Tuesday, 2017-11-28

*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc00:03
*** kumarmn has quit IRC00:08
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc00:18
*** hongbin has quit IRC00:33
*** dklyle has quit IRC00:54
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc01:01
*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:03
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc01:03
*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:08
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc01:15
*** liujiong has joined #openstack-tc01:23
*** sdague has quit IRC01:47
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc01:48
*** ianychoi has quit IRC02:03
*** gcb has joined #openstack-tc02:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:29
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:31
*** kumarmn has quit IRC04:26
*** rosmaita has quit IRC04:39
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:32
*** mriedem has quit IRC07:00
*** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc08:53
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc08:57
cdenttc-members time for an early assemble09:01
cmurphymorning o/09:04
* johnthetubaguy is still applying caffeine09:05
ttxCouple of topics from me09:07
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc09:07
cdentif flaper87 shows up we have euro-quorum?09:07
ttxI was wondering what to do with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498798/09:08
ttxI was wondering if it meant that the telemetry crew is opting out of the goal09:09
ttxbased on discussion @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498796/09:09
cmurphyi think if they also delete their in-tree tempest plugins then they could be said to have met the goal09:10
ttxand how much we should care09:10
cmurphyi think they didn't see value in maintaining it at all iirc09:10
cdentspeaking as a former telemetry person who has maintained some interaction, most of the remaining cores have little to no interest in tempest09:10
ttxOK, I'll abandon and let chkumar|404 follow up09:11
cmurphythat commit message looks very familiar o.009:11
flaper87I honestly have not caught up with that discussion09:11
ttxWhich brings me to my other topic, Rocky goals09:11
ttxWe should start encouraging goals to be submitted and champions to be found09:12
cdent(I guess I ought to set aside some time for gabbi-tempest)09:12
ttxalthough it would be great to have a status update from Lamce and Chandan on how successful the current round is going09:12
cmurphyspeaking for lance i think the policy goal is going well09:13
flaper87ttx: ++09:13
ttxlbragstad, chkumar: feel free to chime in on the channel09:13
flaper87my guess is that the policy goal is going well based on the reviews I've done09:13
flaper87Do we have a prefered way to gather feedback about goals?09:14
flaper87I know we can infer some of it09:14
flaper87I guess we could ask on the ML09:14
cmurphythe updates to the completed artifacts seem like a good progress indication09:14
ttxI'm not a big fan of the current feedback/doc mechanism, I feel like it's a bit noisy and fails to show up progress09:14
ttxI prefer the burndown charts that lbragstad has been maintaining09:15
ttxi.e. a bunch of status pages rather than countless governance reviews09:15
flaper87ttx: indeed09:15
ttxthose per-team update in the goals/ governance directory has a lot of overhead/bureaucracy baked into it09:16
cdentpeople have started doing burndown stuff for lots of things that we might want to formalize it. i provided some space for the nova-notification burndown, but it would be good for it to be a real thing: http://burndown.peermore.com/nova-notification/09:16
johnthetubaguycertainly it seems more a driver effort, than lots of projects pitching in like we thought it would be09:16
flaper87I agree the charts are a good indicator. I'm wondering if we are getting enough feedback on the process though. How hard it is to push a goal, how much acceptance they are getting from teams09:16
johnthetubaguycdent: +1 would be good to make that easier for folks09:16
ttxYes, I'm fine with champions picking their tracking tool09:16
flaper87johnthetubaguy: exactly the kind of feedback I'd like to have from drivers09:16
ttxif we can standardize on something, even better09:17
johnthetubaguyttx: I probably like the best09:17
johnthetubaguyflaper87: +109:17
ttxflaper87: I'll start a thread so that they can answer async09:17
