| *** devananda has quit IRC | 00:12 | |
| *** devananda has joined #openstack-tc | 00:13 | |
| openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/governance master: Update the charter section with meetings every 2 weeks https://review.openstack.org/609562 | 00:16 |
|---|---|---|
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 00:26 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 00:50 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 00:53 | |
| *** gagehugo_ has quit IRC | 01:24 | |
| *** gagehugo has joined #openstack-tc | 01:25 | |
| lbragstad | thanks dhellmann | 01:27 |
| *** clarkb has quit IRC | 01:38 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 02:09 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 02:40 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 03:06 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 06:02 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-tc | 06:33 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 06:38 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-tc | 06:39 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 07:59 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur| | 08:44 | |
| *** dtantsur| is now known as dtantsur | 08:44 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 09:05 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 09:06 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 09:27 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 09:43 | |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: is the timezone correct on the wiki page? | 09:44 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 10:04 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 10:09 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 10:14 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 10:35 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 10:38 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 11:04 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|brb | 11:21 | |
| gmann | dhellmann: thanks for info | 11:26 |
| * gmann add 'tc-members' keyword as notification alert in IRC client | 11:27 | |
| dims | o/ | 11:27 |
| *** dangtrinhnt_x has joined #openstack-tc | 11:45 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 11:51 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 12:05 | |
| mnaser | morning all | 12:12 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 12:21 | |
| ttx | mnaser: good morning | 12:24 |
| mnaser | ttx: hopefully you're doing okay :) | 12:24 |
| mnaser | http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-October/135674.html | 12:25 |
| mnaser | tc-members: ^ play chime in by votes/discussion/etc | 12:26 |
| ttx | mnaser: yes. Short night though :) | 12:29 |
| *** dangtrinhnt_x has quit IRC | 12:34 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/project-team-guide master: Update stable-branches doc to mention $series-em tag https://review.openstack.org/608299 | 12:36 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 12:41 | |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 12:54 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 13:02 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 13:11 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 13:12 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-tc | 13:14 | |
| *** dtantsur|brb is now known as dtantsur | 13:15 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 13:19 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 13:21 | |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : I suspect not. It's an in person meeting, so I'm guessing it would be local time | 13:27 |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 13:31 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Assert stable:follows-policy on octavia-lib https://review.openstack.org/605273 | 13:47 |
| *** mriedem_afk is now known as mriedem | 13:56 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 14:05 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-tc | 14:22 | |
| *** knikolla has joined #openstack-tc | 14:23 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 14:33 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 14:41 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 14:42 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 14:43 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-tc | 14:48 | |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 14:53 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 14:59 | |
| dhellmann | tc-members: time for office hours | 15:00 |
| evrardjp | o/ | 15:01 |
| fungi | so it is! | 15:01 |
| TheJulia | o/ | 15:01 |
| smcginnis | o/ | 15:01 |
| dhellmann | does anyone have any topics to raise today? | 15:02 |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 15:03 | |
| dhellmann | really? no one wants to talk about meeting frequency? :-) | 15:04 |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: well, async + getting coffee | 15:04 |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : what are you even doing here? aren't you getting married or on a honeymoon or something? | 15:04 |
| smcginnis | But office hours isn't the time to raise topics, it's when we're available for folks to come with questions, right? :) | 15:05 |
| * fungi is asyncing some coffee too | 15:05 | |
| * smcginnis was wondering the same about TheJulia | 15:05 | |
