Thursday, 2018-06-14

*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:21
*** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc01:47
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc01:51
*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:55
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:22
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:27
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:36
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:40
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:49
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:54
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:59
*** kumarmn has quit IRC03:04
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:06
*** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc03:11
*** kumarmn has quit IRC03:12
*** kumarmn_ has quit IRC03:20
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:36
*** kumarmn has quit IRC03:41
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:54
*** kumarmn has quit IRC03:54
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:55
*** kumarmn has quit IRC04:00
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc04:00
*** kumarmn has quit IRC04:36
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc05:07
*** kumarmn has quit IRC05:11
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc05:38
*** jaosorior has quit IRC05:41
*** kumarmn has quit IRC05:43
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc05:50
*** kumarmn has quit IRC05:54
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:04
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:09
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:17
*** mtreinish has quit IRC06:19
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:21
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:30
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:34
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:35
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:40
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc06:45
*** kumarmn has quit IRC06:50
*** mtreinish has joined #openstack-tc06:58
*** guvnah has quit IRC07:04
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:05
*** kumarmn has quit IRC07:10
*** evrardjp_ is now known as evrardjp07:12
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:14
*** kumarmn has quit IRC07:18
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:21
*** kumarmn has quit IRC07:26
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:32
*** kumarmn has quit IRC07:36
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:48
*** flaper87 has quit IRC07:49
*** kumarmn has quit IRC07:53
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc07:57
*** flaper87 has joined #openstack-tc07:58
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc07:59
*** kumarmn has quit IRC08:03
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc08:14
*** kumarmn has quit IRC08:18
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc08:24
*** kumarmn has quit IRC08:29
*** ianychoi has quit IRC08:39
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc08:46
*** kumarmn has quit IRC08:50
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc08:56
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:01
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc09:09
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:14
*** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc09:15
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc09:23
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:28
*** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur09:31
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc09:31
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:36
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc09:46
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:51
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc09:53
*** kumarmn has quit IRC09:57
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc10:14
*** kumarmn has quit IRC10:19
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc10:24
*** kumarmn has quit IRC10:29
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc10:37
*** kumarmn has quit IRC10:41
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|brb10:50
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc10:51
*** kumarmn has quit IRC10:56
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:01
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:06
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:09
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:15
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:18
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc11:20
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:23
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:25
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:29
cdentdims: what do you recommend for where should I be looking/watching to keep an eye on the whole containers(but especially k8s)-on-openstack scene11:38
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:38
dimscdent : check the #sig-openstack slack channel every few days ...11:39
dimscdent : fuller view of k8s itself, probably the community meeting or sig-arch meeting (videos and/or the meeting notes google doc) once a week11:41
cdentthe k8s community seems to be a lot more synchrony oriented than I'm comfy with11:42
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:42
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:46
*** dtantsur|brb is now known as dtantsur11:46
*** kumarmn has quit IRC11:51
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc11:59
*** kumarmn has quit IRC12:03
*** cdent has quit IRC12:29
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc12:29
fungiwhat does "synchrony oriented" mean in that context?12:30
*** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc12:46
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc12:54
ttxnon-asynchronous. Lots of video meetings13:00
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc13:03
smcginnisYeah, all k8s meetings are live video.13:20
smcginnisAt least they are recorded, but still.13:20
*** kumarmn has quit IRC13:26
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc13:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC13:31
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc13:49
openstackgerritThierry Carrez proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Release management chapter updates
fungithey probably think we're luddites by relying on irc and e-mail rather than video conferencing and github issues14:08
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc14:10
TheJuliafungi: At that point, we might as well wear tinfoil hats14:12
fungiyou're not wearing your tinfoil hat now? danger!14:12
fungiproceed to immediately14:12
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc14:14
* TheJulia hears "danger will robinson" in the background14:17
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc14:26
openstackgerritJeremy Stanley proposed openstack/governance master: Castellan-compatible key store is a base service
openstackgerritThierry Carrez proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Release management chapter updates
TheJulia\o <-- to be different15:00
cdentwhat name are we using when doing startmeeting?15:01
fungi#startmeeting tc15:01
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 14 15:01:51 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is fungi. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)"15:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'15:01
cdenttc-members office hours15:01
fungi#topic Office Hour15:01
*** openstack changes topic to "Office Hour (Meeting topic: tc)"15:01
ttxBeen spending a few cycles this afternoon reviewing
fungiwe've been using "tc" because that's what the index on eavesdrop links to for our office hour logs15:02
ttxOne things that it's missing is a plug for basic design tenets, like the fact that you can assume teh base services will be around15:02
ttxAnyone interested to etherpadding that with me ?15:02
ttxcdent/zaneb: that could address some of the things we wanted to add to technical vision too15:03
cdentyeah, agree15:03
cdentI can't help etherpadding today but either can help tweak, or participate tomorrow afternoon/monday15:04
fungisure, i've had my head in the base services space recently, happy to spitball some content for that15:04
ttxWill be at
zanebin related news, the technical vision thing is getting closer to the top of my to-do list15:05
zanebI know y'all will be excited to hear this update about the state of my to-do list15:05
cdentit's the only thing I think about15:06
cdentIf we've got nothing else in particular to talk about today, I'd like to selfishly draw people's attention to jay's rant in
EmilienMzaneb: couldn't sleep, waiting for it15:07
cdentthat's a long standing nova problem that we keep talking about in a sideways fashion15:07
cdentbut it never goes away15:07
EmilienMzaneb: you have the etherpad handy right?15:07
cdent(not talking in this instance about the number of cores, but rather the volume of change in a complex setting)15:08
zanebEmilienM: always, I keep it next to my bed.