flaper87ttx: cool, thanks09:18
johnthetubaguy+1 good thinking09:18
ttxSo for Rocky goals, I think we should keep the champion system: if you (or someone you know) sre not ready to do some project-management around the goal, it's a waste of time to propose it09:19
ttxIs anyone interested in coordinating the search for R goals ?09:21
flaper87that yeah was for your previous comment09:21
flaper87not the question09:21
flaper87do we have good goal candidates for R?09:21
ttxflaper87: not yet, so the first steps are asking for champion feedback on the Q goals and then start a thread asking for ideas09:21
cmurphywhere is the goal backlog etherpad?09:22
* ttx looks09:22
johnthetubaguywhere there any big themes from the Forum people are seeing, that might lead towards a goal?09:23
ttxme awesomesearchbar comes up empty09:23
ttxthere was the health check stuff09:23
ttxmight be a bit early though09:23
cmurphymore policy changes are in the pipeline but that is probably a cycle or two off09:24
ttxyou probably want one implementation up before asking everyone to implement09:24
johnthetubaguyah, that came up in Boston, now I have been looking at Monitoring some deployment again, I am +1 a heath check thing09:24
cdentwhen do we want to start thinking about switching the tox jobs so that it is functional-py27 and functional is py3?09:25
cmurphyhere it is https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/community-goals09:25
cmurphysuper unguessable url09:25
cdentwe have got to come up with some way to keep better track of etherpads09:25
ttxcmurphy wins again09:26
flaper87The healthcheck work sounds interesting. I wonder if alan is going to push it forward09:26
ttxcdent: I think it's called a wiki09:26
* ttx hides09:26
flaper87I could reach out to Allan and check if he wants to drive that09:26
cdentttx: totes, but it’s only a wiki if we use it09:26
* flaper87 googles wiki09:26
ttxprivsep could make a good goal09:27
ttxmikal is pretty advanced in migrating nova, and neutron is almost done too09:27
ttxWhoever coordinated the R goals hunt could reach out to him and see if he feels like that could help09:28
ttxBy default I'll do the R goals hunt, but wouldn't mind a volunteer :)09:28
johnthetubaguyon a related note, he made an interesting list of ways you should expect your OpenStack vendor to be involved upstream, which included that kind of thing :)09:29
ttxthere was mordred thing that didn't make it last time, around version discovery09:29
ttxhe might have done it separately though09:30
ttxIn other news, the tech blog idea met a pretty cold reception yesterday. /me reads the new messages now09:31
flaper87ttx: yeah, but, there seems to be a platform for it already09:34
mordredttx: I didn't do it09:34
flaper87I had no iea that /blog was meant for that09:35
cdentup all night, whoooo’s staying09:35
flaper87cdent: lol09:35
cdentYeah, seems like we could marshall /blog to be what’s desired, but I think the key thing is the stuff that dhellmann and harlowja were discussing: acquisitions editor09:35
cdentotherwise relevance is a real problem09:36
flaper87cdent: indeed! I just replied to Jimmy's email saying that09:36
ttxflaper87: well, historically that was our only blog, so anything went in09:40
ttxResponding to the thread now09:40
ttx"Everything in & around OpenStack in written words" is the blog subline. Not exactly what harlowja described :)09:42
ttxthat said there is definitely potential to reuse the platform, since it's there and the only thing posted there those days is the dev digest09:43
cdentIf that subline is true, there’s not a lot happening in & around openstack09:47
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC09:48
ttxI'm not even sure Twitter was invented when that subline was written09:49
ttxwow, there are some gems in the blog09:51
ttxlike the OpenStack jingle09:51
flaper87ttx: link?09:51
ttxlet me listen to it once first09:51
ttxwow it's even worse than I expected09:52
johnthetubaguycdent: I see what you mean, oops09:53
* ttx updates tracker now09:56
cdentjohnthetubaguy: ?09:56
ttxcdent: re subline09:56
johnthetubaguycdent: yeah, subline09:59
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc10:09
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Remove releasenotes/requirements.txt  https://review.openstack.org/52139810:09
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Remove stable:follows-policy from Kolla  https://review.openstack.org/51968510:14
