| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/election master: Create candidates/2026.1 placeholder directories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/949554 | 03:05 |
|---|---|---|
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 12:27 | |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: Documentation main page - add link to Glossary https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/947058 | 15:15 |
| *** ralonsoh is now known as ralonsoh_out | 16:03 | |
| gouthamr | tc-members: a gentle reminder that we'll have our weekly IRC meeting here in ~52 minutes | 16:08 |
| gouthamr | #startmeeting tc | 17:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue May 13 17:00:04 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 17:00 |
| 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. | 17:00 |
| gouthamr | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 17:00 |
| gouthamr | #topic Roll Call | 17:00 |
| frickler | \o | 17:01 |
| gtema | o/ | 17:02 |
| frickler | hmm, pretty empty around here | 17:03 |
| gouthamr | courtesy-ping: noonedeadpunk, gmaan, spotz, cardoe, mnasiadka, bauzas | 17:03 |
| gmaan | o/ | 17:03 |
| gmaan | board meeting still going on but should be closed soon | 17:03 |
| mnasiadka | o/ | 17:03 |
| gouthamr | gmaan: ack.. | 17:04 |
| bauzas | o/ but distant | 17:04 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m] should replace spotz on the ping list, don't know if she has notifications set for just "spotz" | 17:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 17:04 |
| gouthamr | alright, most of us are here, lets begin.. | 17:05 |
| gouthamr | #topic Last Week's AIs | 17:05 |
| spotz[m] | Board meeting is still going but here | 17:05 |
| spotz[m] | Ok we're done there | 17:06 |
| gouthamr | i have a few on me that i am going to punt to this week too, lest someone can lend me an extra pair of hands/time :D | 17:07 |
| gouthamr | - mailing list discussion about Skyline SBOM | 17:07 |
| gouthamr | - adding VMT process links to the "New Projects Requirements" doc | 17:07 |
| gouthamr | - reach out to all project teams to refresh security liaisons and coresec groups | 17:07 |
| gouthamr | in similar vein i think fungi was taking a look at adding escalation documentation for unresponsive liaisons and PTLs within the VMT docs | 17:07 |
| fungi | yes | 17:07 |
| gouthamr | i think you had a busy week, so we can work on these when/if you have time this week.. i'll keep tracking this | 17:08 |
| gouthamr | any update on "ansible-collections-openstack"? | 17:09 |
| gouthamr | did anything change wrt the review situation there? | 17:09 |
| gtema | why should it change just magically? | 17:10 |
| cardoe | o/ | 17:10 |
| gouthamr | not magically, just checking if anyone here worked on this further | 17:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | I was not :( | 17:12 |
| gouthamr | ack, ty.. | 17:14 |
| gouthamr | we took an AI to update our OpenInfra profiles with current affiliations.. this helps a couple of things we're trying to do/formalize before the next elections: | 17:14 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/949432 ( Require declaration of affiliation from TC Candidates) | 17:15 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/876738 (Add affiliation lookup functionality) | 17:15 |
| gouthamr | ty for the reviews on the proposal so far gmaan and JayF.. i'll post an update soon | 17:16 |
| fungi | ah, yeah i was just about to mention that change | 17:16 |
| gmaan | so main goal is here to make affiliation visible to community when voting right? and off course to have it up to dated in openinfra profile. | 17:16 |
| fungi | if anyone wants to take it over and flesh it out, i'm happy to un-wip that | 17:16 |
| fungi | it's sort of bare-bones at the moment | 17:16 |
| gouthamr | gmaan: yes | 17:17 |
| gmaan | I am thinking if somehw we can show it (from openinfra foundation) to TC member table also? | 17:17 |
| gmaan | I know we discussed it in past but hardly recall why we did not do | 17:17 |
| gouthamr | oh, i didn't know of that discussion | 17:17 |
| gmaan | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/#current-members | 17:18 |
| gmaan | this one ^^ | 17:18 |
| gmaan | at least it will help if any affiliation change in between and it will be easy to know by everyone | 17:18 |
| gouthamr | that table is statically compiled.. | 17:19 |
| fungi | publishing it on the governance web page was considered iffy because it makes it look like tc member seats are assigned to specific companies | 17:19 |