mnasercdent: that was a good read.  i'd love to see nova do something like split into smaller teams/packages for drivers for example15:09
smcginniscdent: I missed that one.15:09
cdentmnaser: yeah. like jay's comments, your response is not new :)15:10
mnasernova-libvirt, nova-vmware, etc.  rather than having the entire tree handled by the core team for changes that may not really touch the internals15:10
smcginnisIt really does seem like nova should be decomposed somehow. Whether that's structurally or just process/team-wise.15:10
cdentmnaser: which I think means it is probably the right thing to do, but it never happens15:10
mnasercan gerrit work with some sort of acl that you can only vote on files within a specific path?15:10
mnaser(as a start)15:10
EmilienM@all did everyone had a chance to put their names on ?15:11
EmilienMI think dhellmann wanted to do it for today15:11
dhellmannmnaser : unfortunately, no. we have had to rely on teams to trust each other for that level of granularity15:12
dimsyep, i did EmilienM15:12
smcginnisEmilienM: I put my name on a few but wanted to go back later to do more once others had a chance to grab some.15:12
mnaserdhellmann: i see. it does seem a lot of work to split those things out15:12
mnaserand affects a lot of downstream things15:12
zanebcdent: as an outsider to Nova, it's bewildering/frustrating that everyone inside Nova understands perfectly the problem and exactly how to fix it, and they still won't do it. for many years now.15:13
mnaseri think it's more of a lack of resources15:13
dhellmannthe placement work is a step in that direction, isn't it, zaneb ?15:13
cdentzaneb: I think it depends on how your define "inside", for one thing15:14
EmilienMmnaser: in tripleo, we use "Trust" (crazy right?) to make Gerrit ACLs15:14
zanebdhellmann: yes, that's true15:14
smcginnisBut even with that, there seems to be some reluctance to actually split out placement.15:14
dims"still won't do it" is pretty strong ... current experiments are the runway and the placement possibly moving out15:14
EmilienMmnaser: we promote people "core" on certain files/topics in tripleo15:14
EmilienMmnaser: and you know what? it works :(15:14
cdentBut also the splitting is _hard_. nova is very coupled with itself, with a wiggle over here cascading to impact way over there15:14
dhellmannlooking in from the outside it seems nothing has changed, but when I talk to the nova team I learn about things that are happening. I think it's just going more slowly than anyone likes. Which makes me wonder if we can somehow give them support to say "no" to feature requests that are not related to decomposing the project, to speed things along.15:14
zanebthere was a previous failed attempt to move placement out too though, wasn't there?15:14
dimssmcginnis : i was in the placement break out session, there's work to be done to split it out. need hands now i think15:14
EmilienMmnaser: (not trying to compare, but giving an example where we also wanted Gerrit ACLs on files)15:15
cdentas far as I can tell the reason that placement extraction is happening at all is because a) i'm stubborn, b) i've been exceptionally lucky to have three employers in a row who let me do much of what I want. Other people are not so lucky15:15
zaneb(not suggesting this one is going to fail)15:15
mnaserEmilienM: i think that can be something that would be proposed "you are a nova-vmware-core, while you can +2 everything, you can only +2 vmware changes"15:15
fungicdent: i saw that discussion beginning to build, and can't say i'm surprised at the discovery that you can't force people to review what you identify as important (i think all current/former ptls probably know this already)15:15
dhellmannzaneb : my understanding is that previous approach attempted to forklift it without a transition plan, but I may be mixing up bits of history there15:15
dims++ cdent15:15
cdentthere was gantt which was sort of different15:15
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc15:16
dimsfungi : totally (jay's email from this morning)15:16
cdentand extracting placement won't really change anything other than bring things back to their 2016 state and these coversations go back further than that (recall dan berrange's giant thread in 2014)15:16
* TheJulia feels like we're also semi-rehashing some of the discussions from yvr and wonders what the next steps would be to promote trust15:16
mnaserTheJulia: agreed15:16
ttxI still hope they split functionality into separate review domains before they run out of "supercores" (the limited number of Nova cores that have the full picture in their brains and can really approve changes)15:17
zanebcdent: yeah, that thread is what I keep thinking back to15:17
dhellmannwe have several different proposed solutions, each of them taking a different approach. Which one does the nova team support?15:17
ttxbecause it's hard to raise new ones15:17
cdentyeah, TheJulia, my intent here was not to really address the problem here, just draw people to the thread15:17
TheJuliaYeah, I hate to say it, but the only way movement is going to be made on the various issues is to toss concepts against a wall and see what sticks (for lack fo a better term to use)15:18
cdentttx: yes, supercores are expiring15:18
TheJuliasome of those concepts might be code, and from there sell everyone on it15:18
smcginniscdent: That sounds grim. :)15:18
* cdent is a grim guy15:19
ttxcdent: well their jobs aren't getting any easier as time passes15:19
dhellmannwhat if we applied the maintenance-mode tag to nova?15:20
mnaserwhy don't we add another 'voting' category in gerrit15:20
TheJuliacdent: no, your realistic. There is a huge difference :)15:20
mnaserjust like we have code review and rollcall-vote15:20
cdentdhellmann: that is an interesting idea. It basically maps to what jay is saying.15:20
ttxmnaser: I wanted to discuss next steps on the diversity thing with you, maybe off meeting though15:20
ttxdhellmann: I don't think that would solve anything15:20
mnaserwe can have a +2 in "domain-core" and then +2 in "super-core" and only a super-core can +W15:21
mnaserso a supercore doesnt have to do a very deep dive if he knows that it doesn't touch anything beyond that specific domain15:21
ttxmnaser: I fear that would insitutionalize the wrong approach15:21
dimsdo we expect some of the starlingx's nova folks to show up anytime soon?15:21
dimsdtroyer ^^15:21
ttxYou can't extend trust beyond a certain number anyway15:22
dhellmannyeah, I don't want us to build more complicated voting solutions to deal with the fact that we have a highly coupled system. we should look for ways to help the team have the space to fix the code.15:22
zanebmnaser: technical solution to a social problem15:22
mnaserbut i don't think trust scales15:22
cdentbtw, talking about this amongst ourselves is probalby the wrong approach. we should at least invite melwitt, mriedem, dansmith, jaypipes into this instead of speculating15:22
ttxThe only solution is to split into separate trust domains15:22
ttxi.e review domains15:22
ttxBut that involves letting go of some control15:22
ttx(some would say some overall quality)15:23
* cdent in neither core nor supercore15:23
fungiwhich, as they've noted, is hard with nova because of a lot of tight coupling between various parts of the service15:23
zanebttx: exactly. nothing scales, and that's why we need to avoid projects that are Too Big To Fail15:23
