feel communciation is issue in this particular case | 19:46 |
| gmann | example, this meeting https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-oslo-meeting-tracking#L178 | 19:46 |
| fungi | they've held meetings consistently for the past 5 weeks: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/oslo/2025/ | 19:48 |
| gmann | IMO this is good indication where we have to again explicitly call out 'help needed in oslo' instead of finding workaround to hide it (for short term it is ok to find workaround) | 19:49 |
| gmann | let's things blocked/slow and see if that can solve things here and we can get more help in oslo from organizations | 19:50 |
| gmann | that is what we followed the process for other projects and they end up in retirement as no organization is interested to help. But oslo is different here and cannot be retired so clear message about help is needed | 19:51 |
| JayF | Well the weird thing about oslo is often oslo contributions come from folks whose primary focus is other projects. | 19:52 |
| JayF | There aren't many (any?) dedicated folks working just on oslo. | 19:52 |
| gmann | if we end up putting more and more load on a few members for example tkajinam and expecting him to do/continue everything that is not right direction | 19:52 |
| JayF | That in itself isn't a problem as long as the lights are kept on, but it makes it weird for purposes of how we treat project leadership | 19:52 |
| JayF | gmann: We should consider doing an upstream investment opportunity doc for oslo contribution. I could at least take that to my leadership and see if we have resources we could point to be more dedicated on that project. | 20:38 |
| gmann | ++ | 20:45 |
| JayF | This is the sorta thing I'd do but it'd probably be more effective if I was pointing to someone elses' words :D | 20:48 |
| * gouthamr wraps up meetings and reads scrollback | 22:10 | |
| gouthamr | I think oslo's upstream investment opportunity is warranted, oslo-core is 6 people on gerrit, and bnemec and dhellman aren't around to continue, and others have repeatedly mentioned they're contributing part time.. so dedicated help will be super useful | 22:11 |
| gouthamr | i read oslo meetings | 22:12 |
| gouthamr | i think the topic of leadership got a brief mention and its possible things got lost in translation | 22:12 |
| gouthamr | the next meeting in #openstack-oslo is tomorrow at 1300 UTC | 22:13 |
| * gouthamr which is 5 am my time sigh | 22:14 | |
| gouthamr | i'll leave some notes in the etherpad in case they can pick up and discuss | 22:14 |
| gouthamr | it looks like damani drives these consistently, so would be nice to know his thoughts on how to remedy the situation we have wrt the blocked release | 22:15 |
| gouthamr | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-oslo-meeting-tracking#L221 | 22:20 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-manuals master: Use dnf instead of yum - Network Time Protocol (NTP) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/939466 | 23:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!