| fungi | or that tc members are expected to act as representatives of their employers | 17:19 |
| JayF | I wonder if you could combat that with only showing the aggregate data. | 17:20 |
| fungi | we tried to avoid giving that impression, since there definitely are other open source projects which operate that way | 17:20 |
| gouthamr | #link https://github.com/kubernetes/steering | 17:20 |
| gouthamr | ^ as an example | 17:20 |
| spotz[m] | And how you word it could make folks think we can't police the diversity rule ourselves | 17:21 |
| JayF | e.g. "TC membership is in compliance with corporate diversity requirements, with X members from Y company, A from Z,..." | 17:21 |
| JayF | instead of trying to map people:companies, just express that we have diverse corporate perspectives; which is the point? | 17:21 |
| gmaan | yeah, showing affiliation is not very new things and we know we should be community first not just as TC but a community member | 17:21 |
| spotz[m] | But the problem is if folks affiliations aren't up to date then it's harder to verify | 17:22 |
| fungi | if you show the totals for different organizations, still would want to include a disclaimer that these are not x number of seats assigned to employer 1, y number of seats assigned to employer 2, et cetera | 17:22 |
| gmaan | we are asking everyone to add affiliation in TC candidacy and profile. Showing it in governance page is more of making data easily visible to everyone. | 17:23 |
| gmaan | there is nothing we need to hide or make less visible about it | 17:23 |
| gouthamr | maybe we just propose a change and debate on it? i do think adding disclaimers will be useful, and we should trust our community not to misconstrue this | 17:24 |
| fungi | but publishing it without providing clear context can be more confusing than not putting it front and center on the main page of the technical governance site too | 17:25 |
| JayF | gouthamr: I am not concerned about *our community* misconstruing this, I think the concern is how it appears to external folks | 17:25 |
| gmaan | yeah, if we are doing for election candidacy then we should do it on TC member table also. | 17:25 |
| gouthamr | ack, i think the foundation could be concerned about external perceptions.. and i'm sympathetic to their view given all the campaigning they do to grow the community | 17:26 |
| gmaan | we can highlight the main motive of org diversity, column name can be "Organization diversity" or something | 17:26 |
| JayF | Yeah I think it's all implementation details. Please add me as a reviewer on the proposed change and I'll happily help. | 17:26 |
| fungi | i already hear somewhat regularly from people in other communities that "openstack is not openly governed" because they saw that companies get to purchase seats on the foundatition board, not realizing that the board doesn't decide the technical direction of the project | 17:26 |
| gmaan | we do have affiliation shown for board members also in main page so it is not just for TC | 17:27 |
| gmaan | JayF: ++ | 17:27 |
| gouthamr | true, fungi | 17:27 |
| gouthamr | i actually want to fight this misconception | 17:27 |
| gouthamr | on a tangent, people assume everythng the board adopts is automatically applicable to OpenStack | 17:27 |
| gmaan | I think if we see that then it will be valid when we put it in TC election candidacy | 17:28 |
| gouthamr | it isn't, the TC still governs the project independent of the board's decisions, and we need to accept/adopt their recommendations/stance | 17:28 |
| spotz[m] | Historically it was, now it's not:) | 17:28 |
| gmaan | someone can say having affiliation in candidacy also influence the votes? | 17:28 |
| gouthamr | it should :D | 17:29 |
| gmaan | well, we should not think only min requirement of org diversity . | 17:29 |
| gouthamr | i mean, we are hoping if company X has 6 candidates for an election, the electorate votes keeping in mind that only 4 of them will ever be on the TC | 17:29 |
| JayF | It's completely reasonable to allow folks to vote against candidates based on their employers actions in/attitudes towards the OSS community. | 17:30 |
| gmaan | I feel adding it in election is more externally concern then having elected TC member data showing | 17:31 |
| gmaan | JayF: against is fine, but who stop them to be in favor when they see the affiliation as one of the data for voting | 17:31 |
| JayF | gmaan: Ah, I hadn't thought about it from that perspective; but I suspect that if that sorta stuff is happening it's going to happen internally if not externally. Bad actors will find a way to act bad. | 17:32 |