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Update Blazar's document references  https://review.openstack.org/52171910:15
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Add networking-generic-switch under ironic  https://review.openstack.org/52189410:16
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Fix the format file name  https://review.openstack.org/52300810:16
*** sdague has joined #openstack-tc10:22
openstackgerritThierry Carrez proposed openstack/governance master: Update URL for TC tracker on the wiki  https://review.openstack.org/52338110:25
*** gcb has quit IRC10:28
ttxLooks like EmilienM volunteered to be TC sponsor on dhellmann's "Goal champion" top-5 list item, so he might be interested in driving the Rocky goals search. I'll hold until I hear from him10:38
cdentttx: I thought we’ve said in the past that it is okay for a goal to be multi-cycle? I reckon the storyboard thing will never get off the ground until there’s a full and official push to make it so.10:46
* cdent coffees10:46
ttxcdent: did we ? I don't remember10:47
ttxbut then it's really a S cycle goal that is annuonced one year in advance :)10:48
cmurphyif a goal is expected to take multiple cycles my instinct is to say break it into smaller goals10:48
ttxcmurphy: yeah, that was the idea, the issue is that this one is not really easy to split/ You can't have a goal that 50% of the projects are migrated10:49
cmurphywith this one i think it would help to have a couple more large projects take the leap first10:50
cdentyes, but will they if we don’t say it is a goal, first?10:50
ttxwe could say "all projects in group foo"10:50
cmurphywhy not?10:50
cdentthere’s risk being an early adopter if it’s not clear there is commitment10:51
ttxI expect some of the largest projects to only consider migrating once everyone else is migrated10:51
cdentthe extent to which nova bugs are inter-related with other projects (outside openstack) is likely to be a challenge10:51
ttxSo at this stage I would focus on getting projects like Cinder and Ironic migrated10:51
ttxso that there is incentive to align10:51
ttxAlso I bet that we'll discover issues once largish projects are migrated10:52
ttxwhich we'll want to fix before asking "everyone else" to migrate10:52
cmurphyi think i could volunteer keystone, if there is a solution for that inter-project problem10:52
ttxcmurphy: the solution is called hyperlinks I think10:53
cmurphykeystone also makes heavy use of private bugs though10:53
ttxoh yes that's really a blocker10:53
* ttx tries to form an opinion on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521602/10:53
cdentIs there a pre-goal (or help wanted) to the “everyone on storyboard” goal of “make storyboard actually do the stuff requried”?10:54
cdentttx: I reckon how 521602 resolves will say a lot about whether there is a hierarchy of projects or not10:55
ttxI asked on the storyboard goal review for an update on the the provate bug stuff10:58
*** cdent has quit IRC11:01
*** liujiong has quit IRC11:07
*** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur13:02
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc13:03
*** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc13:12
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc13:28
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc13:32
*** kumarmn has quit IRC13:33
fungiyeah, last i looked the missing pieces of private bug workflow were the ability to predefine and subscribe groups of users rather than just individuals, and the ability to have groups or individuals auto-subscribed to bugs for specific projects13:38
fungi_technically_ private bugs are implemented and working now, but the above makes them not especially useful for our needs yet13:39
fungibut once a reporter realizes they should open a story privately, they're the only subscriber. then they need to realize they should subscribe people and figure out the names of the users they want subscribed and add them to the story13:41
fungiotherwise, it looks pretty solid13:41
ttxah, ok. So usable, even if a bit unwieldy13:42
fungiright, we _could_ work around it with some combination of documentation and client-side tools13:42
fungithough solving it in the service would of course still be preferable13:43
EmilienMttx: I'm happy to be involved in goals again14:00
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc14:34
lbragstadttx: i plan to do a recap summarizing the progress for the policy goal for queens 214:41