dhellmannbased on what jay said in that thread, and I've heard from other folks, the rate of change in the code makes it difficult for them to change processes or tools or have time to grow the team. can we address that rate of change in the code somehow?15:23
mnaser(ttx: yes, let's talk about organizational diversity after if you have sometime)15:23
dansmithdhellmann: saying nova is in maintenance mode isn't going to slow things down15:24
dansmithif that's what you're suggesting15:24
ttxyeah I think it would only have negative effects15:24
dhellmanndansmith : yeah. I'm throwing out ideas to find ways to give you options to say "no"15:24
dansmithdhellmann: I say no a lot :)15:24
EmilienMmnaser: trust scales, when you setup the right culture15:24
dhellmanndansmith : heh, ok15:24
ttxEmilienM: it's really difficult.15:25
smcginniscdent: You're a super non-core. ;)15:25
dansmithdhellmann: but I agree, I'd like more people to say no more often.. I don't think artificially labeling nova as in maintenance mode really does anything though15:25
ttxOne would argue that this group is tied by external trust15:25
EmilienMI don't think I said it was easy :)15:25
EmilienMI said it's possible15:25
dimsEmilienM : check number of on that :)15:25
ttxLike read the email domain15:25
EmilienMit's not about redhat come on15:25
EmilienMI don't care in Gerrit if this reviewer is redhat or not15:25
ttxI'm just saying the trust is sustained by external constructs15:26
EmilienMwhat I care is who is doing it, and the knowledge/capacity to review15:26
mnaserttx: while i agree with you, i think we can bring those external constructs to the open regardless of the org15:26
ttxIt's really difficult to trust someone to review the way you would have reviewed. Works if you have enough shared culture15:26
ttxThat shared culture can come from company culture too15:26
dimsEmilienM : there's extra processes / hierarchy that helps too15:26
mnaser"if i merge things in the wrong place, it will make my peers (other nova devs/cores) unhappy and i might lose my core"15:26
dhellmannbased on the *many* conversations I've had with the nova team about this, I do not think the issue is just "trust". Nova *is* complex. Learning that takes time. Investing in reviewers to build them to core takes time.15:26
ttxDunbar tribe bumber15:27
mnaserdansmith: you seem to be the only one whos mostly around.. are most changes going in specific domain?15:27
EmilienMthe fact tripleo is redhat only doesn't mean it's easy for us to trust each others; but it's in our (project) culture to setup trust and we move forward15:27
dansmithmnaser: we've talked about the domain core thing so many times15:27
dhellmannso instead of saying the nova team should already have fixed this by just trusting more people isn't really digging into the underlying problems15:27
ttxEmilienM: and yet most other team stalls around 15 in core teams15:27
EmilienMdims: like all projects15:27
dansmithmnaser: and I really really think that it's not that easy15:27
mnaserdansmith: i understand but i'm just trying to get a grasp if things mostly seem to be going in one direction15:27
EmilienMbelieve me or not it's not just because it's a redhat only project.15:28
mnaseraka, is it a lot of the libvirt stuff that moves most of the time and others are mostly idle15:28
dimsEmilienM : i trust you on that15:28
EmilienMI was PTL for Puppet OpenStack and we promoted a bunch of non redhat core15:28
EmilienMwe were diverse during some time (well not anymore)15:28
mnaseryeah, it involves trust. and sometimes people break things.  and you tell them, and they learn :)15:28
mnaserand sometimes even long term cores will break things when missing something, and i think that's *ok*15:28
ttxEmilienM: agree that there are things you can do to set up project culture that allow to scale to larger groups15:28
dimsEmilienM : question is what did we learn from there that can be applied to nova15:28
EmilienManyway I was not trying to give a lesson on something, just giving some examples based on my personal experience.15:29
ttxBut it still generally stalls at some point, unless sustained by some other cultural alignment15:29
dhellmanndansmith : are there things the nova team wishes they could do (or maybe just you wish) that the TC could help you with to address the situation?15:29
mriedemi'm around, but not engaging...15:29
dims++ ttx15:29
*** zaneb has quit IRC15:30
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:30
dhellmannmriedem : I'll ask the same question of you then :-)15:30
TheJuliaTossing in a disruptive thought into this track. People don't want to give up control in many cases because of responsibility or perception of responsibility. Fear of making a mistake, if that is reduced, would people not be able to be more trusting because they wouldn't have to have their guard up constantly?15:30
ttxLike if you set up a "ask for forgiveness, not for permission" culture you can grow review teams from 15 to ~2515:30
* dims drags mriedem to the table15:30
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:30
mnaserttx: maybe this links to the idea of "master should be CD-able"15:30
dhellmanncould we, maybe, stop rehashing the same arguments about this we've had for 8 years and talk to the folks directly involved about the help they need?15:31
ttxmnaser: good point yes15:31
mnaserah, yes, good point dhellmann.15:31
dansmithdhellmann: I don't really think the TC is going to fix anything like this from the outside, I guess is my summary15:31
dhellmannsince mriedem and dansmith are actually here15:31
dims++ dhellmann15:31
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:31
EmilienMttx: yes, that's the kind of culture I'm talking about15:31
ttxdansmith: agree with you on that15:31
* mriedem remembers barcelona15:31
dhellmanndansmith : let's not assume that. If you could change something, what would that be?15:31
mriedemand atlanta15:31
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:31
mriedemand every retrospective15:32
dansmithdhellmann: let's not assume what?15:32
mriedemthat the tc can't help15:32
mriedemassuming the tc can help, what do we need?15:32
dhellmanndansmith : that no one outside the team can help15:32
dhellmannor the tc in particular15:32
mriedemmirantis and osic layoffs not happening? :)15:32
mriedemonce placement splits out it should help some, but the core team to start is still likely going to be similar to what it is now15:33
mriedemi don't know how that works when cinder split out, i wasn't around that early15:33
ttxmriedem: should be easier to become core on placement than to become core on Nova I guess ?15:33
dansmithcinder was an obvious piece that could be cleaved off,15:34
mriedemit's a much smaller footprint15:34
EmilienMis the neutron project a good example as well? afik they've split a bunch of things as well15:34
dansmithand not  having to review tons of nova-network features reduced our workload for sure15:34
dhellmannis there another obvious piece, after placement?15:34
ttxso maybe the teams would start to diverge soon enough (hope)15:34
*** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc15:34
dansmithplacement hasn't yet reduced the amount of complexity or code in the rest of nova, but will eventually15:34
dimslooks like dtroyer is not around to say something about nova folks from starlingx ...15:35
dansmithbut not by as much asthe volume or network splits15:35
ttxI still have that hope that hypervisor drivers could be split off. If teh API there could be declared stable15:35