| JayF | gmaan: and I say this as a person who had their vote specifically solicited by a former employer while I worked there via internal mailing lists during early, early OpenStack days :) | 17:33 |
| gmaan | I mean if "openstack is not openly governed" is perception then adding affiliation in election does not solve it instead it bump it more | 17:33 |
| fungi | yeah, we had at least one case (long ago now) where a candidate was censured because their employer was contacting customers suggesting voting for that employee | 17:34 |
| spotz[m] | I personally just remind folks to vote because we have a bad turnout issue. I don't care who they vote for:) | 17:34 |
| gouthamr | ^ deeper problem :D | 17:34 |
| gouthamr | i mean = our voter turnout | 17:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | indeed... | 17:35 |
| spotz[m] | Yeah I know what you meant:) | 17:35 |
| gmaan | I was ok initially but seeing the points here especially fungi mentioned make me change my vote not to make affiliation more visible especially during election. | 17:35 |
| gmaan | let's keep it same as it is now, do diversity checks and advertisement on ML, IRC etc | 17:35 |
| gouthamr | okay, lets work out a proposal and discuss this some more | 17:36 |
| gouthamr | we have other topics to get to today | 17:36 |
| gouthamr | ty for engaging here, but please hold your pitchforks for the gerrit changes :D | 17:36 |
| gouthamr | next AI: we had a couple of "AI" meetings in the past week! | 17:36 |
| gouthamr | at this point, who's to say we're not sending ai agents to all these meetings.. but i did see spotz[m] and bauzas at these meetings, and i don't know if there's anything to share here beyond the summary i posted with the TC weekly email | 17:37 |
| bauzas | cool indeed | 17:38 |
| gouthamr | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/BX7XVZ4I6AAKJETU6Y2TQBNFXO7BUKZ2/ | 17:38 |
| gouthamr | tl;dr: first paragraph | 17:38 |
| gouthamr | on the last AI that i was tracking: "update all project contributor guides to list how to reach core teams" - i sought some action on this through that same email | 17:39 |
| gouthamr | i was curious, do we do PTL-only emails like the release team does? | 17:39 |
| gouthamr | i am inclined to stick to the list and prefix something with [all] and [ptl] | 17:40 |
| fungi | can't hurt | 17:40 |
| gmaan | ++, we are not asking any confidentiality to PTL, they can always share it with team or community. at least it will help to have better response/communication. | 17:41 |
| mnasiadka | +1 | 17:41 |
| gmaan | I am ok if we send to PTL personal email also | 17:41 |
| gouthamr | i did that before the PTG, and i don't know if it was useful or annoying :D no one complained, but people did come to our community leadership forum | 17:42 |
| gouthamr | that's all the AIs i was tracking | 17:43 |
| gouthamr | was anyone else working on anything else to note here? | 17:43 |
| gmaan | we can send ML and the ping PTL who did not respond/take action. like election official did last time. I find that very useful | 17:43 |
| gouthamr | true, good idea | 17:44 |
| gouthamr | #topic 2026.1 Elections kick-off | 17:44 |
| gouthamr | you may have noticed gerrit updates, ty for reviews thus far on election setup that ianychoi and slaweq have been posting | 17:44 |
| gouthamr | #link #link https://governance.openstack.org/election/ | 17:44 |
| gouthamr | #undo | 17:45 |
| opendevmeet | Removing item from minutes: #link https://governance.openstack.org/election/ | 17:45 |
| gouthamr | #link https://governance.openstack.org/election/ | 17:45 |
| gouthamr | ^ the dates for the next election cycle are published | 17:45 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/949554 | 17:45 |
| gouthamr | we are creating directories for folks to submit their nominations at any time here | 17:45 |
| gouthamr | since i'm not contesting these elections in any capacity, i don't mind the collab with ianychoi and slaweq and helping with the TC stuff.. but, if you'd like to do it with me, please feel free and join the #openstack-election channel | 17:46 |
| gouthamr | ^ all the planning/updates are posted here, along with specific gerrit changes.. | 17:47 |
| gouthamr | any questions/concerns/feedback to share wrt elections? | 17:47 |
| gouthamr | alright, unfortunately, we're pressed for time again, so i'd like to table the topic follow up on the contributor experience to next week.. any objections? | 17:50 |