ttxEmilienM: so the first step would be to decide if we pursue with the idea of champions. I think from our perspective it's a success, but wanted to hear from lbragstad and chkumar first-hand experience14:43
ttxThen we need to statr a thread looking for goal proposals and accompanying champions14:43
EmilienMttx: yes, imho, we need one champion per goal14:43
EmilienMyes, it's on my list to take a look at that this week14:44
ttxI'll let you raise that thread then. Thanks for leading this14:44
lbragstadlooking at the projects who've made progress on the goal, i would consider championing goals a positive and worthwhile effort14:44
ttxlbragstad: I've no doubt it's positive, I was just wondering how painful that experience was for the champions. Would you describe it as a positive experience ?14:46
ttxI think a public thread about it may create vocations14:46
cdentEmilienM, ttx: I think we should make sure we distinguish between champions and heroes14:46
ttxcdent: heroes wear capes ?14:47
lbragstadall said and done - i think it was positive, a bit overwhelming at times... but I think that was given other responsibilities14:47
cdentvolunteering to champion shouldn’t be equal to volunterring to doing all the work14:47
ttxcdent: oh yes totally. It's just about volunteering to beat the drum and keep track14:47
EmilienMlike project manager14:48
lbragstadi certainly wouldn't be opposed to championing another goal, or co-championing it so long as communication is on point14:48
EmilienMwe had this discussion, I remember now14:48
cdentbut so far our two famous champions have been doing a lot of the work too?14:48
lbragstad^ that's why I think distributing the work might be worth a try :)14:49
ttxlbragstad: what about the current goal reporting (as reviews in governance repo) ? Would you rather just maintain some wikipage / website to track status ?14:49
lbragstadat the same time, a couple people really helped me out a lot during the process...14:49
ttxI feel like it creates a lot of work for little gain14:49
lbragstadyeah - the completion artifacts felt cumbersome for goal tracking14:49
* ttx is tempted to trash it in favor of some regular reports14:50
lbragstad(is this project using specs, a bug, the goal document itself, or something else to outline the work?)14:50
lbragstadthe more i had to dig for how a project answered that the more i felt the planning artifact should have just been the goal14:50
lbragstadtechnically - it should have had all the necessary information for someone to read it and start applying it to the project14:51
ttxEmilienM: I think it's a change to consider for the R goals -- track completion status separately from the governance goal doc14:52
lbragstadi didn't mind keeping completion artifacts in gerrit because i could just propose the review to the governance repo and make it dependent on the last change that implemented the goal in the project14:52
ttxit creates unnecessary hoops in the process imho, better have a quick report from the champion every milestone or so14:52
lbragstadbut i'm totally open to other ways of doing it, too14:53
EmilienMyou mean, tracking the goal results outside of openstack/governance ?14:53
EmilienMI'm fine with it14:53
EmilienMthe way it was done with governance was iterative and peer reviewed14:54
EmilienMif we use $tool to do it, it will be iterative as well but not well reviewed14:54
EmilienMbut we can try14:55
ttxEmilienM: I feel like we don't necessarily follow the goal enough to review those14:55
ttxand it creates a lot of churn on the governance repo14:55
ttxCould be replaced by 3 "goal updates" paragraphs that the champion would fill after each milestone14:56
cmurphywell we caught that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521445/ wasn't complete by forcing it to go through review14:56
cmurphynot that that would happen a lot14:57
ttxcmurphy: I bet the champion would have caught it too14:57
lbragstadseveral folks caught some updates i was making to projects that didn't make sense with the policy goal, those were caught in review14:58
ttxif they were in the review chain14:58
lbragstadthat was early on, when I was attempting to prune out all non-relevant projects from the goal14:58
ttxi also feel like the TC has nothing to do with this, since it's not governance. Other interested people should help tracking goals, not just TC members14:59
TheJuliaThat does seem logical, but I would only really wonder if champions really have necessary bandwidth15:00
