Thursday, 2018-06-28

*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc00:04
*** ian_ott has quit IRC00:49
*** spotz has quit IRC01:04
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc01:16
*** edmondsw has quit IRC01:20
*** spotz has joined #openstack-tc01:20
TheJuliadhellmann: re: writing it down, +++++01:31
TheJuliaI don't remember a verdict, but I believe I have scrambled brains01:33
*** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc02:17
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc03:03
*** edmondsw has quit IRC03:08
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc04:52
*** edmondsw has quit IRC04:57
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC05:34
*** openstackstatus has quit IRC05:51
*** openstackstatus has joined #openstack-tc05:53
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus05:53
*** fanzhang has quit IRC06:04
*** fanzhang has joined #openstack-tc06:35
*** fanzhang has left #openstack-tc06:36
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc06:40
*** edmondsw has quit IRC06:46
*** tosky has joined #openstack-tc07:58
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc08:07
*** dansmith has quit IRC08:20
*** dansmith has joined #openstack-tc08:21
*** dansmith is now known as Guest8882308:21
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc08:29
*** edmondsw has quit IRC08:34
*** evrardjp has quit IRC09:35
*** evrardjp has joined #openstack-tc09:41
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc09:42
*** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur09:49
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc10:17
*** edmondsw has quit IRC10:22
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|brb11:32
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc12:06
*** edmondsw has quit IRC12:11
*** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc12:13
*** cdent has quit IRC12:18
*** rosmaita has quit IRC12:21
*** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc12:29
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc12:34
*** dtantsur|brb is now known as dtantsur12:55
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc13:01
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc13:27
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc13:37
*** cdent has quit IRC13:46
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc13:50
mnaserquiet morning, hi everyone13:53
*** annabelleB has quit IRC13:58
*** Guest88823 is now known as dansmith14:01
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc14:02
smcginnismnaser: o/14:03
* mnaser has been behind on health tracekr14:04
mnasersmcginnis: does your bot still work? :p14:04
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc14:05
smcginnismnaser: Darn, looks like he died again. Need to look into why that happens. One moment.14:05
*** guvnah has joined #openstack-tc14:06
smcginnis?ptl Puppet OpenStack14:06
*** guvnah has quit IRC14:06
*** guvnah has joined #openstack-tc14:06
smcginnis?ptl Puppet14:07
*** guvnah has quit IRC14:07
smcginnisDang it. :)14:07
*** guvnah has joined #openstack-tc14:07
smcginnis?mission senlin14:07
guvnahSenlin's mission statement is: To implement clustering services and libraries for the management of groups of homogeneous objects exposed by other OpenStack services.14:07
smcginnisNeed to work on my error handling there. :)14:08
mnaserso now we know how to kill it14:08
smcginnisHaha, yep.14:08
smcginnisI need to write a bot to restart my bot when it dies.14:09
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc14:09
scasuse systemd to restart it14:09
*** lbragstad has quit IRC14:10
fungianybody happen to know why we use the term "core developer" instead of "core reviewer" in the project-team-guide chapters on bugs and stable-branches?14:13
smcginnisReviewer seems a more accurate choice to me.14:18
fungiwe've insisted in the past that "core developers" aren't a thing, so just making sure it's sensible for me to push up a change to correct those references14:23
fungiif we want to avoid continued propagation of that terminology then we should do our best to eradicate it in official documents14:23
cdentfungi: yes14:24
fungione very trivial patch coming up! ;)14:24
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc14:26
openstackgerritJeremy Stanley proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: There are no core developers, only core reviewers
dhellmannzaneb , TheJulia : I'm still waiting to hear if we will have a room. It looks likely that we could at least do something informal for the afternoon if we can't get a conference room.14:28
*** e0ne has quit IRC14:31
zanebdhellmann: ack, I think I will probably just go ahead and book then14:32
dhellmannyeah, I'll be there, so at least the 2 of us could hang out :-)14:32
TheJuliaAck, worst comes to worst there are some nearby places14:32
* zaneb might have to arrive on Sat night14:32
dhellmannyeah, kendall waters is looking into it for us, but apparently there is another event in the hotel over the weekend so we're not sure there's a conference room available14:33
cdenti have hotel booked already from saturday night, but no flights yet14:33
dhellmannzaneb : at this point it looks like it would only be for the afternoon, so if you can arrive in the morning that should work.14:33
smcginnisHotel on Saturday but no flights for me yet as well.14:34
zanebdhellmann: I have to check again, but it looks like flight times are not conducive to that14:34
dhellmannah, well14:34
zanebI could leave the house at like 4.30am and make it, but I wouldn't be very popular14:35
dhellmannthere's a 4:30 in the morning now?14:36
dhellmannwhen did we add that?14:36
TheJuliasimilarly, looks like I would have to get to the airport at 4:30 am as well..14:36
TheJuliaits about two hours after when I went to bed.. I think.14:36
* TheJulia would like to request the end of time zones14:37
scasthere's an am? i never received the memo.14:37
dhellmannwell, plan whatever travel makes the most sense for you, but don't rush to arrive by sunday morning14:37
*** pabelanger has quit IRC14:37
*** pabelanger has joined #openstack-tc14:38
zanebthere definitely is a 4.30am because I often hear a baby complaining around that time14:38
*** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc14:38
dhellmannyour baby and my cat would get along swimmingly14:39
scasso would my three cats14:39
scasthey would be more inquisitive and afraid of a tiny human than anything14:39
dhellmannwe have 2. one is a professional sleeper. the other does parkour around the bedroom every morning.14:39
TheJuliadhellmann: So my kitten is NOT the only one... interesting14:40
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc14:40
dhellmannTheJulia : when we first brought them home we had them in a large crate and every morning I would find Duncan hanging upside down from the top.14:40