| spotz[m] | no but I won't be here:) | 17:50 |
| gouthamr | a reminder to please push your colleagues to take the contributor and maintainer surveys.. | 17:50 |
| gouthamr | ack spotz[m] | 17:51 |
| gouthamr | #topic A check on gate health | 17:51 |
| gouthamr | ^ any gate health concerns to report? | 17:51 |
| gmaan | nothing much this week. py3.9 drop fixes are settle down now | 17:51 |
| frickler | well rpittau made a revert for the py39 drop from reqs and is adding extra work in to keep things updated | 17:52 |
| fungi | a setuptools update broke pbr in some situations, work is in progress to address that | 17:52 |
| gouthamr | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/DOJZL5WZJMN4NEAD5GLIQZ455D2NUREY/ (wsgi/deployment changes) | 17:53 |
| frickler | except that pbr CI is badly broken | 17:53 |
| gmaan | most of project py3.9 are dropped or adjusted (c9s ad rocky joibs), not sure what was blocker to re-add py3.9 constraitns | 17:53 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/948876 | 17:53 |
| frickler | seem ironic has some more twisted deps | 17:54 |
| gouthamr | "For example, without RHEL 10/CS 10 support in Bifrost, we're risking having no upgrade path for the current RHEL 9/CS 9 users." | 17:54 |
| gmaan | not sure if we will be ready with cs10 by oct when 3.9 is EOL but somewhere we need to hard stop to support it | 17:55 |
| frickler | there also was some CI failures due to an osc-lib updates, sample fix is https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-octaviaclient/+/948981 | 17:55 |
| gmaan | cs9 can be run on 3.11, that is how yatin moved devstack jobs to | 17:55 |
| gouthamr | right now, with the revert, any changes to the requirements repo not compatible with py3.9 will not be allowed, correct? | 17:56 |
| frickler | well you can make version specific changes, like for >=py310 | 17:56 |
| frickler | there's a lot of those in there already anyway | 17:57 |
| frickler | (for upper-constraints.txt) | 17:57 |
| gmaan | I am not sure requirement test the every bit of 3.9 but a basic checks yes. Many project dropped py3.9 testing like functional tests | 17:58 |
| gmaan | and unit tests from generic python testing template are also gone since start of cycle | 17:59 |
| frickler | that check only verifies that all of u-c is co-installable for every python version | 17:59 |
| gmaan | yeah, it is hard to say we support/test python 3.9 it is just we do not break if any testing exist | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | ~time check~ | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | thanks for highlighting this issue | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | anything else to note in the minutes today? | 18:00 |
| fungi | #link https://summit2025.openinfra.org/cfp/ paris-saclay summit cfp closes in exactly one month! | 18:01 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 18:01 |
| mnasiadka | Well, we have py3.9 back in reqs - but PTI for 2025.2 still does not include py3.9, right? | 18:01 |
| gouthamr | yes | 18:02 |
| fungi | also based on discussion at today's foundation board meeting, sounds very likely we'll be able to drop the icla and ccla in favor of dco (signed-off-by) once the foundation joins the lf | 18:02 |
| gmaan | not just PTI, we removed the testing also | 18:02 |
| gmaan | we are heading towards situation of py3.6 | 18:02 |
| gouthamr | fungi: ack, ty because i missed the meeting and will need to rely on minutes that won't be posted until they are approved at the next meeting :D | 18:03 |
| fungi | there will be an announcement to the foundation ml about it, and i'll bring it up on openstack-discuss once that's posted | 18:03 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 18:03 |
| gmaan | I think jbryce will send in on openstack-dicuss also but if ont then yes it will be on foundation ML at least | 18:03 |
| gouthamr | gmaan: i suspect this is temporary, but i share your suspicion that we may not be able to resolve CS10 issues by Oct | 18:03 |
| gmaan | gouthamr: mainly to run CS10 test at upstream | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | yes.. | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | lets wrap this meeting up, thank you all for joining, and for the spirited discussion.. we have lots to follow up on | 18:05 |
