Thursday, 2018-03-15

*** annabelleB has quit IRC00:16
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC00:28
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc00:32
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC00:47
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc00:51
*** mriedem has quit IRC01:24
*** harlowja has quit IRC01:59
*** rosmaita has quit IRC02:04
*** david-lyle has quit IRC02:21
*** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc04:11
*** harlowja has quit IRC04:50
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc09:03
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc09:12
*** dtruong_ has joined #openstack-tc11:18
*** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc11:19
*** ianychoi_ has joined #openstack-tc11:19
*** cdent_ has joined #openstack-tc11:19
*** mnaser_ has joined #openstack-tc11:20
*** jungleboyj_ has joined #openstack-tc11:20
*** cdent has quit IRC11:27
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC11:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:27
*** dtruong has quit IRC11:27
*** jungleboyj has quit IRC11:27
*** mnaser has quit IRC11:27
*** cdent_ is now known as cdent11:27
*** jungleboyj_ is now known as jungleboyj11:27
*** mnaser_ is now known as mnaser11:27
*** ianychoi has quit IRC11:28
*** diablo_rojo_ has joined #openstack-tc11:28
*** mnaser has quit IRC11:28
*** mnaser has joined #openstack-tc11:28
*** jungleboyj has quit IRC11:28
*** jungleboyj has joined #openstack-tc11:28
*** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur12:04
*** kumarmn_ has quit IRC12:29
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc12:51
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc12:52
openstackgerritJesse Pretorius (odyssey4me) proposed openstack/governance master: Add python_venv_build ansible role to OSA deliverables
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc13:09
*** david-lyle has quit IRC13:12
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc13:15
*** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc13:21
*** ianychoi_ is now known as ianychoi13:23
*** david-lyle has quit IRC13:25
*** zhipeng has joined #openstack-tc13:51
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc14:10
-openstackstatus- NOTICE: POST_FAILURE results on Tempest-based jobs since the most recent Zuul security fixes are being investigated; rechecking those won't help for now but we'll keep you posted once a solution is identified14:11
*** ChanServ changes topic to "POST_FAILURE results on Tempest-based jobs since the most recent Zuul security fixes are being investigated; rechecking those won't help for now but we'll keep you posted once a solution is identified"14:11
*** annabelleB has quit IRC14:20
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc14:23
*** zhipeng has quit IRC14:27
fungitc-members: party^H^H^H^H^Hoffice hour?15:00
* TheJulia was just about to start the music15:00
* cdent gets a beverage15:00
* cmurphy dances15:00
fungisome of you may have clocks which confuse you since last weekend15:00
fungibut i assure you, the time is now15:00
* EmilienM gets a gin tonic for cdent15:01
fungianybody interested in talking about something from ?15:01
smcginnisThe time is here, the time is now.15:01
cdenttopic 3 is stated in a binary fashion, and I don't think it is binary15:02
ttxWanted to flag that we'll be organizing OpenStack/K8s community discussions again at KubeCon EU in Copenhagen15:02
ttxIf you're interested in joining, you can add your name to
TheJuliaon the subject of PTL email addresses being exposed, I'm fine for it since it is not too hard to find anyway, but you have to know more about how the community works15:03
TheJuliaMaybe put an embeded default subject if they click it?15:03
ttxThe other thing I wanted to flag is the initial set of stories @  -- if you think that's not the right level of granularity for TC stories in StoryBoard, let me know now before I go and craete them :)15:04
smcginnisAre all of those actually "story"able?15:05
smcginnisFor instance, fostering community diversity. What would be tracked about encouraging everyone in community to reach out to people.15:06
TheJuliasame question as smcginnis, some of them seem more like smaller tasks as part of a larger story15:06
smcginnisThat seems like an ongoing mode of operation and not a task that needs to be tracked.15:06
TheJuliaThat is a great point15:06
TheJuliait should be a culture we encourage15:07
fungicdent: given we'd just come from discussions at the ptg and a subsequent leadership discussion with foundation representatives to find out how this might work, the governance change in was identified as one of our next steps (notifying the technical committee). what alternatives would you suggest to be more "open" than participating in open governance process as early15:08
dhellmannis the point only to track things we can complete? or to help remember things we need to be doing?15:08
fungias possible?15:08
dhellmannfungi : I personally would have been happy with an email to the ML explaining the outcome of that discussion at the ptg and linking to the governance change15:08
ttxI just watched -- about the tension in K8s between shpipping more like the kernel or more like a distro. Interesting considering recent discussions in OpenStack15:08
fungidhellmann: let me find the e-mail you didn't read then ;)15:08