scasone likes to burrow in bed. one likes to walk across the midsection roughly every few hours. one likes to lay on heads.14:41
* TheJulia wonders if there should be a "cat" track where every presentation features "cats"14:41
smcginnisWhen I had long hair, our cat liked to burrow in and make a nest.14:41
scasi believe my project slides have at least one cat picture14:42
smcginnisdhellmann: for some reason I recently looked back at the cat-ful talk you and ttx gave.14:43
dhellmannsmcginnis : one of our previous cats used to creep up behind me on the sofa and grab my pony tail14:43
dhellmannha, I forgot all about that14:43
dhellmannTheJulia : we could organize an entire conference with that theme14:44
scasi missed the opportunity to have a giant projected odin head at vancouver. not sure when that'll come around again14:44
TheJuliaPresenter pics should include their cat insanity ;)14:44
fungiwe basically don't let our cats in the bedroom, so as a result they alternate between clawing at the bedroom door or howling in the hallway14:44
zanebI also have a dog who likes to get under the bed in the middle of the night14:45
zanebit's about an 8 inch gap14:45
dhellmannhow big is the dog? :-)14:45
fungilimber dog!14:45
zanebthe dog is a labrador-cross14:45
zanebso you can imagine how that goes14:45
dhellmannsounds like a tight squeeze14:45
scasfungi: one of mine just had surgery and stayed in the bedroom for 2 weeks. his brother had separation anxiety and tore the carpet up from the other side of the door in my rental14:45
dhellmannscas :-(14:46
dhellmannI hope they've both recovered14:46
scasoh yeah. they're fighting. surgery cat is actually a bit more brazen now14:46
scasback to being brothers14:46
fungiscas: oh, yes i had one cat some years back remove the trim around the doorframe toothpick at a time, and then removed a section of the carpet and padding and attempted to tunnel through the plywood subfloor14:47
fungithey're persistent when they want to be14:47
scasmy house panther was nothing short of neurotic. when i was outside the room, he constantly laid on me. it was so cute it was disgusting14:49
scasdelivering an upstream change took extra coordination14:49
zaneboh hey there are flights available at sane times now14:50
TheJuliaWhat time are we targetting time wise for sunday?14:56
fungii can actually get directs to denver, however leaving the island to get to the airport in the morning on a weekend during tourist season can take upwards of 3-4 hours14:57
fungiso would still probably need to leave the day before or crazy early before sunrise14:57
dhellmannTheJulia : what time works for folks? it seemed like most folks wanted to make it a 1/2 day, so after lunch?14:57
dhellmannwe could do a group lunch of folks are there for it, too14:58
smcginnisOptional group lunch, then.. yea14:58
cdentlunch is a always nice14:58
*** alex_xu has quit IRC14:58
smcginnisFood good14:58
cdentsmcginnis shot the food!14:58
dhellmannI hear some folks like the BBQ in Denver14:59
ttxThe taco truck near the hotel was a pretty good deal14:59
smcginnisThere were some OK ones across the street or not too far away as well.14:59
dhellmannI expect to be eating there a lot during the rest of the week, so it might be nice to do something different, too.14:59
dhellmannsince there would, presumably, be more time to travel to and fro15:00
fungitc-members: office hour is upon us15:00
fungi#startmeeting tc15:00
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 28 15:00:31 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.15:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)"15:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'15:00
fungi#topic Office Hour15:00
*** openstack changes topic to "Office Hour (Meeting topic: tc)"15:00
mnaserbonjour o/15:00
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc15:00
fungi#chair mnaser dhellmann ttx smcginnis cdent TheJulia zaneb15:01
openstackCurrent chairs: TheJulia cdent dhellmann fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx zaneb15:01
fungi#chair pabelanger15:01
openstackCurrent chairs: TheJulia cdent dhellmann fungi mnaser pabelanger smcginnis ttx zaneb15:01
fungi#chair mugsie15:01
openstackCurrent chairs: TheJulia cdent dhellmann fungi mnaser mugsie pabelanger smcginnis ttx zaneb15:01
dhellmannfor those just joining, we were discussing the pre-PTG meeting plans15:01
jrolllate on the food topic, but before things get busy, just wanna point out denver seems to have thousands of microbreweries :)15:01
dhellmannI am waiting to hear if we have a conference room, but have been reassured that we could likely use the lounge if we have to.15:01
ttxdhellmann: where do we stand on an "additional workshop around an established conference" ?15:02
ttxWas that abandoned ?15:02
dhellmannthe general trend seemed to be for an afternoon-only meeting, so plan your travel accordingly15:02
dhellmannttx: good question15:02
ttxCFP for Open Source Summit in Edimburgh closes Sunday iirc15:02
dhellmannI had thought maybe this pre-PTG thing would make that unnecessary, but that wasn't really clear.15:02
ttxMaybe we can postpone15:03
smcginnisMy impression was that while a lot of us would like to have a workshop, there didn't sound like there was a good time or place for everyone to meet.15:03
dhellmannAlan Clark did ask to join us on Sunday in Denver, and I thought it might be a good opportunity. Does anyone have any objections to including him?15:03
smcginnisNot saying I don't think we should try for it, but there were some challenges to work through yet if we do.15:03
ttxIn September we'll have a better idea of teh early-2019 conference landscape and could pick one15:03
fungii'd welcome his presence15:03
smcginnisdhellmann: That would be great!15:03
fungior anyone from the community really15:03
cdentalan showing up would be great15:03
mugsieyeah, that seems like a good idea15:03
dhellmannsmcginnis : yeah, I think we might have a better chance scheduling something off-peak conference season15:04
dhellmannok, I will relay the current vague plans15:04
dtroyerfwiw, I plan to be thereā€¦ (Sunday PTG)15:04
smcginnisQ1 2019 might give us enough time and be a good time of year to try to do something.15:04
cdentwe could consider doing some virtual video conferencing if people were up for it, but that night be a pain15:04
smcginnisLeaving MN in February to go to Cancun or Hawaii works for me.15:04
dhellmannwhich are, we'll meet some time after lunch, so as not to try to make anyone take really early flights to get there first thing15:04
ttxok, noted. i might still go to Edinburgh :P15:04
scasthere may be an opportunity for me to be attend the ptg on behalf of chef openstack. i suspect it'll be more for me to whip my deceased equine than talk about chef itself15:05
* jroll <3 edinburgh15:05