ttxSounds domain-specific enough15:35
* mnaser doesn't know if there is enough work on other drivers that is affecting cores that much15:36
dansmithwe certainly could do that,15:36
ttxBut I know we've been chasing that stabel API for a long time and nobody really has time to work on it15:36
dansmithbut hypervisor drivers are way more integrated and complicated than network drivers and volume drivers15:36
dansmithttx: we're actively changing right now.. it's always changing.. substantially15:36
dhellmannwhat part of the code causes the most review burden?15:37
dansmithit's not that nobody is pursuing a stable virt api, it's that it's something that is pretty tightly coupled and complex15:37
mriedemrunways has helped focus efforts on getting non-libvirt driver blueprint changes in15:37
mriedemxen and powervm got several bps merged in rocky b/c of runways15:37
dansmithxen for the first time in a while15:37
mriedemso runways is a new thing15:37
mriedemi thiink pike saw a lot of ironic driver features get in15:37
TheJuliaI think we had also been working on those for >1 year15:38
mriedemTheJulia: also lots of those were blocked on getting the ironic stuff done first15:38
* EmilienM likes the name "runway" fwiw, it reminds me "checkpoint" that we use in my internal team, which is a similar process that we're doing15:38
mriedemso it's not like nova was just sitting there15:38
dansmithTheJulia: and to the point, those changes were tied to the virt driver interface, compute manager, scheduler, and placement15:38
ttxEmilienM: of course you like the name "runway"15:38
dansmithso you know, they were complicated to get right and land without breaking people too much15:38
dansmithttx: ;)15:39
EmilienMI like runways in general, always better than a field :P15:39
TheJuliadansmith: completely agree15:39
* EmilienM puts his pilot hat15:39
dhellmannI'm much less interested in having things go faster than I am in making it so the team doesn't burn out.15:39
mriedemalso, nova tends to ask for actual CI coverage of features when possible if they are big enough, and that delays things15:39
dimsi keep reading runway as runaway!15:39
TheJuliadansmith: I was only providing context for the discussion in that some of these things take a long long time15:39
dansmithdhellmann: okay I want to revise my answer15:39
EmilienMdims: just don't runaway on a runway plz15:39
ttxYeah, my main concern at this point is losing the last supercores faster than we can decompose to simplify their work15:40
dhellmanndansmith : I'm all ears15:40
mriedemqueens, as noted in our retrospective at the ptg, was much less hectic in part b/c we had fewer approved blueprints to focus on15:40
dansmithdhellmann: one thing that really makes me feel like ragequitting is feeling like everyone is complaining all the time about us merging a ton of code, but not enough code. I would love to feel like the TC was supporting me more and trying to fix me less15:40
dansmithdhellmann: brutal honesty there, please take it in good faith15:40
mriedem^ same15:40
dhellmanndansmith : yes, I'm trying to make this conversation about helping you rather than fixing you, and I hope that's coming across.15:41
mriedemwe took on less in queens and got more done, which was good,15:41
mriedemand b/c of that, it seems we dipped way into the debt tank in rocky and are way overcommitted agin15:41
dimsdansmith : mriedem : +100 on what dhellmann said above15:41
mriedemlots of big things take project management help too,15:42
dansmithdhellmann: dims: well, it doesn't feel like that a lot of the time, which is just being honest, but I'm glad to hear that15:42
mriedemsdague used to do that for things he cared about15:42
melwittdhellmann: thank you for making that effort, because I have to say I feel similar. we merge a _lot_ of code, yet are constantly the subject of "problems" and "not enough cores"15:42
dhellmanndansmith : IIRC from looking at the stats, nova is doing at least an order of magnitude more review work than other teams. The rate of code churn is incredible. So I'd like to help you lower your stress levels, because you're already doing more than is reasonable.15:42
mriedemildikov did it for multiattach15:42
mnaseri think we're looking to find ways to reduce the load on you because you're valuable members with huge knowledge15:42
dansmithdhellmann: thank you for saying that15:42
* dansmith prints and frames15:42
ttxmnaser: ++15:42
dhellmannmelwitt : if I say there's a problem, I mean that the team is exhibiting signs of stress which leads to bad interactions. I think that's a problem for the long term health of the people, and the project. I want people to stay happy working on OpenStack in general and nova in particular.15:44
mnaseri totally appreciate the work done by the nova core team, it's been invaluable as an operator :>15:44
cdentI'd just like to make it clear that this topic came up because I drew people's attention to jay's message today about feeling overstretched and people's sympathy about that is what is driving this talk.15:44
zanebdansmith: as a likely culprit in that perception, I'd like to acknowledge for the record that Nova is merging an enormous amount of code and that the current cores are working *incredibly* hard. I guess we all just wish you didn't _have_ to.15:44
ttxYeah at this point my concern is much more "how do we make the work of the Nova team sustainable", not "how do we make Nova approve $foo faster"15:45
dansmithso, to be honest,15:45
dansmithI can handle the workload to a large degree15:45
dansmithit's the workload plus the feeling that nobody will ever be happy that really wears me out15:45
cdentis it fair to say, dansmith, that your ability to handle the workload is fairly unique?15:45
*** annabelleB has quit IRC15:45
dtroyerIMO the feelings some have about Nova (too much, not enough, fix it, etc) have become entrenched folklore15:46
cdentas in dan is special (in the good way)?15:46
dtroyerand get passed on to new generations of people coming to OpenStack15:46
dansmithcdent: I can only speak for myself, which is why I said "I"15:46
dansmithdtroyer: very much agree15:46
dansmithdtroyer: and that very much contributes to my cynicism about "help" being offered15:46
dhellmanndansmith : does that mean maybe we could help with setting expectations somehow?15:47
melwittI feel the same, it's all the complaining and criticism from outside that gets me down. nova is a lot of work but I like working on it and I like helping operators, users, and devs15:47
dtroyerthis feels like one place we need to make a decision to intentionally change the culture15:47
mriedemhonestly i'm going to put in the same amount of time and effort regardless15:47
ttxmaybe we should categorize that criticism and address it. I hope that none of this discussion is seen as criticism15:48
dansmithdhellmann: I don't know the answer to that question. I have a cynical feeling about it, which may not match the reality or possibility :)15:48
dtroyerdims:  ((your nova people from starlingx question: that is unlikely to be a sudden change))15:49
dimsack dtroyer. thanks15:49
ttxdims: also they won't become supercores tomorrow. or cores15:49
mriedemi would question how much review happens on the starlingx stuff either15:49
mriedeminternal forks and stuff are generally done by teams that are paid to just get stuff done, not maintain it15:49
mriedemand therefore don't care as much about the long-term costs or quality15:49
mriedemhence why maintaining forks is SUPER HARD15:49