dhellmannfungi : ok, sure. I'm traveling so I probably didn't see it. :-)15:09
cdentfungi: I don't know, I was really only commenting on the nature of the line15:09
cmurphyfungi: i must have missed that email too15:09
cdentbut yes, a more visible email of some form, one that indicates there is a chance to change the course of history is what I was thinking15:09
fungii mean, there was an e-mail saying we had discussions about it at the ptg. we _can_ send announcements about the fact that we've also submitted a governance change, but would also not want to step on foundation marketing toes since they want to put together some big splash around it once it's official15:10
dhellmannfungi : ok, the first is really what I seem to have missed15:10
cdentotherwise it is presented as either a mostly done deal, or a choice amongst a limited set of options where the reader has no thoughts15:10
cmurphyfungi: I guess I did see that, but I was caught off guard by the commit message saying "This has been decided" with no written reference on the decision for people who weren't part of the in-person discussions at the PTG15:11
fungicdent: a governance proposal has never been a mostly done deal in the past15:11
cdentI think the general issue here is that from "inside the halls of openstack development" it often feels like the foundation is doing things and making decisions that are hard to see15:11
cdentthere's no sense that this is bad acting, just a fact of life it would be nice to improve15:11
fungicommit messages are traditionally written as though the change has been approved and merged, not as a question15:12
cdentfungi: sure, but at that stage it feels like things are pretty far along15:12
cdentand as I hope I made clear on that particular change: it's a great thing15:12
fungibecause once it appears in the commit history, it's a done deal15:12
dhellmannI happen to have been in the room for part of that discussion, and all of the folks directly involved were present. I don't have a problem with the way the decision process started.15:12
TheJuliaconsensus through lack of disagreement is sometimes an easier path that makes sense at times15:13
dhellmannI wouldn't have expected a larger group of people to be involved at the beginning. The zuul contributors should have the agency to make a decision like this on their own.15:13
cdentthe specific case of zuul gaining independence is not a problem, but it is emblematic of "oh hey, I'm surprised by this, I'd like $somehow to be more informed"15:14
dhellmannok, sure. it sounds like there was an email, though?15:14
cdentwhich we all think we missed somehow15:14
ttxsmcginnis: on fostering community diversity, the proposed story is specifically around encouraging people to reach out to others they see as good candidates15:14
cdentso again: not a case of bad acting, but a case of info flow problems15:14
ttxwhich is imho actionable15:15
fungicdent: so i guess to explain, foundation representatives approached first the infra team leadership and then we had a larger sit-down with infra team members present at the ptg and via audio conference, and then included it in our ptg summary e-mail, and then had another conference call with some foundation representatives to get their input, and then agreed to move forward with a set of steps one of15:15
fungithe first of which was to notify the technical committee we were interested in pursuing this15:15
dhellmannalthough I'm not seeing it in the openstack-dev archives15:15
smcginnisttx: Is it discrete actionable though?15:15
fungicdent: oh, and i forgot to mention discussions in weekly infra team meetings15:15
smcginnisOr action, then later action, then later action...15:15
smcginnisIn other words, somethign that can and should be tracked.15:15
smcginnisOr better suited as a statement on a wiki or web page somewhere saying this is something TC members are encouraged to do.15:16
cdentfungi: yes, I know, I'm not accussing anyone of anything wrong here. I'm trying to identify that despite all that, there's still some confusion and, gee, what can we do better/differntly/more?15:16
smcginnisWhen would that story be "done".15:16
ttxsmcginnis: ack15:17
fungidhellmann: second to last paragraph of
ttxdhellmann: I'm wondering if that was not an openstack-infra thread15:17
dhellmannfungi : ah, ok. Something of this import seems like it deserves its own thread15:17
smcginnisAh, that explains why I didn't see it either.15:18
fungidhellmann: it was also added to our ptg topics agenda early in the ptg brainstorming process, and communicated on the ptg schedule when we were meeting about it with the infra team members present at the ptg15:18
ttxI think the issue is not that it was done in secret (it wasn't), it's more that you could totally miss iut15:18
fungiso, yes, i too am trying to figure out what we missed15:18
dhellmannI think the thing to take away is planning and discussion tools internal to the team are not the best way to communicate big decisions out of the team15:18
fungiright! we're communicating it now, this week, via governance15:19
fungiit's the biggest bullhorn we have15:19
dhellmannit certainly seems to have gotten attention :-)15:19
ttxISTR that clarkb used his post-lunch presentation time to introduce the idea too15:19
* dhellmann wonders if that was on one of the days he couldn't be physically present for lunch15:19