| evrardjp | smcginnis: :D | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | I would prefer for fairly regular meetings. I thought we were gaining consensus on every two weeks, then it seems (at least to me) that it become once a month, and now once a week. I do feel once a month is too in-often to have a meeting of record | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: basically vacation after summit | 15:05 |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 15:05 | |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : +1 | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | TheJulia: DId the wedding already happen? | 15:06 |
| TheJulia | smcginnis: Tuesday | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | TheJulia: Congrats!! | 15:06 |
| evrardjp | TheJulia: congrats! | 15:06 |
| * dhellmann looks for the champagne emojii | 15:06 | |
| TheJulia | I really like every two weeks, a happy point between the two proposals | 15:06 |
| dhellmann | there are 2 proposals up for vote right now as patches, one for monthly and one for every 2 weeks | 15:06 |
| TheJulia | it _is_ also okay to say "well, no topics, lets start and end the meeting | 15:07 |
| fungi | it seems we have a couple of basic positions. one is that the meetings are to tick the "at least quarterly" checkbox for foundation bylaws (at least until we can get the bylaws changed), and the other is to bring back the old meetings we used to have | 15:07 |
| TheJulia | I thought it was weekly | 15:07 |
| dhellmann | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609562/1 says 2 weeks | 15:07 |
| smcginnis | My take was we started with the bylaws saying we needed quarterly, so we said how about monthly. Which then became weekly/bi-weekly. | 15:07 |
| TheJulia | Oh, well, somehow I didn't grok that | 15:07 |
| * TheJulia can blame post wedding brain haze right? | 15:07 | |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : yes, you get a pass for another few days | 15:08 |
| smcginnis | Definitely! :) | 15:08 |
| lbragstad | biweekly: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/609562/ | 15:08 |
| fungi | i fall more in the tick-the-checkbox camp and would rather we have "official meetings" as infrequently as we can get away with, and limit the topics on the agenda as much as possible | 15:08 |
| lbragstad | monthly: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/608751/ | 15:08 |
| zaneb | TheJulia: congrats! | 15:08 |
| lbragstad | congrats TheJulia :) | 15:08 |
| smcginnis | 🍾 | 15:08 |
| dhellmann | if we think there are differences about the intent of meetings, maybe we should talk a bit more in depth about the sorts of topics we do want to cover in them | 15:08 |
| smcginnis | dhellmann: I agree. | 15:09 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 15:09 | |
| smcginnis | That seems to be the root of the issue from what I can tell. We have differing opinions of what it is for, so differing opinions of how often we should have them. | 15:09 |
| dhellmann | I have a couple of sample topics in https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee right now | 15:09 |
| evrardjp | I have the impression we should get the logs of previous conversations, because that's exactly what was said previously. | 15:09 |
| smcginnis | dhellmann: Those look fine. | 15:10 |
| zaneb | agree with fungi. we need to decide if we're trying to rescind https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170425-drop-tc-weekly-meetings.html or if we're just checking the bylaws box | 15:10 |
| smcginnis | But I think all the reasons we decided to drop a regular meeting still stand. | 15:10 |
| smcginnis | ^^ | 15:10 |
| fungi | i still feel like "official meetings" were not well-suited to community input/involvement and so would rather we not cover anything where we want community involvement in the discussion. i also think there's very little we do where we shouldn't welcome community involvement in our discussions | 15:10 |
| lbragstad | outside of those sample topics, have there been any topics recently that would have been better suited for an official meeting than office hours? | 15:10 |
| smcginnis | I also find it a little ironic that we are trying to do this after an extended discussion about helping global members participate. | 15:11 |
| dhellmann | lbragstad : the alternatives also include the mailing list, and we've been trying to push more discussion there | 15:11 |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 15:11 | |
| fungi | we had official meetings once upon a time because that was how the tc officially registered its votes on resolutions. we moved to asynchronous voting in gerrit, but the meetings continued | 15:11 |
| dhellmann | esp. now that we have a member in an APAC TZ again | 15:11 |
| * dims catching up | 15:12 | |
| TheJulia | Why don't we do quarterly and as a standing agenda item of "review current health deltas"? | 15:13 |
| TheJulia | So we're both fulfilling the requirement, and we're actually having a meaningful setpoint | 15:13 |
| TheJulia | or checkin point | 15:13 |
| dhellmann | well, that is one of the topics on the proposed agenda for november | 15:13 |
| smcginnis | I would be fine if that is all they are. Or as dhellmann's other topic of preparing for any face to face agendas. | 15:13 |
| dhellmann | from a practical standpoint we need to have more than quarterly meetings scheduled, because we're going to end up cancelling some and I don't want us to have to scramble to reschedule at the last minute | 15:14 |
| smcginnis | Why would we need to cancel some? | 15:14 |
| dhellmann | holidays; everyone being gone to an event; life | 15:14 |
| dhellmann | let's say I anticipate it happening and would like to design resilience into the system | 15:15 |
| smcginnis | I'd rather we just handle those likely rare occasions on a case by case need to schedule alternate times when we identify conflicts. | 15:15 |