cdentttx I'm still thinking about it as well, but I'm struggling with seeing the future well15:05
dhellmannttx : I will be there for EuroPython so opted not to make 2 trips to the same place so close together.15:05
ttxI'll apply for CFP -- usually mentioning OpenStack in the abstract is a good way to get rejected15:05
dhellmannle sigh15:05
smcginnisHah, that does seem to be the case these days.15:05
fungiyeah, i avoid mentioning openstack in any cfp submission due to openstack fatigue15:06
ttxI also wanted to discuss diversity tracking, if nobody else has anything more urgent15:06
fungii liked the "bus factor" recharacterization15:07
ttxIt feels like we have several options on the table15:07
dhellmannI was going to ask where things stood with the work on "job descriptions" but I didn't see dims sign in15:07
fungihelps focus on the actual concern rather than the abstract measurement15:07
ttx1- try to adjust the metrics and continue to do tags15:07
ttx2- try to adjust the metrics but use them to feed questions to teh health Tracker for deeper dive into data15:07
ttx3- drop tracking altogether15:08
openstackgerritJeremy Stanley proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: There are no core developers, only core reviewers
ttx4- Produce a comprehensive report every cycle15:08
ttxI' not convinced 4 is worth the effort15:08
ttxI'm convinced (1) is more destructive than useful15:08
smcginnisAgree re: 415:08
ttxso I'm somewhere between 2 and 3 at this point15:09
fungi2 seems like a reasonable compromise15:09
cdentI think we should stop publishing the data, but produce it regularly to use it to inform human interactions15:09
ttxcdent: ++15:09
smcginnisI was just going to say the same - somewhere between 2 and 3.15:09
ttxthat's where I am15:09
ttxHave teh data, but don't make it more significant than it actually is15:09
ttxbecause the more i look into it, the more brittle I see it is15:10
scasmeasuring the thing but not having it published is where i'd go, too. better to measure and not need15:10
TheJulia2 seems reasonable and the lesser lift work wise to implement.15:10
scasit does give a rough idea as to where things stand, but it's not something i'd want to plaster on the wall15:11
ttxAnd as I mentioned in a recent remark on this channel, 67% corporate bus factor on swift due to commit % is less critical than 67% for Masakari.15:11
ttxAs one is more featurecomplete than the other15:11
fungiyeah, and i agree fully that badgifying it via governance tags just turns it into something teams will complain is unfairly casting them in a poor light15:12
ttxIf Swiftstack abandoned Swift I feel like Swift would survive ok. If NTT abandoned Maskari, it would be a walking dead15:12
scasit brought me out of my foxhole since chef is pretty relevant there15:12
ttxdue to lack of an ecosystem of users15:12
ttxThe only drawback of 2/3 is that you don't communicate that information on project health to consumers anymore15:13
dhellmanndo we know if consumers were actually using that information?15:13
ttxexcept if they find the not-so-secret wiki url15:13
cdentwe should care most about openstack health, not individual projects?15:13
mugsiedhellmann: ++15:13
fungiif ntt abandoned masakari it would be a zombie at least until some other interested party picked it back up (a la blazar)15:14
dhellmannof course, they can't use it if we don't publish it15:14
ttxTrove is actually my favorite example :)15:14
ttxdhellmann: yeah, I'm not sure how much corporate diversity actually plays a role in deployment decisions15:15
*** e0ne has quit IRC15:15
cdentsorry, I gotta run, will catch up15:16
*** cdent has quit IRC15:16
ttxBut I feel like it's a more positive message to post "you can use Barbican now, the TC says it's solid" rather than "don't use TripleO, only Red Hat contributes to it"15:16
mugsiettx: I would suggest it doent at all15:16
scas'does it blend without cutting me to shreds' is the general sentiment that i've seen from various interactions with my downstreams in the deploy space15:16
ttxscas: but it's a more complex statement than a diversity tag, right15:17
mugsiettx: but we don't make judgements on the code - we can't say Barbican is solid, just that more than one company works on it15:17
scasttx: very much so15:17
ttxmugsie: well maybe that needs to change15:17
scasttx: for core openstack, swift the big exception, you could say that chef is fairly stable15:17
mugsiequite possibly15:17
* mugsie is just imagining the wall of flames from the first TC code review15:18
ttxmugsie: right... I'm just suggesting we somehow communicate that it's time for people to rely more on Designate for example15:18
fungifireproof pants mode *on*15:19
scasso long as 'someone' is keeping up with build failures and extra-community developments, diversity is a third or fourth degree factor. the user survey metrics for chef are fairly stable because the main use case is 'fairly stable', to overuse the phrase. but that's a complex thing to measure15:19
mugsiewell, bolding us in the project map would help :P15:19
ttxnot saying that the others are less ready :)15:19
ttxBold is the new core15:19
ttxanyway, that's a bit of a tangent15:20
ttxOK! so: I will refine my busfactor scripts and post them to governance repo15:21
ttxI will highlight the most disturbign stats in the HealthCheck page so taht those can be raised in future health checks15:21
dhellmannthat sounds good, too15:21
ttxand I will propose a removal of the existing diversity tags15:21
ttxmnaser: if you want to take some of those work items, feel free :)15:22
fungiit would be nice, in a bikesheddy sort of way i suppose, to come up with a less morbid term than "bus factor" to describe this concept15:22
ttxbut I'm probably in a better position to push those15:22
TheJuliaSo what if a team actually doesn't care about the diversity tag?15:23
dhellmannTheJulia : if it's going away, that doesn't really matter, right? do you mean affiliation diversity in general?15:23
ttxfungi: "diversity brittleness" ?15:23
mugsieTheJulia: most of us don't really care, apart from the kiss of death from the single-vendor one15:23
TheJuliawell, I think my mind is going towards tags in general15:23
ttxThe problem is that diversity has more dimensions15:23
dhellmannttx: "diversity" has so many meanings, I think we always need to include "affiliation" when we talk about it in this way15:24
dhellmannto be clear15:24
ttxfungi: I'll take any suggestion that works both for corporate busfactor and individual busfactor15:24
TheJuliamugsie: that was kind of what I was expecting the answer to be, and that is my perception as well.15:24
fungithough also affiliation may be irrelevant in the single-contributor case15:24
ttxalthough I'll regret my busfactor.py15:24
scasperhaps 'key person risk', to dredge from the old school15:25