ttxwe just have no way of communicating things in a way that would 100% reach people15:19
TheJuliaIt seems like the easiest least impact information path would to have been a joint email being sent to dev list informing them that the infra team have made the decision to openstack dev to reduce shock and surprise15:19
fungialso, i don't think any tc members are surprised by this... i know i personally have mentioned we were pondering the possibility multiple times in recent months15:20
TheJuliaand then just going from there with codifying it15:20
dhellmannso maybe that's the thing to do now? pull some of the content from that ptg summary and start a separate thread to raise the profile a bit15:21
TheJuliaIt doesn't have to be long, just raise visibility that it is a joint decision15:22
ttxYes, i think what's rubbing people in the wrong way is just that the review presents it as done (a consequence of the commit message style) rather than a change in progress15:22
fungias for widely announcing the idea, as i said, i don't think the foundation marketing team want us making foundation-level announcements on their behalf, but also they can't make any major press releases about it while the state of governance is still unrectified15:22
dhellmannI'm not convinced most folks pay attention to governance patches as a source of info. A lot do, but a lot don't. We encourage other teams to communicate via the mailing list as a way to provide a record.15:22
ttxa ML thread would definitely help15:22
dhellmannttx: yes, I think that's partly true15:22
dhellmannfungi : can we be careful with wording to address that? "we're considering" or whatever?15:22
ttxdhellmann: It's not the first time people dislike a topic being launched as a governance change15:22
dhellmannttx: that is also true.15:23
cdentfungi: I suspect that bit of marketing skullduggery is at the root of what's rubbing people the wrong way15:23
ttxBUT it's actually not a bad way of framing the discussion15:23
TheJuliafungi: it could also just be from the team15:23
ttxas long as you give it a proper forum to happen15:23
dhellmannI don't really have an issue with it, but I also recognize that I'm in a position of privilege w.r.t. having heard part of the conversation that not everyone else heard, and that's going to affect my perspective.15:23
fungii really wouldn't want to make an announcement "from the team" about this without clearing it through the foundation execs and marketing staff15:23
fungii can get up with corvus once he's not buried in other issues and see what we can coordinate that won't annoy them15:24
cdentWhen we stopped meetings last summer, one of the things we said we'd do is introduce topics going into the resolution process on the dev list15:24
dhellmannfungi : not even to say "this is being considered"?15:24
TheJuliaI'm in the same position as dhellmann, no objection, but I've heard some of the discussions for a while.15:24
smcginnisA post to -dev would be better than a post to just -infra, IMO. But personally I'm fine with just a governance proposal and then presumably later a larger marketing type announcement.15:24
TheJuliafungi: yay for catch-22s then :)15:24
cmurphyI generally expect big things to be discussed/announced on the mailing list since not everyone can attend the PTG or be present for all discussions15:24
fungismcginnis: well, the audience is the infra team, not the developer community, imho15:24
ttxfrom a governance standpoint it's really just a project moving off governance15:25
ttxLike gnocchi15:25
fungicdent: we figured it would end up in the tc tracker and weekly tc status updates anyway15:25
ttxwhich was introduced in the same way15:25
TheJuliaTrue, it is going to have some reverberation of shock regardless of any how or communication15:25
ttxIt actually does not even require a formal TC vote :)15:25
fungiand we're doing our best to avoid something that ends up in the media before there is something more to announce15:26
cdentfungi: yeah, sure, I'm just recalling that we had that idea in the past to prepare the ground, which I think is a good way to avoid the "it seems alread decided" feeling: announce the topic on the ML before the resolution even exists15:26
ttxcdent: or if you want to still use the review to frame the discussion, post both at the same time15:26
dhellmannI'm a little concerned that we're not willing to talk about things because we want to wait for marketing announcements.15:27
clarkbI mean I did start a thread on a mailing lsit and said feel free to dig into any of these topics more15:27
clarkbno one didd...15:27
fungithere's still plenty we don't know yet, after all, like what our actual governance structure will end up being, what the project name will be, et cetera15:27
TheJuliafungi: if tech media is savvy enough, they are going to find these discussions, the commit message and be able to fill in the contextual blanks at even a hint of something15:27
clarkbI don't feel like thats an unwillingness to discuss it15:28
corvusthe opposite in fact15:28
dhellmannclarkb : well, fungi is certainly saying so15:28
fungii'm not15:28
fungii'm saying we want to coordinate and try not to step on toes15:28
dhellmannmaybe I misunderstood, then. "we're doing our best to avoid something that ends up in the media before there is something more to announce"15:28