ttxIf Gerrit is the right way to track goals, we could set up a separate repo. But I'm not convinced Gerrit is the best way, and would rather let champions use the tool of their preference15:00
lbragstadTheJulia: that kinda sounds like cdent's concern15:01
smcginnisCan Storyboard help in any way here with tracking?15:01
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc15:02
lbragstaddhellmann: and i spoke with Emmet Hickory during the PTG about using storyboard15:02
ttxThe only thing the TC needs to be involved with is selecting the set of goals for a given cyclle, know is whether goals are progressing, and if TC members should weigh in to restate the importance of the goal15:02
ttxknow if*15:03
ttxthen individuals can help keep track of the goal status to help the champion, but they don't need to be a TC member to do that15:03
TheJuliaI guess that is if individuals are aware they can assist, step up, and feel empowered to help that feedback loop.15:08
*** marst has joined #openstack-tc15:10
TheJuliaThe other question, that may help overall success is graphical representation of goal status, since humans tend to parse a picture far faster than text.15:11
persiaMy concern about using storyboard for this sort of thing is that until all the projects migrate, it becomes difficult to manage tasks for unmigrated projects in Storyboard.  Once migration has completed, I think it makes sense.15:12
persiaTheJulia: Have you seen the graphs lbragstad previously prepared?15:12
TheJuliapersia: Agree with that statement 100%15:13
lbragstadpersia: yeah - that's exactly what we were talking about with Emmett15:13
TheJuliapersia: I am unsure if I have seen the graphs you are referring to15:13
lbragstadTheJulia: if you're curious https://www.lbragstad.com/policy-burndown/15:13
lbragstad^ i stole some code from dhellmann and sdague to get that to work15:14
lbragstadit does not show projects that have completed the goal though - only ones in progress and ones that are left15:14
TheJuliaI guess that does kind of represent all of the data needed if you record the starting point and track along15:15
persialbragstad: For clarity: do you mean it doesn't list the completed projects in text?  I thought the graphical representation also included projects that had completed goals.15:15
lbragstadpersia: no - it only tracks what's in progress and what's left,15:16
lbragstadcompletion is tracked in the governance repo with the Completion Artifact15:16
persiaOh, heh.  Somehow my brain assumes the high point on the left is all the projects.  I suppose some may have completed goals before tracking begins :)15:16
TheJuliaSeems like the delta over time is what might be more important to track, because that might also help identify creep, of course that may not matter15:16
lbragstadpersia: yeah - the major drops in the graph are when i removed projects from tracking if they didn't have any work to do15:17
sdagueTheJulia: yeh, I banged that out when having to go through the giant backlog of api-ref doc fixes15:18
sdaguefor the nova project15:18
dhellmannpersia , lbragstad : yes, the discussion of using storyboard for tracking goals was part of why I wanted to push on the migration.15:42
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc15:43
*** david-lyle has quit IRC15:46
fungismcginnis: _if_ the completion tasks were in storyboard too, then yeah you could set up an automatic board where those tasks would move between new, review and merged lanes as their corresponding changes were worked through15:51
fungibut as persia says, not so convenient while projects are still in multiple task tracking systems15:51
smcginnisfungi: Maybe more reason to make moving to storyboard a goal. For future ease of goal tracking.15:55
lbragstadfungi: yes - exactly15:56
fungilbragstad: where you say "persia: yeah - that's exactly what we were talking about with Emmett" do you mean another emmett who isn't persia? ;)15:56
lbragstadif it's all in one place, it makes tracking all those bits way easier15:56
* lbragstad ...15:57
lbragstadpersia: i apologize, i completely forgot your nick to name mapping15:57
lbragstadfungi: thanks fungi15:57
* lbragstad should probably have another cup of coffee15:58
fungime too15:58
openstackgerritLance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Update policy artifacts for telemetry/panko  https://review.openstack.org/52345216:03