fungito be clear, i don't object to it but some people may find the imagery of contributors getting hit by a bus unsettling15:25
TheJuliattx: it can always be renamed ;)15:25
* ttx cries in a corner15:25
zanebanybody want to talk Adjutant?15:25
* dhellmann would like to hear some other opinions on adjutant15:26
ttxfungi: less unsettling than being forked, right15:26
* ttx shuts up15:26
ttxI was leaning towards +1ing it but didn't want to influence anyone15:27
dhellmannI'm still a bit on the fence and am looking for someone to tip me one direction or the other.15:27
jrollttx: fungi: I like "lottery factor", winning the lottery is a much happier scenario where people might just stop working on things :)15:27
fungijroll: or retirement ;)15:27
jrollretirement usually isn't so sudden :P15:28
cmurphyoops i'm late15:28
zanebdhellmann: I'm pretty relaxed about voting for it, so I'd like to hear more about your concern that its flexible architecture could prove to be a Bad Thing if it results in people writing lots of non-interoperable plugins15:28
ttxFor Adjutant, I'm fine adding it, because it's easy to remove it afterwards if it ends up being destructive after all15:28
TheJuliayeah, retirement seems to be more of a trickledown from what I've seen so far15:28
TheJulia"tableflip factor"?15:28
fungijroll: fair. also working on free software already feels like retirement to me at least ;)15:28
ttxI think we expressed our concerns15:28
smcginnisrage quit factor15:28
dhellmannttx: Is it "easy" to remove? When was the last time we removed a project?15:29
smcginnisI wouldn't consider it "easy", but maybe in relation to the work getting it added it would be. :)15:29
ttxThat would be Fuel and the App catalog.. 2017?15:29
fungiwe removed fuel, app catalog, akanda15:29
dhellmannzaneb : We've done so much work on interoperability with other projects, and place so much value and emphasis on it now, that I'm having trouble just letting go of that.15:30
zanebdhellmann: specifically, in what ways could making it an official project make the downstream plugin problem worse?15:30
ttxIt's easier than most due to where it would end up in the map15:30
dhellmannzaneb : it wouldn't be any different, at a technical level. It would be different because we would be saying "yeah, we don't care about the lack of interop with this one project"15:30
ttxdhellmann: I would definitely not accept it if it ended up in the "main" bucket15:30
fungithe app catalog removal is probably the most similar, since it was "we're retiring this active effort because it is not the direction we want to take openstack"15:30
dhellmannand I guess I prefer not to make exceptions15:30
ttxI think that needs clear APIs15:30
dhellmannat the same time, I've wished we had the user onboarding features for *ages* (the thing we built at Dreamhost wasn't reusable in any way)15:31
dhellmannand to be clear, I will support the decision of the group, whichever way it goes15:32
dhellmann*this group15:32
mugsieyeah. and the info I would take for onboarding into my cloud is completely different to the info collected by vexxhost for example15:32
dhellmannI'm talking post-signup onboarding15:32
dhellmannstuff like "welcome! next we're going to create some default networks for you"15:33
dhellmannsome of what we had to do was driven by our choice of networking architecture and backend15:33
ttxdhellmann: re: Adjutant if we add them now they won't be in Rocky anyway, forit release would be Stein15:33
smcginnisI forget where I read it recently, bit there was some wording around the desire for interop with OpenStack not meaning it's something you can easily switch between providers with absolutely no changes, but rather having a base level of expected compatibility.15:33
smcginnisI see adjutant as being outside of that base level and something more on the provider level where it's perfectly fine if vendor a works slightly differently than vendor b.15:34
zanebit's not like we don't have non-interoperable ways of doing it now, it seems like Adjutant is at least a step in the right direction15:34
smcginnisBut at least both vendors can use a tool supported by the community and not some home grown widely divergent thing.15:34
mnaserttx: i can take on some of these tasks if you want to assign any15:35
mnaseri'm still trying to grasp most of the diversity stuff but i'll take any action items15:35
ttxmnaser: I'll see if I end up needing help, You have plenty on your plate15:35
zanebsmcginnis: and tbh I am less concerned with interop when the interface is Horizon (which anybody can relearn pretty quick) vs. a bunch of scripts that have to be rewritten15:35
mnaserttx: thanks, i've had some unexpected surprises of extra work on my way..15:36
zanebnot unconcerned, but definitely less concerned15:36
smcginniszaneb: Same here.15:36
dhellmannthere is an API, right?15:36
ttxzaneb: depending on how much prevalent those sorts of APIs already are, one could even consider that Adjutant is helping standardize overall15:36
* mnaser doesn't like the fact some providers build their own control panels and not use horizon instead15:36
zanebdhellmann: AIUI yes, but mostly for the purposes of exposing it through horizon15:36
dhellmannah, ok15:37
smcginnisEven if it's scripted for some reason, I don't see a problem with that.15:37
scasmnaser: ++15:37
ttxI guess that's a good question -- how many of the OpenStack public clouds already use some sort of proprietary API to integrate with their business logic on $stuff15:37
smcginnisAs a user, if I've scripted something for working with Vexxhost, I would assume I need to redo some things if I then go to some other provider.15:37
ttxIf all of tehm do, then Adjutant is a win15:37
ttxIf none of them do, then Adjutant is likely to increase divergence15:38
smcginnisI would assume at least 90+% of them do.15:38
fungiin previous discussions, adjutant developers were quite clear the api is and is meant to be user-facign and not merely for web integration15:38
mnasersmcginnis: i like to think that what you run against our cloud should be the same as any other cloud15:39
mnaserthe only thing i'd expect to change are things like.. image id.. flavor..15:39
mnasernetwork id..15:39
*** lxkong has quit IRC15:39
mnaserthat's how i think it should be anyways15:39
mnasermy view is that: each company can do it's own thing in a way, but at some point, you will end up with a set of openstack credentials and the experience from that point onwards should always be consistent15:41
fungii expect it was more like for self-service sign-up the information you collect from new customers is likely to be at least somewhat different from the information some other provider might collect15:41
ttxfungi: in a lot of cases they piggyback on an existing system15:41
cmurphymnaser: technically some of what adjutant handles is the part before you get the openstack credentials15:41