corvusi mean, we're having this conversation because we (myself included) pushed to say "lets start talking about this early so we don't just drop a bombshell"15:29
fungiand also i want to avoid putting words in the foundation's mouth before they're ready to announce _their_ decisions about this15:29
smcginnisfungi: If it's a governance change, I don't agree infra is the audience.15:29
dhellmanncorvus : ok. I think the minimal feedback is that a -dev ML thread saying "this change is under consideration" would be a good addition to the governance patch15:29
ttxheh, not sure we even have a final idea on the strategy here15:29
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:30
dhellmannI mean, I don't think the TC can even say "no" to this, so it's not like we're going to have a big argument15:30
corvusdhellmann: perhaps there's a distinction between "let folks know we're working on an effort" and "make a bold announcement"15:30
dhellmanncorvus : yes, I'm definitely trying to make that distinction. I may be failing.15:30
TheJuliadhellmann: Seems were all arguing about signaling, and even a bombshell is likely okay in the grand scheme of things15:30
smcginnisdhellmann: I agree. This is saying this will no longer be under the TC, so I don't think the TC really has much power over that anyway.15:31
fungismcginnis: sorry, i was referring to the intended audience for the ptg recap, not any subsequent discussion related to the governance change proposal15:31
smcginnisBut as a courtesy, I think it would be good to just have a brief mention on -dev that this is changing.15:31
corvusso maybe a -dev ml msg that says "hey, we don't have all the answers yet, but it looks like this is the direction we're heading, if you want to get involved, contact ..."15:31
dhellmannas ttx pointed out, projects have left tc governance in the past without much consternation. We all just love zuul so much it seems like a bigger change. I'm personally very happy to see the change happen, fwiw.15:31
ttxsmcginnis: much like we did not have much to say about Telemetry dropping Gnocchi15:31
dhellmanncorvus : yes, exactly15:32
smcginnisfungi: OK, I was referring to the hidden bit in the ptg recap that there seems to have been some expectation that a wider audience was aware of. ;)15:32
corvustbh, if we decided to go take zuul proprietary, i hope you'd say no.  :)15:32
fungismcginnis: ahh, nope, only people who are interested in what the infra team did/discussed at the ptg15:32
cmurphyI'm pretty sure gnocchi did have a discussion on the mailing list about leaving15:32
fungiyes, they did15:33
dhellmanncorvus : I would object, but I don't think I could stop you. I can't force you to stay under TC governance, right?15:33
dhellmanncorvus : we'd probably just fork it and call it zewl ;-)15:33
corvusdhellmann: i suppose you could say "go fork it" in that case15:33
dhellmannor that15:33
ttxdhellmann: you'd still need someone to care for your own version :)15:33
ttxI like Zewl15:34
dhellmannttx: of course15:34
fungithere's our new name if the foundation says we can't keep the current one for some reason15:34
dhellmannthere you go15:34
clarkbfwiw (and I could be completely at odds with the TC's perspective) the target audience of this communication imo is the infra team15:34
ttx /some/ reason15:34
* dhellmann disclaims any copyright or trademark to "zewl"15:34
cmurphycould solve the netflix zuul problem :P15:34
clarkbas they are the team being affected, and so don't think it is entirely unreasonable to have used the infra mailing list and ptg time/space/schedule for these discussions15:35
* ttx buys zewl.io15:35
ttxand zewl.org15:35
dhellmannclarkb : I certainly expect the infra team to have the most input. I think the point we're trying to make is that as part of the broader community, speaking up in a venue more likely to be seen by folks not following the day-to-day of the infra team would be a nice gesture15:35
fungii'd have to dig up the gnocchi thread, but it probably used [telemetry] or something in the subject and not [all] so was more of a discussion within their team. now you've got me curious to go find it15:36
corvusi'll draft up a ml post later today (after we fix zuul :|) and hopefully send it out in the next day or so15:36
clarkbyup I'm not opposed to that. I do have some issue with the implication that we've faield at communicating to the most important audience15:36
dhellmannclarkb : not "most important", just "complete"15:36
corvusi will run it by the foundation folks just to make sure it's not overstepping where they think we are.  but i think i can phrase it the right way.15:36
cdentIt's frustrating to me that, as usual, we're getting caught up in details of a particular event (one that in the end we're all happy to see happen), rather than the general problem we saw with it (early transparency etc). Solving the immediate problem is easy, but since we _keep doing it_, we've got a general issues to resolve.15:36
corvusi'm very happy to have this feedback -- this is why we wanted to start this as early as possible, to figure out what we needed to do in order to do this right.15:37
dhellmanncdent : I don't think there was an early transparency problem. The foundation isn't making this decision. The contributors to zuul are. They were involved in the discussions.15:37
cdentWe do this detail spiral all the time.15:37
fungicdent: my takeaway is more that no matter which venues someone uses in an attempt to communicate clearly and early, fault will be found15:37