ttxdansmith: mriedem: melwitt: also sometimes Nova is taken as the example, while the criticism is actually on OpenStack in general15:50
dtroyermriedem: that is why this is challenging to everyone involved :)15:50
mriedemand throwing people at this problem doesn't really help15:50
dhellmanndansmith : ok. I'm reluctant to say that because no one has figured out how to help with that in the past we can't come up with any new ideas today.15:50
ttxNova is singled out very often. Like in this discussion15:50
dansmithdhellmann: ack, which is why I hedged and exposed my cynicism :)15:50
mriedemi need a "my sensitive ego has been bruised" alert bot15:51
dimsdansmith : mriedem : melwitt : totally love and respect your work and try to hang out with you all every chance i get. So please don't feel your work is not appreciated. let's try an emoji - 💖15:51
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk15:51
* mriedem sees a lego brick15:52
mnaseryeah honestly my experience with the nova team is so awesome as an operator15:52
ttxdhellmann: I think handling Nova through the TC liaison mechanism rather than make it an all-TC exercise will help, too.15:52
EmilienM++ lot of respect for nova and other projects15:52
fungiyeah, given the feedback i heard from the nova cores who skimmed some of the divergence in the starlingx nova fork, it doesn't sound like the choices they made are especially compatible with the level of review the current nova core reviewers would expect (no offense meant to the starlingx crew who were maintaining those)15:52
ildikovmriedem: it's a heart15:52
mnaserat the summit i was stopped twice by two different cores to ask about how impactful a change nova was doing was going to be for us.  that's awesome15:52
mnaserthey totally didn't have to do that but the did15:53
dhellmannOne of the things jay mentions in his email is an "endless stream of feature requests". Can someone give any detail about the source of those requests?15:53
dansmithmnaser: brag all you want, everyone knows the nova team <3's mnaser :)15:53
mriedemvexxhost (mnaser) and cern get special treatment b/c of their level of openness and involvement in the project15:53
dimsdansmith : i mean ... who doesn't?15:53
dansmithdims: indeed15:53
mnaseri really want to do a talk on "how to work with upstream" and add more orgs to that list15:54
dansmithmriedem: and they actually contribute positively15:54
mriedemcburgess and med were also in that boat15:54
mnaseri think if people understand the value of working with upstream, internal culture will change massively15:54
mriedemmnaser: true story, one of our guys from china that was in vancouver for the first time commented after the nova cells v2 / cern session, 'wow you guys are very involved in helping cern and they are with making sure their needs are met'15:55
mriedemit was like a revelation15:55
dansmithwell, they do also have a very big electron gun...15:55
mriedemi'm just personally interested in helping the people that show up15:55
fungiyeah, don't wanna be on the wrong end of that sucker15:55
mriedemmgagne and the godaddy folks also come to mind15:56
mriedemjmlowe too15:56
mnasermaybe as the tc we should also look at our projects and acknowledge the good progress they've done so far15:56
dtroyerfungi: the choices made in starlingx were for expediency and had the advantage of a highly opinionated configuration rather than having to work with N possibilities.  overcoming that is going to be one of our biggest challenges in clearing the debt backlog15:56
mnaserrather than always trying to say "hey so let's fix this"15:56
mnaserit might give the messaging of "we're fixing you because you don't have your stuff together" in a way15:56
dhellmannmriedem : helping folks who show up seems like exactly the right approach to day. That's how open source is supposed to work, imo.15:56
mriedemmnaser: it totally does,15:56
dhellmannugh, *to take15:56
mriedemat least it always has to me15:56
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc15:57
dansmiththe culture in openstack has changed recently,15:57
dansmithwe used to celebrate the development side15:57
mnaseri think we had 3 nova cores pretty much mention that they felt the messaging is "we're fixing you" so maybe we should look into changing that15:57
dansmithfocus on the wins15:57
fungidtroyer: yeah, i get that. just don't want people getting the impression that they were doing the same sort of work the nova team needs now, and the learning curve for them is likely to be as steep as it is for most people coming to the nova team for the first time15:57
dansmithnowadays, it feels like the developers are the ones in the back room not doing enough,15:57
dtroyerfungi: ++   (more for the record than anything :)15:58
dhellmanndansmith : I've noticed that a bit, too15:58
dansmithwhich means we focus on the projects getting the most complaints15:58
dims++ fungi15:58
mnaserthis was good and i'd like to thank dansmith, melwitt and mriedem for speaking up15:59
mriedemhaving said that, i was happy with the press in queens for multiattach and vgpus and the like15:59
TheJuliadansmith: I agree that could be, but I also think that as time has evolved, we've lost valuable people, people have become more spread thin... so perceptions might not match reality in terms of their ability to contribute15:59
mriedemthat was nice to see15:59
mriedemcern was extremely gracious in vancouver15:59
fungidansmith: dhellmann: in recent years i've seen lots of feedback that celebrating developer activity caused other parts of the community to feel like second-class citizens and start lobbying to stop doing things they saw as idolizing developers. i don't agree with that assessment but it seems to have pervaded a lot of the extended community15:59
melwittI guess I want to say quickly that I appreciate the concern from all of you. we are a team of human beings and sometimes we get stressed and exhausted and I think it's okay to be open and honest about that, IMHO. at the same time, I don't want it to cause a rush of concern and fixing if someone opens up about something. we open up to try to make things better and truly evaluate the processes we're trying out16:00
mriedemfungi: the core party aside16:00
fungiglad the core reviewer parties are a thing of the past, yes16:00
fungii expect those fueled a lot of that sentiment16:00
dhellmannI was glad melwitt had a chance to talk about the work in nova on the keynote stage. I wish there had been more time for that sort of thing.16:00
TheJuliaThat was really nice16:01
fungiit was awesome16:01
mriedemmed mentioned during the summit feedback session something like that for superusers during keynotes but the community contributor awards16:01
*** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc16:01
mriedemthat would be a solid 'hey we actually care about contributors' thing from the foundatoin16:01
dhellmannmelwitt: agreed. at the same time, we'd like to try to help before the pressure gets so bad, so maybe we should talk about this more often in smaller doses16:01
dhellmannmriedem : yeah, that's high on my list of things16:02
fungii also can't help but feel like there must be something the tc could do to help have the right conversations to stem the overwhelming tide of feature requests jaypipes mentioned and i've seen others (not even just in nova) bring up from time to time16:02
dhellmannI started a conversation with mark c. about that after dublin, but didn't follow through in time to make it happen for yvr16:02