| mnasiadka | Maybe it's just me, but gmaan's replies are invisible to me via Matrix bridge - I'll need to re-read the meeting again in the logs ;-) | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | #endmeeting | 18:05 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue May 13 18:05:16 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:05 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-05-13-17.00.html | 18:05 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-05-13-17.00.txt | 18:05 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-05-13-17.00.log.html | 18:05 |
| gmaan | mnasiadka: oh | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | mnasiadka: oh, yikes.. gtema/spotz[m] - do you see the same issue? | 18:05 |
| fungi | possible something's gone sideways with the bridge, maybe like a partial netsplit | 18:06 |
| gtema | gouthamr - seems to be same on my side | 18:06 |
| fungi | in oftc proper i see his replies fine | 18:07 |
| fungi | so the meeting log should include them at least | 18:07 |
| mnasiadka | it does :) | 18:07 |
| fungi | oh, tc-members earlier today i approved a message through moderation to openstack-discuss from someone at another project asking whether we would relenquish control of https://pypi.org/p/quantum to them (for those who weren't around in the long-ago, that was the original name for neutron) | 19:28 |
| fungi | https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/2OHLYITMHMMQU5O2XKMCDNZCX4E3UOJD/#2OHLYITMHMMQU5O2XKMCDNZCX4E3UOJD | 19:28 |
| gouthamr | i think we can relinquish the name, no one should be using quantum 2012.2 ; and this is akin to https://pypi.org/p/reddwarf | 20:31 |
| gouthamr | https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/UIPSKKPCRH6E6ZVTSJW2UQPMNJ7ETELG/ | 20:32 |
| JayF | We can't "let them have it" in general though; the reason we don't use it anymore is that it is not a unique trademark. We can give the user the name in pypi; but it isn't any less ambiguous for them to use it than it was for us :) | 20:34 |
| gouthamr | for sure | 20:34 |
| gouthamr | but that's not our issue to impose? | 20:34 |
| gouthamr | we can tell them there's an issue, as sean mooney and you have done, but its their problem to sort it out :) | 20:35 |
| JayF | No, it's not. But it also doesn't mean we should let someone run full speed into a brick wall without us warning them it's there :D | 20:35 |
| gouthamr | yep | 20:35 |
| * JayF was hoping someone would have something beefier than what we said | 20:35 | |
| spotz[m] | Yeah I just knew we renamed due to trademark issue, so while we can give it to him my concern is it's use would come back on us | 20:36 |
| gouthamr | https://quantum-journal.org/quantum-is-now-a-registered-trademark/ | 20:37 |
| gouthamr | https://www.quantum.com/en/terms/ | 20:37 |
| gouthamr | https://uspto.report/TM/98362353 | 20:37 |
| fungi | if memory serves, the foundation's trademark lawyers were concerned we wouldn't be able to register it because there was a global storage hardware/software company of the same name, and so openstack's storage components could be seen as competitors (even though we wanted the name for the network component, that didn't really matter) | 20:37 |
| gouthamr | ah https://www.quantumstorage.com/ | 20:38 |
| gouthamr | :D | 20:38 |
| gouthamr | okay, computer storage | 20:38 |
| gouthamr | which is these guys: https://www.quantum.com/ | 20:38 |
| fungi | correct | 20:38 |
| fungi | the latter | 20:39 |
| gouthamr | > "while we can give it to him my concern is it's use would come back on us" | 20:39 |
| gouthamr | how? | 20:39 |
| fungi | they made consumer hard drives originally i think, i had a few of theirs back in the '90s | 20:40 |
| JayF | they made the bigfoots, the thinner but 5.25" style hard drives | 20:40 |
| spotz[m] | Well he found us through pypi:) | 20:40 |
| JayF | if you've never seen one, google it, it's pretty crazy to see | 20:41 |
| TheJulia | ... Yeah | 20:41 |
| TheJulia | err | 20:41 |
| gouthamr | yes, and the people we transferred https://pypi.org/p/reddwarf to deleted the project? | 20:41 |
| JayF | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bigfoot has a photo | 20:41 |
| TheJulia | fungi: yeah, I looked up the number of marks today for quantum and went "wow" | 20:41 |
| gouthamr | so maybe we can delete the contents and metadata and transfer stuff? | 20:41 |
| gouthamr | ah, sasquatch of storage | 20:42 |
| fungi | storsquatch | 20:42 |
| spotz[m] | I wonder if the trademark is still an issue? Not that we'd go back to it | 20:42 |
| fungi | yeah, i can give it the same treatment as reddwarf if tc-members are in agreement | 20:42 |
| spotz[m] | I'm fine with it | 20:43 |
| gouthamr | +1 from me, we've good citizens amongst us, JayF and sean-k-mooney | 20:43 |