dhellmannand I think we *are* early in the process here, so we're making the minor course correction15:37
ttxcdent: yeah, the main issue is that there is no way to communicate things to everyone15:38
fungiwhich would explain why we "always" have this discussion15:38
TheJuliaI propose that we just rubber stamp it and move on15:38
cdentfungi: that's unfortunate, that makes it seem like you think we can't do better. I know we can.15:38
fungiwherever you mention something first, that will be not-first-enough15:38
* cdent shrugs15:38
cdentI'm resigned to other people's resignation.15:38
dhellmannI thought we'd been trying to consistently ask people to post to the -dev list.15:38
ttxdhellmann: that does not make people read. Back to our problems communicating release tasks to PTLs/release liaisons15:39
cmurphyno one needs to read all of -dev, it just should be there when we go searching for it15:40
dhellmannsure. we can't force people to read anything. but if we're consistent in how we deliver messages, then people can learn *that* and also start trying to cope with it15:40
ttxI had similar issues in communicatign other changes where I did post to the ML, and people complained that I did not make it visible enough that it was important15:40
dhellmannand I think that's really the underlying thing that has cdent so frustrated, and we've addressed it in this case, so I think the system is working15:40
dhellmannthough maybe cdent disagrees15:40
cdentdhellmann: no, you're right, especially about: "then people can learn *that* and also start trying to cope with it" and consistency15:41
ttxWhen change happens and people did miss te early signs of it happening, there will be complaints. I don't think that's something we can avoid at the size of this community15:41
dhellmannttx: I don't think there's any way for us to always reach everyone. I think being consistent in how we *try* to reach *anyone* will help anyway.15:41
* TheJulia looks a the clock15:41
ttxBUT I agree that consistency would be nice15:41
ttxAnd unified mailing-lists, too, but I digress15:42
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:42
clarkbfewer communications channels overall would make that far simpler too (at the cost of now needing to filter single streams more aggressively)15:42
dhellmannttx: I agree that it's likely folks will miss things. I missed the details in clarkb's email -- I probably skimmed right over them because I was in that meeting, so they didn't stick in my mind.15:42
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:42
dhellmannclarkb, ttx: yes, I would like us to seriously consider merging the mailing lists.15:42
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:42
dhellmannI will put that on the discussion list for a future office hour, though15:42
clarkbI'd also argue we need similar with the irc channels15:42
clarkbbut that may also be selfishly wanting to not have to rewrite all the bots to handle the number of channels we now have15:43
fungiyeah, so the gnocchi removal commit message only cites "a lot of talk within the Gnocchi team" and the related ml thread did only have [telemetry] in its subject line as i remembered so was not really a pronouncement to the community at large15:43
dhellmannclarkb : I'm a little less convinced there, given the nature of "live" conversations and interleaving of messages.15:43
corvusfungi: i'm happy to improve on that.15:44
fungijust a data point of course, not suggesting they didn't also do it wrong15:44
dhellmannfungi : that's a fair point. I don't necessarily consider the topic tags as a true filter in the way that a separate ML is, but I see your point.15:44
clarkbdhellmann: my biggest concern with it is we have too many channels now for a single client to participate in all of them15:44
mugsiethe subject was interesting enough that I would have clicked on it as I did my morning -dev scan on the way to work15:44
fungimugsie: but only if you weren't already filtering on topic tags15:45
mugsie(re gnocchi)15:45
clarkbdhellmann: which means there is the possibility of users out there not being able to participate in all the things they want without convoluted client setups15:45
mugsiefungi:  Yeah, I filter on tags, annd then have an "other" bucket that I scan over and "mark all as read" every now and again15:45
mugsieclarkb: is there devs / users / people that work across *all* the projects?15:46
TheJuliaperhaps a worthy topic, instead is, removing community complexity15:47
dhellmannclarkb : ok, that's an interesting bit of feedback. I don't try to join all channels any more, so I wasn't aware of client limits.15:47
clarkbmugsie: infra release requirements docs? I've largely given up trying to lurk all of the channels at this point15:47
fungidhellmann: yep, freenode's chanmax is 12015:48
dhellmannok, that's pretty far from any number of channels I've ever tried to join15:48
fungii still lurk in ~100 channels to leave me room to tactically join some for shorter periods15:48
mugsieah, I assumed that we had grown to a point where projects should be going to #-infra #-release #-docs, and not the other way around.15:49
fungiwe've already had to implement scalability solutions for gerritbot to make it join and part channels as needed so it stays under chanmax15:49