smcginnislbragstad: I was wondering about that. ;)16:11
TheJuliasmcginnis: I was just going to play along and see if it came back up :)16:37
* dims catching up on backlog16:40
*** robcresswell has joined #openstack-tc16:42
smcginniscdent: Great recap email, as usual.16:44
robcresswellcdent: Sorry I wasn't about for that discussion on the ptl-meeting last week, just reading logs16:44
robcresswellYeah, thats what led me here :)16:44
cdentthanks smcginnis, robcresswell16:44
dimscdent : +1 to "There wasn't time to actually discuss this as previous topics ran _way_ over, but at a superficial glance it appeared to involve a complete misunderstanding of not just how open source works in OpenStack, but how open source works in general."16:44
cdentrobcresswell: I don’t reckon I properly represented your needs/concerns so please feel free to followup16:45
cdentdims: yeah, I mean, it was so egregious that to try to step lightly around it is just…16:45
robcresswelldims cdent: Which talk / section *was* that?16:47
smcginniscdent: ++ Glad you didn't try to just allude to it and just called it for what it was. :)16:48
cdentrobcresswell: it was at the board meeting on the sunday before summit, in a bit about dealing with needs of enterprises16:48
cdentthere’s a bit more about it in graham’s summary16:49
mugsiecdent: yeah, I had a serious WTH moment when I saw it :)16:49
smcginnisI've been asked roadmap questions before, but that was not the place I was expecting it to come up.16:50
mugsieyeah, there seems to be a disconnect there16:50
robcresswellttx: To your comments about not using openstack-dev adequately, I agree, and am / have been part of the problem in that regard. Would still like to see how it could be improved overall.16:51
mugsieI am glad that we have started pushing out info about that meeting to the wider community16:51
cdentmugsie: yeah, it feels a bit odd that there’s not more of it16:53
cdentI think we need to hold the board to greater account16:53
robcresswellAlso I definitely agree with it being a "cultural" issues within OpenStack, so perhaps my attempt to overburden PTLs further is misguided. Just trying to make suggestions. Not sure what the best solution is, but there's still some big disconnect between the projects. At times it feels almost like a rivalry.16:53
cdent(and they us)16:53
mugsierobcresswell: yeah, I get that16:53
cdentrobcresswell: yeah, good observations16:53
mugsieI also feel there is a lot of pre history, that not all PTLs / people in the community would have been around for that drive that culture16:54
mugsieI was not involved until around Folsom / Grizzy for example, so I missed the PPB and its history, and never worked on an integrated project, so miss a lot of the background there16:56
robcresswellMy overall feeling is that when I started PTLing Horizon I expected there to be some guidance from "higher up"; whether that was purely information from surveys, or whether it was people interacting regularly with customers, or whether it was a group of cloud architects from varying companies. There are many possibilities. But instead there's a kind of vacuum, which I found difficult, personally. That's16:57
robcresswellmade worse by own relative inexperience in industry.16:57
robcresswellmugsie: Yeah, I started just before Paris. So... Juno-ish?16:58
cdentrobcresswell: higher fidelity feedback?16:58
pabelangercdent: 'somewhat bizarre presentation' indeed :)16:58
mugsiecdent: feedback would be a start, for some things.16:59
mugsieother than "yeah, feature $x would be cool, so would $y"16:59
robcresswellha, yeah, but also feedback *between* projects. Someone at a higher level saying "telco's are really pushing for X so Nova have added it, and it would be really valuable to expose that API via Horizon as a priority"17:01
robcresswellMy bias is a little plain here, but I think my point still stands.17:01
robcresswellInstead it tends to be that someone opens a bug that says "Cinder added Y 3 cycles ago so you should really be supporting it by now!"17:01
robcresswellExactly what you just put in the etherpad mugsie :)17:02
smcginnisrobcresswell: Slightly off-topic, but I always thought we needed a UIImpact tag for commit messages like we had with DocImpact to automate things a bit.17:04
smcginnisrobcresswell: At least a "Hey, you might want to think about adding this thing" kind of automation.17:04
mugsieyeah - I would be interested in finding out from the docs folks how well that worked for them17:05