smcginnisUnpopular opinions, but I actually liked the core parties. Maybe I didn't get exposure to the downsides of that.16:02
dhellmannfungi : right, that's what I was hoping we'd get to16:02
dansmithdhellmann: I think the assumption that we need to be parented before we get into a fight is the wrong approach, FWIW16:03
zanebfungi: shameless plug: I think this is something that a technical vision could help with16:03
dhellmanndansmith : oh, I communicated poorly, then, because that's not what I mean16:03
dansmithdhellmann: well, that's what it feels like whenever someone venting turns into the TC showing up to separate the children on the playground :)16:04
dansmith(to me)16:04
fungismcginnis: the opportunity for a quiet place to get away and have laid-back conversations was nice. the exclusivity if it was sort of divisive and reinforced a caste system dynamic16:04
dhellmanndansmith : but as an example, if there's a flood of feature requests that won't stop, maybe that's something we could deal with at the TC/board level so you don't have to have the fight repeatedly with every vendor who comes along16:04
mriedemwe've done things in the past to try and stem the tide of feature requests,16:04
*** kumarmn has quit IRC16:04
mriedembut the thing is, then you get nailed for not landing enough features that people want16:05
mriedemit's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation16:05
TheJuliamriedem: define nailed16:05
dhellmanndansmith : you may be referring to one specific instance where I did feel a discussion had deteriorated to a point where a third-party could help mediate16:05
mriedemconstant critisizm?16:05
mriedemconstant "how do we fix nova?"16:05
smcginnisfungi: I liked the quiet place to have conversations aspect of it.16:05
TheJuliamriedem: could it just still then be a perceptions issue?16:05
ttxFTR we like to fix Swift too.16:06
smcginnisfungi: And felt like it was a good way to foster communication between the people in different teams that could work together to actually get things done.16:06
zanebso I have a theory that is probably unpopular :)16:06
dansmithdhellmann: I dunno that the board/TC really have the ability to stem that tide I guess16:06
mriedemTheJulia: idk, i think some people just don't care about anything but their special snowflake16:06
TheJuliaI guess maybe I genuinely think people are well intentioned, and maybe criticism comes from a lack of context16:06
dansmithdhellmann: I'm not referring to any one incident, fwiw16:06
smcginnisfungi: And if having a party incentivized some people to get more involved and become cores to be able to go to it, that's good in my book.16:06
dhellmanndansmith : if we said openstack was going to focus on technical debt during 2019 and not accept new features, and you received new feature requests, you could just send people to me instead of having to talk to them yourself. Would that help?16:07
TheJuliamriedem: true, or they don't have the capacity to care about anything outside of the overall venn diagram defining their role16:07
cdentzaneb: ?16:08
fungidansmith: there is the idea that if the vendors pushing for new features are represented on the board or in the set of foundation member companies, then there's the potential for product management and executive management direction conversations to stop trying to cram new features into a project which is already under stress to keep up16:08
dansmithdhellmann: that doesn't seem realistic to me, but if it did happen I guess it would be nice :)16:08
zanebthe theory goes that due in part to the hype cycle and in part to the lack of a detailed technical vision, OpenStack became a thing that tried to be all things to all people. It tried to be both a cloud offering and a self-service full VMWare/oVirt replacement complete with live migration, shelve/unshelve, and generally a lot of stuff that increased the complexity of the code and led to a steady torrent of n16:08
zanebew feature requests16:08
*** jpich has quit IRC16:08
ttxdansmith: we kinda said Ocata could be used to to a stable release... not sure that worked really though16:09
dansmithzaneb: I agree with that theory, but what point did it support?16:09
dhellmanndansmith : I would support that and fight for it if it would help you have time/space to do more work to split parts out of nova or take whatever other steps you need to help resolve the technical issues that make it hard for you to bring in new folks to the core team16:09
zanebif we could have picked one then things would have been easier to manage16:09
mriedemzaneb: but that ship has sailed16:09
ttxyeah we kinda have users now16:10
mriedemand the hordes are now doing it to k8s is my understanding16:10
jrolldhellmann: fwiw, I think that people external to the TC generally don't believe that the TC/board have influence on what contributing companies do. I follow the TC's work fairly closely and it isn't even clear to me that there is influence there16:10
jrolldhellmann: if there is influence, it isn't very visible16:10
zanebmriedem: yes, in many ways it's too late to fix that now because we have existing users to support16:10
dansmithjroll: agree16:10
TheJuliajroll: ++16:10
dansmithdhellmann: I wouldn't say that a year of tech debt is going to accomplish or even work towards that goal16:10
dhellmannjroll : we have tried to be very hands-off in the past, but the bylaws of the project give us basically unlimited power if we choose to use it16:10
zanebbut we can still do better for the future by saying clearly what we do and do not want OpenStack to be16:11
mriedemi'm pretty sure my employer still wants/needs to see features going in every release regardless of what upstream does, so that doesn't help me really16:11
dansmithmriedem: mine as well16:11
dansmithdhellmann: he said influence over the companies, not the developers16:11
dansmithdhellmann: I don't think the bylaws give you unlimited power over, say, huawei's actions16:11
dhellmanndansmith : if we have to make it so that the TC has to approve patches, we could do that. I wouldn't want to, but we could.16:12
dhellmannmy point is that we have more power than we use16:12
dansmithokay I guess I'm missing something16:12
mriedemand then nova will just lobby to be a top level project in the foundatoin and outside the tc pervue16:12
mriedemwhen is swift going to do that btw?16:12
dhellmannwe say no one has any influence over these companies, but the community sets the contribution rulues16:13
jrolldhellmann: my point being you can offer the TC to help with the negativity or turning down feature proposals, but most people won't believe that the TC can successfully help there16:13
dimsjroll : we can try ... right?16:13
dhellmannjroll : walk softly and carry a big stick16:14
jrollnot saying it isn't possible16:14
* mriedem looks at the clock and realizes he hasn't reviewed anything he wanted to review yet today16:14
ttxI think we need to better define the problem (if there is a problem) before wielding a big hammer in any direction16:14
dhellmannmriedem , dansmith , melwitt : thanks for your time today16:14
TheJuliattx: definitely16:15
fungijroll: in fairness, i also have limited expectations in our ability to get board members to take specific actions, or that the board members even necessarily have the ear of the right people in their own organizations to make such things happen, much less in other member companies. still, not trying guarantees it won't happenm16:15