clarkbmugsie: we do achieve that to a certain extent but for example just yesterday ironic had declared openstack had shot itself in the foot and we were all doomed (emphasis mine)15:49
* mugsie thinks its cool that people are willing to do that though15:49
fungiwe'll likely need to shard some of our other irc bots in the very near future to run multiple instances of them partitioned by channel lists15:49
clarkbI was able to quickly jump in and clarify the situation because i was lurking15:49
TheJuliaclarkb: not that we're all doomed, just the shot self in foot bit15:50
dhellmannI hope our PTLs encourage teams to take topics like that to a broader audience.15:50
dhellmannMaybe that's something we should communicate to them explicitly.15:50
fungii feel _more_ compelled to lurk in more channels now that we don't push teams to use the shared meeting channels, since i'd like to be able to participate in their meetings when relevant topics come up15:50
dhellmannas a reminder.15:51
dhellmannI do push teams to move conversations to some of the cross-project team channels15:51
dhellmannnot necessarily the meeting channels15:51
cdentdhellmann: I think regular reminders of all sorts are worthwhile, since new people come and go and things change.15:51
dhellmannfungi : yes, I'm sure I'm missing more things now, too.15:51
dhellmanncdent : maybe the TC should put together a small team to review the PTL guide info in the PTG guide?15:51
mugsieyeah, lurking in the meeting channels has been useful over the years15:52
dhellmannand then we can work into the election announcement process "make sure to read the PTL guide" or whatever15:52
cdentdhellmann: yeah, I'd be happy to help with that15:52
dhellmanncdent : excellent, thank you for volunteering15:52
TheJuliaSo I think we're over thinking it15:52
TheJuliaWe're trying to solve a problem that is actually less than what it is in reality15:53
fungimugsie: i'll readily admit that some of it is just my compulsion to kiboize discussions15:53
*** kmalloc has joined #openstack-tc15:53
cdentRE irc and channels. Just my personal opinion but I really hope we can bring the community around to using irc less. It is so toxic.15:53
cdentand really bad for memory15:54
TheJuliathe ironic example being what I understood to be one effort, aparently turning into another effort or side effect with some magic under the hood of CI to make things continue to work. My view is that it is a bad idea, I'm not going to block it, but when discussing it with-in and amongst the ironic team, others jumped in15:54
fungicdent: what part of it is toxic? having real-time/synchronous discussion, or that it relies on text, or something about the protocol, or...?15:54
TheJuliaIn that case, we were still trying to graple with the what, why, and where questions before we would have gone to the larger community15:54
cdentthe toxicity seems to come from the lack of signalling for turn taking, and the resulting interleaving.15:55
fungii find it helps my "memory" to be able to grep years of channel logs in seconds and find where something got discussed last15:55
dhellmannTheJulia : I'm not sure if you're using "ironic" there as the name of the project or in the original sense of the word. And I'm not sure what event you're talking about. Can you expand?15:55
cdentsure, fungi, but only because that text is already there. If it were in email you could grep there too, and the context would be richer and has the chance of being more threaded15:55
smcginnisI actually find turn taking in IRC easier. That's been a frustration at the BoD meeting that when I have something to say, I usually can't get a word in, and by the time I can things have moved on.15:56
ttxunless it's stuck in cross-posting hell15:56
fungicdent: true. however the pace of discussion in e-mail can be cripplingly slow15:56
TheJuliadhellmann: for context: In #openstack-ironic, someone raised the patch to move to g-r usage for neutron. I thought about it for a moment and raised concern in the team channel, which then devolved much like today's TC discussion15:56
dhellmannand the pace on irc can be criplingly fast :-)15:56
cmurphysmcginnis: ++15:56
cdentsmcginnis: that's a function of the BoD and besides I left out of in person and voice in my statements on purpose15:56
dhellmannI object to the characterization of this as having devolved, but ok.15:57
cmurphyi find in-person discussions very difficult to interject in15:57
TheJuliadhellmann: and I explictly stated that we were shooting ourselves in the foot since we're hiding behavior so CI will be different from developer and different from third party CI15:57
mugsiecdent: I would say that for a lot of people starting out using designate, I can have have a 5 min conversation and 90% of the time it solves their issues. on email that could be hours, and require me to keep responding15:57
ttxcompared to some old tc meeting discussions, this is a calm discussion15:57
dhellmannTheJulia : I think I posted something to that effect in the mailing list thread on that topic15:57
cdentfungi: yes the pace has issues. But I think there's a balance or decision tree for when to use irc and when not, and we've tipped way over into using irc all the time for nearly everything and it instills an urgency that is ... icky15:57
dhellmannTheJulia : and I have voted -1 on the related pbr patch15:57
*** dtruong_ has quit IRC15:58
dhellmannso I think we agree on the direction, at least15:58