| dhellmann | I really dislike the idea of having to coordinate 13 schedules on short notice. :-/ | 15:15 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: convention over configuration! | 15:15 |
| smcginnis | Not everyone needs to be present, just a quorum. | 15:16 |
| dhellmann | well, that's true | 15:16 |
| dhellmann | ok, so if someone wants to propose quarterly, please write the patch | 15:16 |
| evrardjp | that was what I meant smcginnis , thanks for clarifying in english terms :) | 15:16 |
| smcginnis | If we don't do Monday's or Friday's, and we keep it away from when we know Summits and things land (although that could be considered a meeting) we can avoid the need for most last minute scheduling. | 15:16 |
| smcginnis | evrardjp: ;) | 15:16 |
| smcginnis | We would then have three options. Do we need to set up a cordocet vote on this? :) | 15:17 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: I think the meetings should take place regardless of availability of one or even five members. As long as we have some sort of quorum we should be good | 15:17 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: I think the point was to ensure it is done quarterly so doubling the frequency (or more) would do -- that's why a month was proposed. But still the agenda is my concern | 15:17 |
| dhellmann | quarterly would have us at november, february, may, and august | 15:18 |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 15:18 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 15:19 | |
| evrardjp | #troll_mode PTG + Summits would have met the quarterly requirements | 15:20 |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 15:20 | |
| fungi | evrardjp: they did, roughly speaking | 15:20 |
| dhellmann | so what topics should we *not* plan to discuss in meetings/ | 15:20 |
| dhellmann | ? | 15:20 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 15:20 | |
| fungi | evrardjp: that's part of why we're discussing the requirement again now that we are combining the next ptg with a summit | 15:20 |
| smcginnis | If we make them only about health check updates and in-person meeting planning, that works for me. | 15:21 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: Anything that has arisen in the prior week or two is a good starting point in my mind | 15:21 |
| evrardjp | let's do midcycles! #troll_mode off | 15:21 |
| *** mugsie has joined #openstack-tc | 15:21 | |
| smcginnis | It's narrow enough to discourage discussions that should happen here and on the ML. | 15:21 |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : I was hoping for something more specific | 15:21 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: the point I was concerned with is the community health's tracking status updates | 15:21 |
| fungi | i'd rather discuss things as they arise rather than saving discussion of them for up to two weeks | 15:22 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: Sadly I don't have a time machine, if I did I would :) | 15:22 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : you can expect to have those mentioned in every single meeting while I am chair | 15:22 |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 15:22 | |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: these are important topics indeed, I would like those to be very open | 15:22 |
| evrardjp | I am afraid of a negative impact. | 15:22 |
| evrardjp | I'd rather not have this become a "restricted to tc meetings" | 15:23 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : I will ask tc-members every meeting whether they have talked to their teams and updated the wiki with new data. If there are significant issues to bring up, we may go into those, but I expect those to be raised when we learn about them and not kept for the meeting. | 15:23 |
| dhellmann | yes, that's the point of saying it will be a status update | 15:24 |
| zaneb | I'd like to hear from the fornightly crowd what they think _should_ be on the agenda. I'm sympathetic in principle to having some sort of cadence to drive things forward. but I'd like to know which things y'all think are worth saving up for 2 weeks | 15:24 |
| dhellmann | mnaser and ttx aren't here today, so we may have to wait to hear from them | 15:26 |
| evrardjp | I have the impression this meeting becomes a two weeks "update" to the "outside" | 15:26 |
| TheJulia | So what if keep a very focused specific agenda, including healthchecks, and try to keep the things that come up to as they arise? | 15:26 |
| mnaser | I just checked into my hotel room | 15:27 |
| TheJulia | I think we can't do full updates every two weeks | 15:27 |
| mnaser | Reading scrollbaxk to follow up | 15:27 |
| evrardjp | while the rest of the conversations are happening live | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : hi! | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : yeah, that's why I suggested monthly :-) | 15:27 |
| TheJulia | I'm on board with monthly if that is a main purpose of the meeting | 15:27 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp: that's not how I see it. I see the meetings as a chance for us to have an internal conversation about our work as a team. | 15:28 |
| lbragstad | correct me if i'm wrong, but is the end goal to attempt to change the bylaws? | 15:28 |
| evrardjp | I am fine with x as long as the purpose is clear in the motion | 15:28 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: I see | 15:28 |
| fungi | i don't object to using the meeting as a means of communicating information to a larger audience. the suggestion was that there's some subset of the community who consumed tc meeting minutes (back when we had meetings) as their primary means of keeping up to date on what we're doing | 15:28 |