| TheJulia | Go take a search at: https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/search/search-information | 20:43 |
| gouthamr | they warned the guy | 20:43 |
| TheJulia | I've got a half drafted email noting the bit about protecting and defedning marks | 20:44 |
| fungi | in my personal opinion, the fweer names we're squatting on pypi for no good reason, the better | 20:44 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 20:44 |
| JayF | Yeah I am like. +0 on this. I feel like doing what the person asks is going to make their life harder, but also I agree with fungi | 20:44 |
| JayF | it's their business how hard they want their life to be I guess :D | 20:44 |
| fungi | well, 1. they may not want a trademark for the brand, but 2. their field of endeavor might not be seen to compete | 20:45 |
| TheJulia | yeah, all the community can do is try to be a good citizen and point out "maybe not one to use" | 20:46 |
| gouthamr | maybe trademark lawyers and patent trolls collect fat paychecks for saying : "digital storage ~= package management" | 20:46 |
| TheJulia | and then release it | 20:46 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 20:46 |
| TheJulia | gouthamr: Even OSS projects have trademark lawyers... ;)( | 20:46 |
| TheJulia | err ;) | 20:46 |
| spotz[m] | I just don't want ours to have to get involved in this:) | 20:47 |
| gouthamr | true, and ours is quite conservative thankfully... that said, do we have any guidance somewhere | 20:48 |
| gouthamr | regarding naming new projects? | 20:48 |
| gouthamr | https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/creators.html#choosing-a-good-name-for-your-project | 20:48 |
| gouthamr | doesn't call out trademarks, or consulting the foundation lawyers via legal-discuss for instance | 20:49 |
| gouthamr | fungi: we still own https://pypi.org/project/python-reddwarfclient/ | 20:49 |
| gouthamr | a few weeks ago, this came up regarding "aetos" : https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/946744 | 20:51 |
| gouthamr | this = the issue if we need legal to weigh in on new project names | 20:52 |
| TheJulia | I'll throw in my $0.02: When I was at HP, we actually had to run project names by legal before we even proposed them upstream. That won't be same for everyone, and often, we've seen project have to change their names because you don't know sometimes | 20:53 |
| fungi | yeah, they didn't ask for us to give them that one. we *can* delete unwanted pypi projects if there's interest. or mark retired ones as "archived" now recently | 20:54 |
| gouthamr | TheJulia: yes; if we suggested that folks reach out to legal-discuss in the project creators guide, would the OpenInfra Foundation be billed for these requests? | 20:56 |
| fungi | i can find out, but also the answer to that is likely to be different a month from now | 20:57 |
| gouthamr | ah, due to the LF transition? | 20:57 |
| TheJulia | Yeah | 20:57 |
| gouthamr | we can hold off and ask when that's complete, we don't get new project requests often | 20:57 |
| fungi | yeah, would probably go through central lf legal, i hear they have a trademark lawyer on staff full time | 20:58 |
| TheJulia | *plus* some of us on legal disucss have to respond "I'm not a lawyer, but..." | 20:58 |
| gouthamr | in the past few weeks, we created "grain-ui" and "aetos" .. | 20:58 |
| fungi | grian | 20:58 |
| fungi | (not grain) | 20:58 |
| gouthamr | oh yes that | 20:58 |
| fungi | though i think people's spellcheckers keep auto-correcting it | 20:58 |
| gouthamr | am my own spellchecker - that's how i defend my typos :D | 20:59 |
| gouthamr | "Grian is the pseudonym of a British YouTuber, who is primarily known for creating Minecraft content." | 21:01 |
| gouthamr | #TIL | 21:01 |
| TheJulia | oh my | 21:01 |
| TheJulia | its not in the USPTO database! | 21:02 |
| gouthamr | haha, there's EPO, JPO, CHIPA, IP Australia, UK IPO, WIPO, ... and twenty others - unless we explicitly grin at non US intellectual property police | 21:04 |
| TheJulia | super true | 21:04 |
| gouthamr | would the TC like a vote on the matter? or is lazy consensus preferred | 21:06 |
| gouthamr | tc-members ^ | 21:06 |
| TheJulia | 14 results on Grian in WIPO's trademark db | 21:06 |
| gouthamr | (most of who may have slept) | 21:07 |
| gouthamr | yikes | 21:07 |
| TheJulia | 9,870 for quantum | 21:07 |
| gouthamr | *flip table* meme | 21:07 |
| TheJulia | lol | 21:07 |
| TheJulia | TFaaS | 21:08 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!