cdentmugsie: right those are people who need to come into the scene and feel their way; that's a great moment for IRC15:58
fungiTheJulia: i agree that we need a common entrypoint for running jobs under ci and locally, to ensure consistent experience. and i do think the tox-siblings changes are getting ahead of our ability to provide a new mechanism to keep that consistency15:58
cdentbut to then say, as a result of that, that it is important to be on irc all the time...15:58
*** dtruong has joined #openstack-tc15:58
TheJuliadhellmann: ahh, I've not had a chance to look at the ml or reply since I only sat down with coffee about 10 minutes before office hours started15:58
dhellmannTheJulia :
smcginnisOK, that part is not great. But I like that there are text logs for that.15:59
mugsiecdent: that is one issue. I do find myself habitually checking IRC on my phone15:59
TheJuliadhellmann: thanks15:59
cdentmugsie: thus, toxic15:59
smcginnisSure beats watching a youtube recording searching for some bit of detail.15:59
mugsiesmcginnis: so much15:59
cdentsmcginnis: yeah, logs  are great, but again, it's a question of volume and priority15:59
ttxcdent: IIRC from last time I checked, the data is not consistent with "increased use of IRC and less use of email"15:59
mugsiecdent: could be worse - if it was slack it would be a push notification :P15:59
cmurphymugsie: *shudder*16:00
cdentttx probably because all we do now is talk all the time and nothing else ;)16:00
fungimugsie: cdent: personal choice on my part, but i don't carry a phone capable of letting me check irc (or even e-mail). when i'm afk, i'm really afk16:01
cdentfungi: do you use a bouncer?16:01
TheJuliafungi: I'm not in disagreement as long as there is common entrypoint/use patterns that are clear/easy/simple and that we're not encouraging situations where we're testing code with a project's prior library or service release because we didn't explicitly install it ourselves. Truthfully, it is not even something I would block, I would just grumble.16:01
fungicdent: no bouncer, just a shell server16:01
dhellmannsomehow I seem to have successfully trained people to email me if they want me when I'm not on irc16:02
dhellmannperhaps it is just the constant repetition asking them to do it16:02
cdentwhoops not directly link meant:
fungicdent: i run my irc and (and e-mail, and lots of others) client remotely and just attach to it when i'm available to do so16:02
* TheJulia reads the first paragraph of cdent's post and wonders if if she has just grown to completely ignore all of the notifications16:03
*** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc16:03
fungii don't feel compelled to follow up on every nick highlight, and often merely skim or even completely skip scrollback in most channels16:03
cdentTheJulia: the meat is after that16:03
dhellmannfungi : same16:04
TheJuliacdent: I'll read after I've had a shower and all16:04
cdentTheJulia: second bullet point in the list and beyond16:04
cdentI would like to be able to mostly stop using IRC, except for scheduled things, but that's proven impractical16:05
dhellmanncdent : I'd be curious to see the outcome if you experimented with it for a week or two16:05
* TheJulia steps away to go feel human again16:06
smcginnisTheJulia: Always a good statement. ;)16:06
cdentdhellmann: I'd like to try that but the FOMO on that is huge, especially with regard to nova stuff16:06
TheJuliasmcginnis: it is that or cylon16:06
smcginnisTheJulia: New or old?16:06
dhellmanncdent : yeah :-/16:07
ttx is live, emails going out to speakers now16:07
* dhellmann has to return to the in-person meeting he's attending16:07
clarkbcdent: for infra the big win with IRC tends to be triage16:07
TheJuliasmcginnis: new of course16:07
* ttx checks if his talks were accepted16:07
dhellmannthanks for a robust office hours, everyone :-)16:07
clarkbcdent: being able to have a conversation because something is broken right now and move forward quickly. TC largely doesn't have that problem so I think you'd probably be fine off of irc16:08
smcginnisDarn, my talk was accepted.16:08
cdentclarkb: yeah, triage is another excellent IRC use case because it has immediacy and interactivity16:08
cdentbut at large we use it as "the place where stuff happens"16:08
cdentclarkb: if my responsibilities were just the TC I could probably manage off irc, yes16:09
dmsimardcdent: also
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc16:25
cdentdmsimard: yeah, have read that before16:25
smcginnisIs there a name for when someone DMs you a naked ping? Those annoy me more.16:27
TheJuliasmcginnis: a prod perhaps?16:29
TheJuliaregardless, super annoying16:29
smcginnisAt least twice a week, I log on in the morning to one of those with no context, no follow up, and the person quite hours ago.16:30
TheJuliaI <3 it when people do message me to get my attention but with a fully formed idea/thought/request when they know I'm not likely to be looking at IRC or near a computer16:30
TheJuliaThat happens to me some weeks, but not super often16:30
TheJuliaof course, mostly the people that know to ping me with the fully formed thing also know my phone will beep and I might look at it sooner rather then sometime on Monday16:31
fungismcginnis: i tend to ignore them since a lot seem to be nefarious16:32