| zaneb | evrardjp: I got the same impression from mnaser. but Doug already has a weekly email to update the community weekly. I don't see how a meeting will do that better | 15:28 |
| dhellmann | lbragstad : I'm not sure we would be able to remove the meeting requirement from the bylaws, so I want us to be meeting the requirement just in case. | 15:28 |
| mnaser | Okay I caught up a little | 15:28 |
| mnaser | Let me open my laptop to type things out! | 15:29 |
| lbragstad | dhellmann ok | 15:29 |
| evrardjp | I guess multiple purposes are raised here, and maybe that should be stated in the document | 15:29 |
| *** clarkb has joined #openstack-tc | 15:29 | |
| evrardjp | it was not so clear to me at least but let me re-read this once again | 15:29 |
| fungi | lbragstad: ttx and i have asked jbryce to pass along to the foundation's legal counsel that we're interested in being able to move some of those parts of the bylaws into our charter, at which point we'll have more freedom to alter or remove them as requirements without having to muster 10% of the foundation membership to vote on it | 15:30 |
| lbragstad | ok, that makes sense | 15:30 |
| fungi | but how far we get with that will depend on lots of factors | 15:30 |
| lbragstad | tl;dr we have to live with it for the time being | 15:30 |
| mnaser | alright so | 15:31 |
| dhellmann | fwiw, I think there's some utility to us having regular formal meetings, regardless of whether we're required to do so. | 15:31 |
| fungi | we have an alternative option of trying to explain how our current practices satisfy the requirements as stated in the bylaws, too | 15:31 |
| mnaser | first of all, do we have agreement that we'll have meetings (so that i don't spend time talking about why i think they were important?) | 15:31 |
| mnaser | because that's probably the point to discuss prior to the frequency | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | as chair, I will be calling meetings to meet our obligations in the bylaws, whether the rest of you want them or not :-) | 15:32 |
| dhellmann | so the only questions are how often and what will they cover | 15:32 |
| mnaser | right: so here is my pov | 15:32 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 15:32 | |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: I think we agree with you there :) | 15:32 |
| mnaser | office hours are great to encourage external members to come in and bring up subjects, however, i think we can all agree that they have been a bit of a failure unfortunately | 15:33 |
| mnaser | the EU friendly hours is attended by the 2-3 members in EU | 15:33 |
| mnaser | APAC friendly hours are pretty much dead | 15:33 |
| fungi | yes, i believe that calling meetings with some regular frequency is our best option to be able to prove that we satisfy the requirements in the bylaws, and i also agree that doing it with somewhat greater frequency than the bylaws require gives us the flexibility to skip meetings without having to worry too much about failing to comply | 15:33 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: I do not agree on the failure | 15:33 |
| mnaser | and the US friendly hours is just the TC talking about TC things | 15:33 |
| mnaser | there is no "office hours" where community can come and talk to us about things. it's very hard. | 15:33 |
| mnaser | we're all very vocal and the hour almost always becomes more than one | 15:34 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 15:34 | |
| mnaser | and it probably is very intimidating for a community member to come here and be like "can i have some time" | 15:34 |
| mnaser | now, with the proposed new meetings that happen, someone can email the tc mailing list, or a tc member, or the chair and say: hey.. i'd like for us to talk about this | 15:34 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: without office hours I wouldn't have been asking my questions, and learning a lot in here. I was very intimidated at first. I still am tbh. I am sure with meetings it would have been worse. | 15:34 |
| mnaser | and we can actually slot them in and give them the time | 15:34 |
| zaneb | mnaser: meetings were even more intimidating | 15:34 |
| smcginnis | evrardjp: Meetings were much much worse. | 15:35 |
| mnaser | rather than trying to get in here and *race* to bring your topics up | 15:35 |
| fungi | i'm at least able to follow the discussions in our office hours, whereas my comments during the official meetings we used to hold were infrequent and asynchronous because by the time i could read and type a reply the discussion had already moved on | 15:35 |
| mnaser | even I have subjects that i want to discuss with the tc | 15:35 |
| mnaser | that i cant even find the time to bring uo | 15:35 |
| mnaser | because office hours just fly by with several topics and they're all equally important | 15:35 |
| smcginnis | There should be no designated time to bring up discussions | 15:35 |
| TheJulia | fungi: I find that often an issue with many voices in a limited timespan irc meeting | 15:35 |
| smcginnis | Office hours is a completely wrong time to save a topic for. | 15:35 |
| mnaser | but i'm in EU right now | 15:35 |
| zaneb | mnaser: meetings were like that too | 15:36 |
| mnaser | if i post something at 8am when i wake up | 15:36 |
| fungi | start discussing something when you have something to discuss and people will reply when they're around to reply | 15:36 |
| mnaser | zaneb: i disagree, meetings have an agenda | 15:36 |
| evrardjp | mnaser: someone can just ask on this channel at anytime, and we say "this would be a great topic for next office hour" -> everybody could talk this way | 15:36 |