fungittx: agreed. especially if cloud services are not the only product/service so they already have a crm and billing system15:42
mnaserthis might be a bit ignorant of me to ask, but do you *have* to be interop-able to be an official project?15:42
cmurphythe deployment tools are an example of projects with no interoperability guarantees because that wouldn't make sense15:43
ttxdepends what you mean by operop-able15:43
mugsieit is a goal of our though15:43
mnaserso the way i imagine adjutant is just a collaboration across different providers who would like to stop duplicating their logic and work together to implement their common business logic15:43
fungihas some things to say about "basic interoperability with the rest of OpenStack: User-facing API services should support Keystone for discovery and authentication"15:43
mnaserand extend it with their own business logic on top, rather than each provider having their own set of onboarding stuff15:44
mnaseras long as that is limited to logic that isn't user facing imho15:45
mnaseruser facing and touching other openstack api services15:45
mnaserbut anyways, i might be late to this whole convo.  i'll follow the review and comment15:45
fungimnaser: yeah, in adjutant's case rather than wanting to have interchangeable backend drivers with a consistent api, they want the backends to change the api conditionally15:45
ttxmnaser: that would be the ideal scenario yes15:46
mnaseryeah that's a no bueno imho.  work with other providers and come up with the set of common shared api calls you want to work on: ex.. reset password, etc15:47
fungifor me what it boils down to is that we've had examples of dynamic apis in openstack, and our experience to date is that you can't really build redistributable tools around those15:47
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc15:47
mnaseri do feel like at that point it's a bit odd15:47
fungiso instead you end up with provider-specific clients and sdks15:47
fungiwhich we've also had a proliferation of in the past15:47
mnaserlike it has it's own queueing and task management tooling15:47
mnaserwe have tools that do that in openstack which it would be nice to depend on and help the overall ecosystem15:48
zanebone thing we haven't discussed: is there actually interest from other vendors? I only see one email on openstack-dev to that effect15:49
mugsieNo - we covered that a long time ago, there is no relation between Mistral and Adjutant15:49
dhellmannyeah, adjutant "tasks" are not at all like mistral's15:49
ttxzaneb: that's a good question yes. If there is no hope of open collaboration aroudn Adjutant, the overall value add is limited15:50
mugsiemnaser: every project has it own internal queuing and task managment system15:50
fungi(perhaps more like glance's "tasks"?)15:50
mugsieyeah, that's pretty close fungi15:50
mnaserzaneb: i dont want to speak on their behalf but i think citycloud might be using parts of it15:50
mugsieor designate's workers / tasks15:50
mnasertobberydberg: ^ ?15:50
zanebI guess I should check the operators list15:51
dhellmannif we can go back to the PTG meeting for a second, Alan asked if it would be appropriate to invite the rest of the board members who may be in town to join us. I don't have a problem with that, except that I don't know how much space we have yet. Is there any other reason not to include them?15:52
fungizaneb: i want to say there was some discussion of it on the operators list last year, but i'll need to find my old notes from the last time i researched it15:52
ttxdhellmann: yeah, maybe wait until we know if we have a room... The bar won't be enough if the board comes15:52
mugsiedhellmann: I dont think there is an issue, apart from space15:52
fungidhellmann: assuming space is not an issue, i'm cool inviting anyone from the community, even board members15:52
cdentdhellmann: only if we want to talk about them behind their backs. I reckon we want to talk about them to their faces15:52
dhellmannttx: yeah, that's what I was thinking. I only asked for space for 13 to start15:52
dhellmannI will ping Kendall again today to see where things stand15:53
fungicdent: i certainly prefer to talk about people to their faces ;)15:53
smcginnisMaybe we can get the lunch area? It would be great to have the board there if possible.15:54
* mnaser is totally in support of that idea15:55
smcginnisMaybe instead of bemoaning not getting invited to board meetings, we just need to invite the board to our meetings.15:55
dhellmannthere's some other big event going on over that weekend, so space is going to be tight15:55
mnaseri think the only thing is as long as it stays a 'tc meeting', but i'm sure we won't have a problem with that15:56
dhellmannthat was my other question: what do we actually want to talk about?15:56
smcginnisMaybe we can all get train tickets and just take over a car and ride around the city all day.15:56
mnaserdhellmann: i think is a good start15:56
fungicue train ascii art15:56
cdentdhellmann: isn't september too far away to be agenda building?15:56
mnaserwe can get a lot of that hashed out imho15:56
cdentI reckon it depends on how far we've got on some things15:57
smcginnisWith the board, I would like more discussion about FOundation direction for expanding to other areas and what projects we're bringing on board.15:57
mugsiesmcginnis: ++15:57
cdentbut if we haven't finished it yet, I reckon two things: tech vision and board interaction15:57
zanebsmcginnis: AIUI wherever the board has quorum it becomes a Board Meeting and then it's a whole Thing15:57
dhellmannthis would be "other board members who will be at the PTG" so not necessarily enough people to trigger quorum15:58
fungiyeah, i don't anticipate a majority of the board will travel to the ptg15:58
fungimost of the elected individual directors likely will15:58
zanebdhellmann: yeah, I think this is fine, just thinking about why 'just invite the board to our meetings' might not be a solution in general15:59
fungiand a few of the appointed directors are also active contributors in the trenches as well15:59
dhellmannI've suggested we wait to invite anyone else until we have more details about space, and I've pinged Kendall to see what the status on that is. I'll let you all know when I have more info.15:59
dhellmannand I need to drop offline for a while, unfortunately, but please do carry on without me16:00
ttxI think we are done :)16:00
fungithanks everyone!16:01
*** 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"16:01
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 28 16:01:05 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)16:01
openstackMinutes (text):
funginice to close that one out at the hour mark for the first time in a few weeks16:01
smcginnis*obligatory meeting format grumble16:01