mugsieI could see hundreds of bugs getting created, and hurting the noise:signal ratio17:05
dtroyernot creating bugs, but making something query-able17:06
dtroyerliek APIimpact (or whatever it is)17:06
mugsieyeah. I think the newer versions of gerrit with tagging will make that easier as well17:08
cdentyeah, apiimpact’s impact was never too clear17:09
dtroyerI found it usefuol in the beginning but I don't think its use caught on enough to self-sustain17:10
robcresswellmugsie: They moved the DocImpact stuff to just open a bug within your own repo after a while for exactly that reason iirc. It just opened hundreds of bugs in docs with no owners17:11
mugsierobcresswell: yeah, that was my recollection as well, but people like asettle may have a more complete viewpoint17:12
robcresswellsmcginnis: Yeah, that kind of thing would be pretty handy. It's difficult from our POV to know what to prioritise for addition / improvement17:12
smcginnisI actually wish there was a better automation API for etherpads. Just having something that triggers on a tag like that and adds a line to an etherpad of "things to consider" would be enough for me.17:16
mugsiethat would be interesting alright17:17
*** cdent has quit IRC17:20
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc17:21
*** mguiney has joined #openstack-tc17:40
*** hogepodge has joined #openstack-tc17:42
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk17:50
*** cdent has quit IRC18:57
fungithe ops community sort of did something like that with some structured tag suggestions, but for etherpad reasons it needs to be driven from an explicit list of pad ids. one "feature" of etherpad is that you can create somewhat private pads simply by not publicizing its randomly-generated pad ids (this is also one of the expectations underlying its read-only alternative urls), so any mechanism to index19:01
fungiand search across all pads would defeat those intentional properties of the software19:01
harlowja'Josh Harlow was press19:11
harlowjaganged, but it's not clear if the hook set.'19:11
harlowjathx cdent :-P19:11
funginow ye be swabbin the deck19:22
harlowjawith qtips19:25
* harlowja loves the pain19:29
*** sdague has quit IRC19:37
openstackgerritMonty Taylor proposed openstack/governance master: Update shade team metainfo  https://review.openstack.org/52351920:02
openstackgerritMonty Taylor proposed openstack/governance master: Rename shade team to OpenStackSDK  https://review.openstack.org/52352020:02
mordredfungi: I'm strongly considering retiring the #openstack-shade channel completely - do we do channel redirects or similar?20:03
fungimordred: yup, i think we even have the process semi-documented20:03
fungijust a sec20:03
fungimordred: https://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/irc.html#renaming-an-irc-channel is what you want20:04
fungisame basic process applies for merging one established channel into another established channel20:05
fungii'm going to guess you want to relocate shade discussions to the sdks channel?20:05
mordredfungi: yah - it's bifurcated for no good reason right now20:09
fungisounds good to me20:10
*** fdegir has joined #openstack-tc20:31
*** jpich has quit IRC20:33
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC21:04
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc21:21
*** openstackstatus has quit IRC21:42
*** openstack has joined #openstack-tc21:44
*** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack21:44
*** openstackstatus has joined #openstack-tc21:45
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus21:45
EmilienMttx: (rocky goals) email sent22:24
openstackgerritEric Fried proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Port wiki bugs pages (1 of ?)  https://review.openstack.org/52355122:38
*** efried has joined #openstack-tc22:40
dhellmannefried : I'm about to drop offline for the evening, but I'll put that ptg doc patch on my list for first thing in the morning22:51
*** marst has quit IRC22:56
efrieddhellmann Thanks.23:00
*** lbragstad has quit IRC23:17
*** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc23:24
openstackgerritEric Fried proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Port wiki bugs pages (2 of ?)  https://review.openstack.org/52360223:27
efrieddhellmann ^23:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC23:33
*** lbragstad has quit IRC23:56

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!