| smcginnis | And use the ML too. | 15:36 |
| mnaser | as chair/vice chair, if we're talking about $foo and the conversation moves to $bar | 15:36 |
| mnaser | we say: hey all, remember why we're here, let's take a step back | 15:36 |
| mnaser | and conclude this subject | 15:36 |
| smcginnis | mnaser: Did you attend any of the meetings we used to have. It was defintely not a time conducive to introducing something new. | 15:36 |
| mnaser | smcginnis: did we have a preset agenda in advance? i may have not attended them but i've certainly heard many community members complain about the fact that they cant keep up | 15:37 |
| TheJulia | It seemed to often just be a rehash to get people on to the same page | 15:37 |
| zaneb | mnaser: you are talking about meetings in the abstract, but I am talking specifically about the meetings the TC used to hold in IRC. which were exactly like office hours except worse | 15:37 |
| mnaser | well maybe let's have structured meetings | 15:37 |
| smcginnis | Much worse. | 15:37 |
| mnaser | start by roll call, follow up on actions, 2-3 timeboxed discussions | 15:37 |
| * dims shudders | 15:37 | |
| mnaser | where we have to come to a conclusion at the end of | 15:37 |
| evrardjp | I'd rather keep office hours and have structured meetings both aren't exclusive imo. | 15:37 |
| dhellmann | we did have agendas, which forced us to time-box discussions, which caused them to happen *very* rapidly | 15:37 |
| mnaser | well | 15:37 |
| fungi | also the topic needed to get added to the agenda far enough in advance that it could be announced we were going to be discussing whatever it was, and usually at least half of the agenda ended up on a backlog to discuss at a future meeting | 15:38 |
| mnaser | by havign 1 meeting every month | 15:38 |
| mnaser | we have even *LESS* time to discuss things | 15:38 |
| mnaser | where as if we have a loaded subject | 15:38 |
| mnaser | we can actually slot it out and distribute it more | 15:38 |
| mnaser | if we have more space and time | 15:38 |
| fungi | i'm still unconvinced meetings should be for discussing things. that's where i think our old meetings failed us | 15:38 |
| * lbragstad was under the assumption the meetings would only contain administrative stuff | 15:39 | |
| smcginnis | We still have all the reasons for https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170425-drop-tc-weekly-meetings.html , we're discouraging APAC participation *right after* we just had a big move to better encourage it, and discussions should be at any point here or on the ML. | 15:39 |
| smcginnis | fungi: ++ | 15:39 |
| zaneb | mnaser: the point is, by not having frequent meetings we're able to discuss stuff *outside* of meetings so we have *more* time | 15:39 |
| smcginnis | lbragstad: That is my hope. | 15:39 |
| TheJulia | fungi: ++ | 15:39 |
| mnaser | i dont think that our meetings were going to be some "board meeting" style | 15:39 |
| lbragstad | mnaser it sounds like you think meetings should contain more content than just administrative things? | 15:39 |
| smcginnis | The less frequently we have meetings, the more likely we will have discussions outside of them. | 15:39 |
| mnaser | administrative but also slots for community members to ask for subjects to bring up that are important for them | 15:40 |
| mnaser | just look at this office hour so far | 15:40 |
| mnaser | it's nothing but tc | 15:40 |
| mnaser | and if you tell me anyone right now will come up and propose a subject while we all discuss this.. | 15:40 |
| mnaser | i doubt they would | 15:40 |
| smcginnis | Which is a failing of ours that we waited for office hour to talk about this. | 15:40 |
| mnaser | so we stop discussing in office hours then, we listen. | 15:41 |
| lbragstad | this could have been a meeting thing (meta-meeting discussions ftw) | 15:41 |
| TheJulia | lbragstad: but we're not logging it | 15:41 |
| fungi | we're logging it | 15:41 |
| mnaser | so for example this very discussion | 15:41 |
| TheJulia | well, kind of yeah | 15:41 |
| mnaser | that we have | 15:41 |
| lbragstad | which would open up office hours for the discussions your hoping to have | 15:41 |
| fungi | kind of completely logging it | 15:41 |
| mnaser | community members cant actually really see a lot of it | 15:41 |
| TheJulia | fungi: I know, but it is not an explicit meeting log | 15:41 |
| mnaser | lets be honest, who would be like "hey today i'm gonna open eavesdrop.openstack.org and read all through #openstack-tc" | 15:41 |
| mnaser | that's just unrealistic | 15:42 |
| TheJulia | We need to reach consensus on purposes, we're quite literally all over the map | 15:42 |
| mnaser | every office hour is essentially a meeting | 15:42 |
| mnaser | that's whats happening. | 15:42 |
| mnaser | we just dont want to call it a meeting | 15:42 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: and I think that was fungi's point regarding the requirement | 15:42 |
| mnaser | the heavy discussion happens in office hours | 15:42 |
| evrardjp | smcginnis: agreed with you there | 15:42 |
| fungi | o | 15:43 |
| fungi | er | 15:43 |
| fungi | i'm good with discussing these things outside office hours | 15:43 |
| mnaser | and IMHO talking more outside office hours | 15:43 |
| fungi | throughout the week | 15:43 |
| mnaser | makes it even more stressful for external members to keep up with this | 15:43 |
| dhellmann | I did start this conversation on the mailing list. I thought we more or less had consensus there before I started writing patches. Could we have concluded this conversation in either of those places? | 15:43 |