notmynamewell this is an interesting buffer scrollback to start the day with16:15
dhellmannI'll just point to thingee's work on forcing third-party ci through for the cinder team as an example of how, when we set the rules to support the teams doing the work, we can make big changes happen.16:15
jrollI'm just offering a POV from outside of the TC, especially as to why people generally are meh on the TC trying to take action here16:15
ttxnotmyname: hi!16:16
ttxfungi: should we close the hour?16:17
fungiseems we've wound down16:17
fungiunless notmyname has something? ;)16:17
ttxIf we continue I need another drink16:17
jrollit's especially difficult to answer the question "what can the TC do to help here?" if one doesn't think the TC has the influence or power to do much16:17
* jroll is done, I think16:17
jrolldo much with toning down the slew of patches or negativity from contributors*16:18
fungijroll: yeah, we've been mostly loathe to exercise any nuclear options16:18
fungiin part, because those options put the project teams in a position of having to decide whether they want to continue to be part of openstack or go it on their own16:19
zanebthe TC has a lot of influence, but mostly only power that is too strong to use16:19
notmynamefungi: nah, still reading scrollback. don't wait for me for anything16:19
zanebkind of like the Queen16:19
dhellmannwe could, however, back up teams that want to exercise some of that power themselves16:19
fungithough i think that comes down to those teams feeling comfortable to exercise that power, and knowing we've got their back if their decisions get escalated to us16:20
dhellmannwhich is exactly why I keep asking the team what would help16:21
jrollwell, if we stick to the specific nova thing16:22
fungiwhat we probably can't be much help with is taking away the stress the employers of team members may place on them16:22
jrollwe concluded the major part of the problem is that the constant negativity is what really drags down the folks working on it16:22
fungiat least as far as said nuclear options are concerned16:22
smcginnisfungi: Should you #endmeeting?16:22
mriedemyeah, i was going to say,16:22
jrollhow can the TC reduce people saying "nova doesn't want my features!!"16:22
jroll"nova sux they won't merge this completely out of scope thing"16:22
mriedemstop talking about 'fixing' things, more emotional support, and understand we're trying - we realize there are issues, and we're generally our own worst critics16:23
fungijroll: it sounds like the bigger problem is "my employer will reassign me and i won't have time to be a nova core reviewer any longer if i can't at least also make some progress on features they've requested"16:23
TheJuliamriedem: That should be a presentation for berlin16:23
mriedemTheJulia: did that in boston16:23
mriedemit was the ptl talk16:23
TheJuliaI know :)16:23
fungiwas a very excellent talk, btw16:24
TheJuliait should be in the playlist on repeat of sorts16:24
mriedemfungi: really depends on what the core is focusing on i think16:24
jrollfungi: I think that is a smaller risk than the cores totally burning out16:24
mriedemhuawei is totally happy to have me working on fixing scale and resiliency issues16:24
mriedembut we have lower priority feature needs for operators too16:25
fungihuawei sounds like they're doing it right ;)16:25
mriedemhuawei is best way16:26
* mriedem drops mic16:26
jrollplease tell me that's the official slogan16:26
fungihypothetically, if nova were to want to take a cycle merging no new features and just working on decomposition, tech debt, usability fixes, bugs... any feel for how many of the current nova core reviewers' management chains would reassign them to somewhere else?16:26
TheJuliaIt wouldn't just be cores that we would need to worry about16:28
jrollI've always assumed employers would continue having people do the same amount of feature work, with a note that it won't be merged until the following cycle16:28
TheJuliabut actual on the ground contributors16:28
jrolland then double the feature requests the following cycle16:28
fungiTheJulia: if the actual on the ground contributors who get reassigned wer ethe ones pushing the unending flood of feature review requests, then that sounds like what they'd want?16:28
*** kumarmn_ has quit IRC16:28
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc16:29
jrollfungi: except those same devs probably also contribute bug fixes, right?16:29
*** kumarmn has quit IRC16:29
jrolland suddenly you've lost some percentage of bug fixers16:29
fungior is the general makeup of a random (not necessarily core reviewer) contributor to nova doing a mix of implementing new features and fixing bugs?16:29
fungijroll: yeah, that's what i'm wondering16:29
jrollgood question16:29
fungitragedy of the commons scenarios tend toward a lot of people pushing agenda patches and a handful working on fixing existing issues16:30
smcginnisdhellmann: That might be an interesting metric for your next set of reports. ^16:30
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc16:30
TheJuliaI think it would be like trying to cross the doldrums with a sailboat.16:30
* jroll needs food, this was a good conversation. I'm bummed I came in so late16:30
smcginnisdhellmann: How many contributors are doing feature work, how many are doing bug fixes, and what's the venn diagram look like of the two.16:30
dhellmannyeah, it can be hard to tell the difference between a bug fix and a feature request16:31
dhellmannI would like to figure that out, though, so if anyone has ideas16:31
smcginnisI suppose it depends on the team's policies around using Closes-bug for actual bugs.16:31
jrolldhellmann: closes-bug: vs implements: would get you most of the way in nova16:31
dhellmannyeah, and teams moving to storyboard will just have "story" or "task"16:31
smcginnisProbably not complete, but it would get part way there.16:31
fungiit would be a very fuzzy metric, but might be striking enough to still hold some insights16:32
*** edleafe has joined #openstack-tc16:33
fungiokay, so we've basically wrapped up discussion i suppose? i'll close this log out16:33
cdent_many_ implements are tech debt fixes16:33
cdentnot strictly bugs16:33
dhellmannI'm more interested in the difference between the things the team wants and the things the team has thrust upon it16:33
fungia lot of teams also don't have strict policies about filing bugs if there's already a fix available... so generalizing across teams could be tough16:34
fungifor infra work, bug reports were generally placeholders for we know something is broken but don't know what the fix should be yet. if it was faster to write the patch than the bug, we didn't saddle contributors with having to do both16:35
TheJuliaYeah, when it takes 20 minutes to file the bug, and a minute to fix it, and maybe 2-3 minutes to type a verbose commit message summarizing why... it adds up quick.16:36
TheJulia(because the bug has to be written with the bus factor accounted for)16:37
mgagneSpeaking of negative perception... (sorry if topic is past already)16:39
zanebyou have to balance that against how many minutes future readers spend trying to figure out why the heck that change was made16:39
mgagneOn a positive note, when I attempted to contribute to Nova in the past (like years ago), I used to perceive Nova in a very negative way.16:39