fungii mean, i'm glad that it's not actually a formal meeting and we're cool with discussing things for longer than a rigid one-hour slot16:02
fungibut i do agree the meetbot usage makes it feel more formal and less inviting16:02
smcginnisNot much response that I've seen the ML post asking about usefulness.16:03
mugsieyeah. did we find out if the people looking for the logs are finding it useful?16:03
smcginnisMaybe I'll respond there with my opinion.16:03
smcginnisI have not heard anything one way or another. Could be not many people care one way or the other.16:03
mugsieyeah, there was one or two people in YVR who asked16:03
fungirocky was one16:04
fungii don't recall who else16:04
mugsieanita i think?16:05
*** annabelleB has quit IRC16:11
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc16:16
*** jpich has quit IRC16:21
openstackgerritMerged openstack/project-team-guide master: There are no core developers, only core reviewers
jrollttx | zaneb: depending on how much prevalent those sorts of APIs already are, one could even consider that Adjutant is helping standardize overall <- I've been leaning toward yes on adjutant for this reason, but I don't have data on the prevalence of those APIs16:44
*** jaosorior has quit IRC17:10
smcginnisI do think it at least provides a place for de facto standardization to occur.17:13
*** annabelleB has quit IRC17:14
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc17:15
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk17:22
*** ricolin has quit IRC17:25
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc17:28
*** e0ne has quit IRC17:28
*** annabelleB has quit IRC17:29
dhellmanncdent : we're paired up to do the health check for telemetry, so I thought it would be good to coordinate before I try to get in touch with them. Have you started looking into the team yet?17:37
cdentyeah, I talked to jd a couple days ago and asked him if there was anything he was concerned about other than what I had written on the tracker already17:38
cdenthe said that was a good start17:38
dhellmannoh, somehow I didn't see what you'd written in the tracker17:38
* dhellmann reloads the page17:38
cdentI asked if there were any other regular contributors besides the two cores and he said no, but we both expressed some degree of interest/positivity about monasca's promise to help out17:39
dhellmannis "more to come" based on more research you had planned?17:39
cdentwhich has born a bit of fruit17:39
dhellmannoh, nice17:39
dhellmannthat's a positive thing to include17:39
cdentthe "more to come" was written before I spoke to jd recently , and I haven't been back to the page yet17:39
dhellmannah, ok17:40
dhellmannit sounds like you have that one handled, so I'll leave it to you to fill in the rest of your notes when you have time. I guess let me know if there's anything I can do to assist.17:40
cdentwill do, thanks. I agree that it's in hand.17:41
dhellmanncmurphy : have you had a chance to reach out to dtroyer about the OSC team, yet? we're paired on that one and I don't want to duplicate effort you've already done.17:52
cmurphydhellmann: no I have not yet17:56
dhellmannok. do you want to try to schedule a time for the 3 of us to talk?17:56
dhellmannI suppose email works, too17:56
dtroyer:)  I shouldn't be too hard to find these days outside of a bit of travel in 2 weeks17:57
dhellmanndtroyer : somehow I always assume you're buried under work :-)17:58
dtroyerit has lightened up a bit finally17:58
dhellmannwe're talking about
dhellmannand trying to get a sense of how our various project teams are all doing17:58
dtroyerI'm even debugging a flakey OSC functional test right now!  \o/17:58
dhellmannhow many people are actively doing reviews on OSC these days?17:59
dtroyerI'd have to count but there are a handful, a couple of which I think are possibilities for core18:00
dhellmannah, good, that's better than I expected18:00
cmurphythat's exciting news18:00
dtroyerstevemar has been doing some reviews too again, but we can't plan for his time at all18:00
dhellmannyeah, I count him as a bonus18:00
dhellmanndoes the team hold regular meetings? or do you mostly rely on the mailing list for communication?18:01
dhellmannI see a pretty good backlog of open reviews. Maybe some of those folks you're looking at for core will be able to help with that.18:02
dtroyerit's all -sdks and ML for communication, we don't do meetings anymore18:02
dhellmannok, that's what I thought18:02
dtroyerI'm poking through the backlog for things that ought to be in the next release, then we'll cut one and re-attack it18:03
dhellmannthat seems like a reasonable plan18:03
dhellmannOSC came up at one point as a candidate for the "help wanted" list. do you still want to be added there?18:03
dtroyerThat might be helpful in getting a bit wider variety of projects represented?18:04
dhellmannyeah, I think that was the idea18:04
dhellmannI'm happy to sponsor that (you need a TC sponsor) and we can talk about the write-up another time18:04
dtroyerthat sounds good, thanks18:05
dhellmannare there any issues you'd like to bring up? things that are causing the team friction or that you could just use help with?18:05
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc18:05
dtroyernot really, it is just time and helping people find a way to not have to work on OSC in free time.  Resource managers tend to not have buckets for CLIs unless they don't have one and need it18:07
dhellmannyeah :-/18:07
dhellmanncmurphy : did you have any questions to ask dtroyer that I haven't already covered?18:08
cmurphyno, sounds like things are headed in a good direction18:10
dhellmannok, I recorded some notes in
dtroyerThanks for doing this (the whole liason thing), in retrospect it seems obvious and I wonder why we didn't do it sooner18:11
dhellmannplease let me know if I missed something there18:11
* dhellmann is the king of obvious ideas18:11
dhellmannhere's another:18:12
dhellmannzaneb : if/when we approve Adjutant's application, we should go ahead and have 2 liaisons attached at the same time.18:12
zanebah, yep18:12
smcginnisDid we ever start a newly governed project checklist?18:12
dhellmannI assume you'll want to be 1 (but maybe not). Maybe you can help find the other for us?18:13
dhellmannsmcginnis : no, we didn't18:13
cmurphyI can volunteer18:13
smcginnisAssign TC liaisons, remove tagging ACL, etc.18:13
dtroyerthat looks good except for the space :)  I fixed it18:13
dhellmanndtroyer : thanks18:13
cdentI have to say that a) I _really_ like having some of the TC duties more fully defined and visible because it makes it easier to desire chunk out the time, b) desire and actually pulling it off are not quiet the same thing18:14
zanebdhellmann: happy to take that one (or leave it, if there are other volunteers)18:14
dhellmann21 team reviews are already done, so that's pretty good18:14