| fungi | and we *did* discuss this earlier in the week outside office hours too | 15:43 |
| mnaser | someone who wants to know what's going on with the tc but doesn't read logs everyday will have no idea whats going on | 15:43 |
| TheJulia | but their level of caring about what is going on is likely at a completely different level | 15:44 |
| fungi | but really unless we get more diligent about moving these discussions to the mailing list (at which point it will be at least as much text) we're not fitting this sort of volume of discussion into an official timeboxed meeting so people who want to see what we're discussing are not going to be able to get that from meeting minutes | 15:44 |
| TheJulia | and office hours level topics might not make much sense for many contributors to find out what is going on | 15:45 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: you'd be surprised at how many people want to know whats going on but just cant keeu p | 15:45 |
| mnaser | the *board* we report to cant even keep up with us, and they care. | 15:45 |
| TheJulia | The positive outcome of holding a fixed meeting with an agenda is you have an easily digestible output. The thing that we're hitting here is we have different desired end results. | 15:45 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: i think you really summarize what is the outcome i want there | 15:46 |
| evrardjp | well we have many efforts, I'd like to understand how we're gonna work | 15:46 |
| fungi | also that an easily-digestible uotput is a fiction since we're going to discuss a lot more than we can fit into even a weekly hour-long meeting | 15:46 |
| mnaser | it's letting people digest what we do easier, and also making it easy to be slotted in | 15:46 |
| evrardjp | I think we should let dhellmann give his vision, and we should follow him then | 15:46 |
| TheJulia | You know, it is okay to change, pivot, adjust | 15:47 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: ++ | 15:47 |
| TheJulia | we just have to have a measurable output | 15:47 |
| lbragstad | +1 if we need to adjust we should be able to do so | 15:47 |
| mnaser | i don't plan to have this hard set in stone, it might suck for the first few times, and then we'll nail it down | 15:47 |
| TheJulia | so if we go monthly and find we need more often, then so be it. Perhaps we change the standing topics up between meetings | 15:47 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: i worry that no one will ever say "we need to meet more often" | 15:48 |
| fungi | this is why i think if the goal is to provide some periodic report of what we're doing for the sake of people who best consume that via meeting minutes, the meetings should just be summarizing and reporting prior discussions, not actually discussing things | 15:48 |
| mnaser | its easier to skip meetings than ask to plan for more, imho. | 15:48 |
| TheJulia | but also, we quite literally can't address every contingency, case issue, or desire in a singular solution. | 15:48 |
| mnaser | maybe we should just | 15:48 |
| mnaser | delete #openstack-tc | 15:48 |
| mnaser | that'll force us all on the ML :D | 15:48 |
| fungi | there are plenty of people in the community who would like to just delete the tc entirely ;) | 15:49 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 15:49 | |
| mnaser | or come up with a no-irc-discussion policy | 15:49 |
| smcginnis | I feel dhellmann's weekly TC email is the proper medium for communicating "what is the TC doing". Meeting logs, channel logs, and ML posts are all the sausage making. | 15:49 |
| fungi | smcginnis: i agree with you, but i'm hearing people say that there is some audience who won't read those but will read meeting minutes for some reason | 15:49 |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 15:49 | |
| smcginnis | Then those people can read the logs if they wish. | 15:50 |
| mnaser | we can't just have open discussion all the time, it just doesn't work honestly | 15:50 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: ++ | 15:50 |
| mnaser | it's hard for all of us to keep up | 15:50 |
| mnaser | the VERY example of this failing is literally this conversation | 15:50 |
| mnaser | are we meeting? are we not? are discussing every week or every 2 weeks or every month? | 15:51 |
| smcginnis | If we can't have open discussions without a set time block, then I agree with those that the tc should be disbanded. We've failed. | 15:51 |
| mnaser | no management entity exists to discuss 24/7 | 15:51 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 15:52 | |
| TheJulia | smcginnis: There are different types of discussions | 15:52 |
| fungi | we don't discuss 24x7, we discuss asynchronously with varying degrees of synchronicity | 15:52 |
| smcginnis | fungi: ++ | 15:52 |
| mnaser | fungi: but that has made it hard for us to consume information and for those who want to know what we're doing as well | 15:52 |
| smcginnis | TheJulia: If the desired output is somewhere someone can catch up on what we are doing, then we need to work together on making Doug's weekly email meet those needs. | 15:52 |
| TheJulia | If we set a time, and hold to it.... then we can increase the synchronous discussion for important topics, but we also need to stay on topic | 15:52 |
| fungi | right this moment the discussion is much more synchronous, but other times this week i've responded to comments from the previous day | 15:52 |
| dhellmann | smcginnis : yeah, I could use some help with those | 15:52 |
| mnaser | fungi: which is confusing and difficult. | 15:53 |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 15:53 | |