mgagneI felt I was ignored and got no feedback whatsoever for months. The only feedback was an automated reply saying "sorry, deadline has past, please propose for next version". It didn't feel like I was interacting with humans at all. Only some kind of big administration where forms and numbers are the norm.16:39
mgagneDuring that same period, I was also contributing to Cinder and had a totally different (positive) experience. So it played a lot in my negative perception of the Nova project as I was expected the same (positive) experience.16:39
mgagneNowadays I get a human reply and feedback. (thanks to mriedem, melwitt, dansmith and others I forgot) It drastically changed my perception of the Nova project. I agree it's not perfect but at least it feels more human. So there is that which I feel is a great improvement. ++16:39
fungizaneb: an excellent argument for very detailed commit messages16:39
TheJuliazaneb: indeed, or be able to pick it up with sufficent context.16:39
fungii just don't see a ton of benefit, personally, to copying my detailed commit message into a bug and immediately closing it16:40
mriedemmgagne: that reminds me of something mrhillsman told me once, or maybe smcginnis said it from an ops meetup - that ops people feel like they shouldn't or can't ask questions or raise issues in the -nova channel16:40
mriedemwhich is definitely a perception issue16:40
mgagnecdent: you too ++16:40
TheJuliamgagne: I was kind of thinking the same thing earlier this week that I actually went on a business trip, got back and had two nova patches merged and I was like "WOW!"16:41
mgagnemriedem: you know what I said at an ops meetup? "you need a friend to get stuffed reviewed or merged"16:41
zanebfungi: benefits are that other people reporting/searching for the same bug may find it, and you can track the status in multiple branches. obviously this applies less to infra than some other things16:42
mriedemwell, honestly knowing a person that is running a certain system does help, like when i think 'caching scheduler' i know who i can talk to16:42
mgagneTheJulia: I appreciate your feedback for the times I attempt to contribute to Ironic ++16:42
melwittmgagne: thank you, and we appreciate the effort you make to work with us and get things fixed in nova16:42
cdentmgagne: yeah, I agree that there is definitely a FOAF aspect to openstack contribution that isn't always ideal, but isn't always a negative either16:42
mgagnemriedem: so I'm the caching scheduler guy now, don't know how to feel about that one :P16:42
TheJuliamgagne: I really do try, sadly there is no way for me to reply to every single patch :( (and I actually feel bad about that reality....)16:42
mriedemwell, it was rax16:43
mriedembut now you're the main person16:43
cdentmgagne: tarred!16:43
mriedemmgagne: you can also be the "loves network_data.json guy"16:43
mriedemif you want16:43
fungizaneb: it may also just be that i'm used to looking at git history to find why changes were made (at least if they're minor enough changes to not require a release note or security advisory)16:43
TheJuliacdent: OpenStack is not alone in that.... In some other projects I've had to reach out through a friend because I couldn't illicit a response. :\16:44
cdentTheJulia: yeah wasn't trying to say openstack was unique in that regard, just that it happens16:45
mriedemthe random dead cat questions also matter, those get ignored16:45
cdentI suspect it part of scale16:45
mriedem"i deployed openstack and i can't create a server, please help"16:45
TheJuliacdent: Yeah16:45
mriedemlike, that's where we tell people to hit the forum or #openstack channel16:45
mriedembut, an operator saying, "i'm upgrading and hitting x, i think it's due to y but need some help here"16:45
mriedemmnaser: ^ is great about that16:45
TheJuliamriedem: Then there is also the "Uhh, that is weird, uhhhhhh Could you give us this laundry list of things we need to help you?" and then crickets are beamed in through time using a transporter16:46
fungi#chair TheJulia cdent zaneb dhellmann smcginnis dims ttx16:46
openstackCurrent chairs: TheJulia cdent dhellmann dims fungi smcginnis ttx zaneb16:46
fungiokay, i'm about to disappear and grab lunch/run errands. our office hour is nearly an office double-hour at this point but someone can #endmeeting when appropriate16:46
TheJuliaDo we have anything else to discuss? Things to get off our chests? great beers or coffees to share?16:47
dhellmannfungi : nice reworking of the base services draft16:48
dhellmannI think it's safe to close the logs at this point16:48
dhellmannTheJulia : do you want to do the honors?16:48
TheJuliaSure! Since it seems like the time ship relativity beamed in crickets.16:49
* cdent chirps16:49
*** openstack 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"16:49
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 14 16:49:34 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)16:49
openstackMinutes (text):
* TheJulia wonders if the chirp made it into the log16:49
TheJuliawoot, it did16:49
mnasermriedem: thanks, i try to value your (and nova-cores) time so i do try to do my own research before coming up with something16:49
mnaserwhich i think helps out in getting an answer most of the time and getting somewhere16:50
mnaservs "my nova instance won't go up because novalidhost" :p16:51
mriedemdefinitely, and because you're usually up to date quickly, you're finding the issues that people are eventually going to run into16:51
mriedemmnaser: you just run into them 2 years ahead of time16:51
mriedemyou're a time traveler of sorts16:51
mnaserpart of why i like us being up to date means.. i don't have to bother you about an issue that exists in codebase that is 2 years old16:52
mnaserno one remembers why and no one probably cares that much (as devs, i figure)16:52
mriedemsome care, but much fewer16:55
zanebyeah, my least favourite thing is "we're running Kilo and running into this problem with <hairball that has been rewritten twice since then>"17:00
jrollmnaser's experience reminds me of my experience with nova/ironic when I was running onmetal from master. those are fond memories17:12
*** annabelleB has quit IRC17:50
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc17:51
*** ricolin has quit IRC18:09
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc18:31
*** cdent has quit IRC18:55
*** annabelleB has quit IRC18:58
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc20:01
*** annabelleB has quit IRC20:04
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc20:05
*** annabelleB has quit IRC21:04
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc21:11
*** kumarmn has quit IRC21:15
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc21:35
*** kumarmn has quit IRC21:39
*** annabelleB has quit IRC21:40
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC21:45
*** edmondsw has quit IRC21:54
openstackgerritJeremy Stanley proposed openstack/governance master: Include PTL E-mail address in rendered team pages
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc22:01
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc22:05
*** kumarmn has quit IRC22:22
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc22:25
*** hongbin has quit IRC22:27
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc22:41
*** dklyle has quit IRC22:56
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc22:57
openstackgerritJeremy Stanley proposed openstack/governance master: Include PTL E-mail address in rendered team pages
*** kumarmn has quit IRC23:47

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!