fungiin the past when i've attempted to engage with them, i get vague questions and then they start to try to dcc files to me16:32
fungi(the privmsg naked pings)16:33
TheJuliaI guess it goes with where one hangs out on irc, at least for those of us who have used IRC for ages16:34
fungiand then i get to refresh my memory on how to close dcc request buffers in my client16:34
fungiit's like, "my how quaint, i'd forgotten people used to share files over irc!"16:35
TheJuliasuch memories!16:35
fungijust about all legitimate privmsg events i get are vmt-related16:36
fungiand for the ones that aren't, if i can tell they're obviously an openstack community member and not trying to report something sensitive, i'll just politely request that they ask their questions in an appropriate public channel instead16:37
cmurphysome people are really uncomfortable asking for help in public channels16:38
fungisure, but i also can't be the one to answer all their questions16:38
clarkbOnce upon a time I was spending a lot of time getting multinode testing to work and adding in tls support to devstack and generally debugging openstack. This lead to many private requests to debug people's actual clouds on irc. Never felt comfortable doing that and would try to steer people to the appropriate channel16:38
cmurphyi tried to nicely shoo someone out of my privmsg and into the channel and i've not seen them on irc since :/16:38
fungiyep, it's a balance new irc users have to learn to strike... being uncomfortable asking questions in a public channel means you need to be really, really sure you're not being disrespectful of someone else's time and that the reason you're reaching out to them privately is for reasons which will be important to them, not just important to you16:41
pabelangerif people haven't seen, our poll for naming the S release is open and going:
pabelangerwe've seen some people having 'already voted issue' likely due to shared IPs addresses with other community members16:45
pabelangersomething to keep in mind when we review the public polling after naming closes16:45
fungiyeah, at least one of them confirmed to the ml thread that when they switched to a machine on a different ip address they were able to vote16:46
fungii wonder if we should mention that to a broader audience than people who read the mailing lists, or if that will have a negative impact dragging in votes from people well outside the openstack community16:48
fungigiven i don't follow social media, i have no idea if that's already been done16:49
dmsimardfungi: if we have a unique public link, broadcasting it to a larger/social audience might tip some not-very-honest people16:50
fungiright, that's what i was concerned about16:51
dmsimardnot that there would be a point in cheating to name an OpenStack release but 4chan and co are out there :)16:51
clarkbthe trick will be convincing them to cheat in favor of stein :)16:51
fungii'm hoping my unicode stein glyph will have that effect anyway16:52
*** kumarmn has quit IRC16:56
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc17:02
*** kumarmn has quit IRC17:07
*** harlowja has quit IRC17:09
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc17:14
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk17:15
mugsiewell, there is one name on the list that 4chan etc may want to win for the lolz17:19
fungii appreciate some good lolz from time to time17:19
*** kumarmn has quit IRC17:25
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc17:28
*** kumarmn has quit IRC17:32
dmsimardlike the lolz from quantum ? :)17:32
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc17:38
fungimore of a downer than i guess17:41
fungigranted, the origin of their name is even more gruesome17:42
*** jpich has quit IRC17:49
smcginnisAlmost as bad as Joy Division.17:51
fungithis is true17:58
fungithough i did like their music better ;)17:58
fungi(and, subsequently, new order)17:58
smcginnisSame ;)18:01
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc18:05
*** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc18:08
*** kumarmn has quit IRC18:12
*** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc18:20
*** david-lyle has quit IRC18:29
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc18:33
*** david-lyle has quit IRC18:37
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc19:17
*** hongbin has quit IRC19:25
*** ChanServ changes topic to "OpenStack Technical Committee office hours: Tuesdays at 09:00 UTC, Wednesdays at 01:00 UTC, and Thursdays at 15:00 UTC | | channel logs"19:26
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc19:26
-openstackstatus- NOTICE: The regression stemming from one of yesterday's Zuul security fixes has been rectified, and Devstack/Tempest jobs which encountered POST_FAILURE results over the past 24 hours can safely be rechecked now19:26
*** diablo_rojo_ has quit IRC19:30
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc19:30
* dims catching up19:41
*** cdent has quit IRC20:30
*** kumarmn_ has quit IRC21:36
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc21:54
*** kumarmn has quit IRC21:58
*** hongbin has quit IRC22:50
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC22:56
*** annabelleB has quit IRC22:56
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc23:10
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc23:20
*** david-lyle has quit IRC23:59

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!