| mnaser | who really here reads every single message in #openstack-tc, honestly. | 15:53 |
| smcginnis | o/ | 15:53 |
| fungi | i find it less confusing and difficult than discussing in a formal meeting, but that may simply be me | 15:53 |
| zaneb | I read at least 95% | 15:53 |
| mnaser | because i remember we all had a lot to do and i find times where i get so unreasonably behind | 15:54 |
| TheJulia | I'm more towards 90-95%, and sometimes I don't immediately grok because context is not clearly set as to the topic of discussion | 15:54 |
| fungi | if we go back to formal meetings, i'll likely go back to not synchronously participating in the meetings because it's too hard to get a word in edgewise. i can follow up after the meeting once i've had a time to read | 15:54 |
| TheJulia | If we try to recall the topic that we started with, can we? | 15:54 |
| mnaser | monthly vs biweekly meetings, and content of meetings | 15:55 |
| fungi | and whether meetings were simply to meet a bylaws requirement or something we found useful in the past | 15:55 |
| TheJulia | well, content was our first discussion pivot | 15:55 |
| TheJulia | fungi: that was the second pivot | 15:55 |
| mnaser | also: i'd like to say that the tc members have changed over time, so if a group of people couldnt make meetings useful, doesnt mean the rest cant | 15:56 |
| dhellmann | would it work if we said topics need to be raised on the mailing list in advance of the meeting, and that the meetings would not go into deep discussions? | 15:56 |
| fungi | i agree, and i'm not against trying again, i just don't expect i'll be chiming in much if at all | 15:56 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: i think that's how it should work. an agenda prepared well in advance. | 15:56 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: I like that idea | 15:57 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : that's not the same thing as what I said | 15:57 |
| dhellmann | I said we wouldn't go deep on any topics, either. | 15:57 |
| dhellmann | so we would talk about the fact that an issue was still under discussion, or agree that it had been resolved, but not get into the details | 15:58 |
| TheJulia | "Do we have consensus, yes/no?" "Do we need to have further discussion on this, yes/no?" | 15:58 |
| dhellmann | right | 15:58 |
| TheJulia | We can table that discussion | 15:58 |
| dhellmann | and if so, go back to the ML | 15:58 |
| TheJulia | exactly | 15:58 |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 15:58 | |
| dhellmann | I'm not sure that really meets what mnaser is trying to accomplish | 15:59 |
| TheJulia | I would concur with that assessment | 15:59 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: i think i would be ok with this | 15:59 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: do you feel that we could use it as an information source for broadcasting outward? | 16:00 |
| dhellmann | ok, so I think that covers the agenda question | 16:00 |
| dhellmann | it leaves open the question of how often we need to do that, though | 16:00 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: yes, that's what i took time to think a bit about | 16:00 |
| mnaser | because the answer to those questions will say "the tc has figured out x but is still thinking about y and working on z" | 16:00 |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 16:00 | |
| mnaser | dhellmann: if we have that discussion every month, we should have a no-tc-discussion-during-office-hours rule | 16:01 |
| lbragstad | so long as it is concise in meeting minutes, i think it would be easier for others to consuem | 16:01 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: I think there is value in discussion, but ensuring we have consensus should not be restricted or limited to office hours. This time should be "how can we help each other?" "how can we help others in the community?" | 16:02 |
| mnaser | on second thought, we probably should always work a no-tc-discussion-during-office-hours type of rule anyways | 16:02 |
| fungi | i'm good with keeping office hours for community interaction and having discussions about random topics between tc members outside office hours (and also on the mailing list as much as possible) | 16:02 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: but it ends up with deep discussions that members probably have a hard time interjecting | 16:02 |
| *** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc | 16:03 | |
| mnaser | i still feel like having those lightweight meetings that doug proposes every 2 weeks is reasonable | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: We are not going to be able to prevent that. It will occur regardless of restrictions, we will just end up shifting visibility | 16:03 |
| mnaser | because every month might be a very long time | 16:03 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: i'm sure people see us talk plenty outside those hours :) | 16:03 |
| mnaser | heck, we can even try inviting members to office hours and say | 16:03 |
| * lbragstad has to run - will read scrollback | 16:03 | |
| mnaser | hey $select_projects, we'd love for you to come hangout for this office hour | 16:04 |
| mnaser | we wanna chat, learn a bit more about you, how are things going, do you need help | 16:04 |
| TheJulia | We're not going to get them all, but we could have a standing "Anything from project leaders?" topic | 16:04 |
| mnaser | make it a social event to avoid a dead office hour i guess | 16:04 |
| TheJulia | time box it to 10 minutes or something | 16:04 |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : during the meeting? | 16:04 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: possibly, I'm just tossing that idea out there | 16:05 |