dhellmannzaneb : can I leave it to you to recruit 1 (or 2) people, then?18:15
zanebdhellmann: I believe cmurphy just volunteered18:15
dhellmannoh, I missed that, sorry cmurphy18:15
dhellmannso that's 2, then, I'll make a note for when that application is approved18:15
dhellmannthank you both!18:15
* zaneb should probably start on this health tracking task18:16
* cmurphy is glad to realize she's not the last one to start18:16
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Update WSGI goal status for Monasca
dhellmannI've found they only take 10-15 minutes, so far18:17
dhellmannthe trick is finding a time when the PTL has a chance to chat18:17
dhellmannand that's less time than I expected, so I'm pretty pleased18:18
mnasertc-members: i'd like to update everyone that it looks like the starlingx team seems to be starting their work18:22
mnasercmurphy: we're supposed to pair up on one and i was holding back on sending an email, not sure if you had already :p18:23
smcginnisThanks, I was wondering when we would start to see more activity out of that.18:23
mnaserif not i was going to send an email and cc you out of it18:23
dhellmannmnaser : oh, good, thanks. I saw them on the agenda for the PTG18:23
smcginnismnaser: Do you know if there are certain areas they are focusing on to start?18:23
smcginnisOr dtroyer ^18:23
smcginnisNot important, just curious.18:23
mnaseri like actual healthy review activity too --
mnaseri don't really know, i should have reached out, this is just me looking around and monitoring thing18:23
dhellmannit looks like they're not really following the 2-reviewer rule, yet:*+is:merged18:25
dhellmannalthough I shouldn't complain (look at the goal-tools repo lately)18:25
cmurphymnaser: I think you're paired up with EmilienM on starlingx, not me
smcginnisHmm, approving their own patches even.18:26
smcginnisHah, and then three +W's on others.18:26
mnasercmurphy: oh i meant like on following up with projects (health tracker)18:26
smcginnisMaybe just getting used to gerrit.18:26
fungithey're still very new to this arrangement, i'm sure18:27
mnasergenerally if someone is going out of their way to use a workflow that's new to them, i'm totally okay with them making a few things here and there18:27
mnaserwith time they'll realize some of the values and start seeing the way we do things18:27
dtroyerAt this point stx still has no governance so we're kinds working on consensus, and things liek the 2 reviewer rule I've suggested we default to OpenStack practices seems to be generally accepted.18:28
zanebwe've also started to land some of the patches from the fork in Heat18:28
dtroyerI'm not surprise it isn't perfect yet18:28
mnaserzaneb: that's awesome.18:28
fungithere are other (not openstack official) projects in our gerrit where the team mails around patches to each other or puts them on test servers, and then designates someone to push them into gerrit and approve them once they're done reviewing and testing them18:28
mnaserthis is so far shaping up to be in a really cool direction18:28
dtroyermost of the activity in stx-* in Gerrit is the dev work WRS did between when we got their R5 release (late match) and now18:28
zanebthere's a lack of detail on what the reason for some of them was, but the original author from windriver has been helping out with comments so that's been helpful18:29
dhellmannso it seems like they're learning and adapting to the community practices, which seems good18:29
zanebfungi: wow, I feel sad for those people who don't know what they're missing out on18:29
mnaserthe one thing where i'd like to keep in mind is: as more projects come, if they use the openstack infra but don't "identify" as openstack, not under governance, etc18:29
dtroyerzaneb: thanks for your help and patience, yes we started the upstream bits with heat wo work out processes.  I do think some of our more established teams (network, storage in China) have also started18:29
fungiyeah, i figure if they're submitting patches to openstack projects, then the reviewers are going to demand good explanations in commit messages and they're going to learn from our reviewing example18:29
mnaserthe resources that we have in CI might start going towards some of those other projects18:30
mnaserand slow down the dev cycles in "openstack" world18:30
mnaser*maybe* it would be nice if the board encouraged coming on-board with some sort of resources for ci when joining, or figuring out a way to 'fairly' split things up18:30
clarkbmnaser: i've aid this repreatedly before I am not concerned about that currently with tripleo being our biggest resource consumer18:31
clarkbnova and neutron closely followfor about 80% of our resource consumption between the three of them18:31
fungii have a feeling those "other" projects won't represent but a small fraction of our overall load for the foreseeable future. they don't have the thousands of developers and hundreds of repos openstack does18:31
dtroyerpart of our problem with the upstream stuff, like in heat, is we don't have the original documentation (Jira tickets, etc) that drove the change.  We have encouraged those who did the original commits to jump in,a nd I see Al did so that was a good start18:31
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Add note about tracking cycle goals post-cycle
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Fix doc output path in PTI reference
zanebclarkb: testing a whole distro could theoretically be as expensive as TripleO though. but I agree let's wait until it's a problem18:32
clarkbzaneb: and more importantly if this is a real issue why are we not looking at tripleo?18:32
mnaserit'd be nice if redhat funded some CI resources18:32
zanebtbh I thought TripleO CI was mostly running on rdo-cloud, but I haven't been paying attention18:33
clarkb(I don't think it is currently an issue but there has been some tension in the past with tripleo being slow to accomodate upstream needs)18:33
* mnaser would be open to talking with redhat and providing at-cost infrastructure18:34
mnaserso if anyone wants to make that conversation :x18:34
mnaserclarkb: though, thinking about it, redhat does put a lot of dev resources so i think it's also a matter of pitching into helping in openstack all in different ways18:41
* mnaser probably doesn't have as much dev resources but can help with servers18:41
mnasergive and take i guess18:41
clarkbmnaser: ya, I think where it has been painful in the past with tripleo is when there has been a lack of willingness to work with the group/whole/community18:41
clarkb(like when we ran out of log server disk space due to tripleo jobs)18:42
clarkbwe've gotten past that, but those are the sorts of things I worry about more so than does this project using .001% of our test resources create problems18:42
dhellmannsometimes it's hard to tell what changes to CI are going to have a big impact on resources18:42
mnaserclarkb: ah yes, i think overall the team has switched things up more recently to work more with infra such as figuring out mirroring, even abandoning patches when their gates are broken (not to disturb ci)18:43
clarkbmnaser: yup its much better today18:43
mnaserso i'm hoping that this was maybe a case of the past and now things are much more stable and they're a lot more aware of the overall infra18:43
clarkbbut in the context of "we are adding new prjects we need to worry about resource consumption" I still think you have to look at tripleo before anything else18:44
clarkband if tripleo isconsidered ok then everyone else is fine imo18:44
*** annabelleB has quit IRC18:44
mnaseryeah :x18:44
mnaseri know we're up to 60 vms or so but we are almost done setting up a new az which means we can bump that significantly, maybe to ~150 or so, i'm hoping.18:45
clarkbdhellmann: yes, particularly with log disk consumption that wasn't exposed very well to people. We have gotten better at that (I think zuul even has a per job limit now too)18:45
mnaserpossibly more if we have a way to calm things down relatively quickly when we get extra load18:45
clarkbdhellmann: we have also made it easier to run multinode jobs so everyone thinks they need 5 node jobs now instad of working it out on 2 first18:45
clarkblittle things like that can add up, but in aggregate still tend to be low compared to our large consumers, tripleo, nova, neutron18:46
dhellmannclarkb : yeah, I was thinking in general, but that's a good specific example. Like if I want to add a job that runs on every patch, I worry "do we have the nodes for that? how much slower will things be if I do that?" and maybe it's not a big deal but I have no idea what sorts of things make it a big deal (job length? frequency? both?)18:46
dhellmannI'm sure it's complicated to figure out, but I don't even have a heuristic right now18:46
mnaseryeah i think having awareness and maybe even a whitelist to be able to get multinodes18:47
dhellmannand log space isn't something I had ever really thought about, so, I'm sure there are other things like that18:47
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc18:47
mnaseryeah i'm thinking log space was just not something anyone ever thought of :P18:47
dhellmannit's not so much about "permission" to do something as "transparency" so that people can make good decisions18:47
dhellmannnot that the information is being hidden, of course18:48
dhellmannmost people seem very concerned about using community resources well18:48
clarkbThe struggle iwth multnode for me is less about control and more that it is difficult to have reliable multinode jobs because races are now far more likely as you have introduced significant latency between tasks (network)18:50
*** e0ne has quit IRC18:50
clarkband so few multinode jobs tend to run reliably overtime unless a project stays on top of it18:50
clarkbit is more about getting people to unerstand that this isn't trivial before they jump into thedeep end18:51
mnaseryeah also i think having long term non voting jobs too is smoething i find we would need to address18:51
fungithe ci quota consumption for a job mostly boils down to the product of frequency by which it's run, average runtime duration, and number of nodes it needs18:52
dhellmannI wonder how much resources we actually use in non-voting jobs? :-)18:52
mnaserOSA is a bit bad at this, we have some non voting jobs that have been failing for a while that i'm still trying to bring them back to life18:52
clarkbdhellmann: I'll have to see if we can compile finer grained data of resource usage out of the zuul db now that we have that. It should have project, job, node, and runtime info all in one place18:52
dhellmannthat would be very interesting to see18:53
openstackgerritSam Doran proposed openstack/governance master: Add ansible-role-openstack-operations to governance
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc18:53
dhellmannwe want to be careful about how it's interpreted so we don't end up pointing fingers at projects on the top of the list18:53
dhellmannbut just like with the team health checks, it would be good to know where we actually stand18:54
fungiwe've used similar sorts of calculations in the past not to point fingers, but to figure out who we should approach to find out ways we can help make their utilization more efficient18:55
fungii.e., where we get the biggest wins in capacity for the time we spend helping them18:55
dhellmannif we keep that as a goal in mind, it should be fine18:55
clarkbI actually think our base openstack tempest job should be a multinode job fwiw (because it finds so many more bugs than the single node job). But few want to deal with fixing it all the time18:56
clarkbthe piece of data the zuul db lacks is the nodeset scaling factor19:06
clarkbwe can get that from the zuul api separately once those changes to list job configs go in I expect19:06
cdentas usual kevin makes some astute comments in the thread following the latest tc report19:14
clarkbI particularly like the first point (speaking of tripleo :) )19:14
cdentnothing that hasn't really been said before, but it is nicely aggregated in one place19:15
smcginnisYeah, some good points there.19:17
smcginnisOnly thing that didn't sit quite right with me was the statement "Fundamentally, there isn't huge differences in what Kubernetes and OpenStack tries to provide users"19:17
smcginnisAnd not so much that statement, because I think that part is true.19:17
smcginnisBut the other end of it is where things are widely different.19:17
cdentrather than talking about it here19:18
cdentwe should just make the thread go ballistic19:18
fungiyes, that19:22
cdentit is possible we'll be able to extract some really excellent stuff for the tech vision (we already can, but more is even better)19:25
mriedembtw, people that don't care or don't pay attention might not realize they are running heavy CI jobs on changes that don't need it, e.g.
*** annabelleB has quit IRC20:23
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc20:23
*** annabelleB has quit IRC20:33
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc20:33
*** annabelleB has quit IRC21:00
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc21:04
*** rosmaita has quit IRC21:17
*** cdent has quit IRC21:27
*** edmondsw has quit IRC21:31
*** lxkong has joined #openstack-tc22:04
*** hongbin has quit IRC22:16
*** tosky has quit IRC22:53
*** annabelleB has quit IRC23:04
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc23:07
*** annabelleB has quit IRC23:17
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc23:17
*** gagehugo has quit IRC23:56
*** annabelleB has quit IRC23:59

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!