| * TheJulia suspects it will not stick and we can move on | 16:05 | |
| dhellmann | TheJulia : sure, I'm just making sure I'm clear on what you're saying | 16:05 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: ack | 16:05 |
| *** annabelleB has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| mnaser | dhellmann: TheJulia: i think it's probably better if a project wants to bring up soemthing they can email the tc | 16:06 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: social events are good for community building. There is some value in building relationships... but that also seems like noise to other discussion, but it is important. Like me getting married this week. Only a couple people in this channel would have even had a clue otherwise | 16:06 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: mailing list imho :) | 16:06 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: late congrats :D | 16:06 |
| mnaser | (boots totally work btw) | 16:06 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: thanks | 16:06 |
| TheJulia | <3 | 16:07 |
| dims | congrats @TheJulia ! :) | 16:07 |
| * TheJulia steps away for a couple minutes to take away whatever toy the kitten has found | 16:07 | |
| mnaser | but yeah, lets make office hours somewhere that we attract community members and keep the meetings as following up on the state of things | 16:07 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 16:08 | |
| TheJulia | 1M * '+' | 16:08 |
| dhellmann | speaking of hours, we're a bit over right now and I have an appointment I have to go to | 16:09 |
| dhellmann | I think this was useful for at least clarifying what folks want out of the meetings | 16:09 |
| TheJulia | So back to the topic at hand, lets go back and vote with what we feel is acceptable to ourselves, keeping in mind it is okay and likely expected for us to pivot | 16:09 |
| dhellmann | please go vote on the 2 timing patches, and take any further discussion to the mailing list thread | 16:09 |
| dims | ++ dhellmann | 16:10 |
| dhellmann | tc-members: a reminder, I'm going to be out 13-28 Oct, and mnaser will act as chair while I'm away | 16:10 |
| TheJulia | dhellmann: thanks! Have a wonderful time away! | 16:11 |
| mnaser | (we have the house all for ourselves, let's have a big party) | 16:11 |
| zaneb | lol :D | 16:12 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: and invite everyone? | 16:12 |
| mnaser | heck ya | 16:13 |
| mnaser | push up those governance changes to include that all tc members get fancy food and unlimited alcohol at every events | 16:13 |
| TheJulia | My doctor will likely express displeasure at that | 16:15 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 16:29 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 16:34 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_afk | 16:43 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 17:04 | |
| jroll | mnaser | who really here reads every single message in #openstack-tc, honestly. <- me | 17:07 |
| mnaser | jroll: that very message is proof :P | 17:07 |
| jroll | ikr | 17:07 |
| jroll | I read a not-quite-a-meeting about meetings! | 17:07 |
| fungi | soon perhaps we can have a meeting about not-quite meetings to balance it out | 17:21 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 17:34 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 17:35 | |
| smcginnis | We should schedule a meeting to discuss it. | 17:38 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 17:39 | |
| *** ianychoi has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 17:56 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 17:57 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 18:02 | |
| *** mriedem_afk is now known as mriedem | 18:09 | |
| *** gouthamr_ has joined #openstack-tc | 18:25 | |
| *** openstackstatus has quit IRC | 18:28 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 18:29 | |
| *** openstackstatus has joined #openstack-tc | 18:30 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus | 18:30 | |
| TheJulia | Should there be specific constraints for that meeting? | 18:36 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 19:03 | |
| *** tosky__ has joined #openstack-tc | 20:16 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 20:17 | |
| *** clarkb has quit IRC | 20:18 | |
| *** clarkb has joined #openstack-tc | 20:19 | |
| *** tosky__ is now known as tosky | 20:23 | |
| *** gouthamr_ is now known as gouthamr | 21:53 | |
| dhellmann | tc-members: here's another interesting article from Nadia Eghbal, this time about supporting open source projects: https://nadiaeghbal.com/user-support | 22:06 |
| dhellmann | the change over time in motivation for maintainers vs. users was an interesting observation that may apply to us | 22:06 |
| dhellmann | the bit about bug reporting templates seems like something for the storyboard team, too | 22:07 |
| clarkb | dhellmann: one thing I took from it is that research may also explain some of the interactions we've got with various parts of the community. Like with user committee/AUC looking for a home. | 22:07 |
| clarkb | in other communities they seem to be far more integrated as part of the support scaffolding | 22:07 |
| dhellmann | yeah, interesting | 22:07 |
| dhellmann | mrhillsman, maybe you have thoughts on that? ^ | 22:08 |
| clarkb | ansible in particular was called out as having people doing a lot of support that don't necessarily have a ton of commits in the codebase | 22:08 |
| dhellmann | I wonder if it has implications for our plan to merge all of the mailing lists | 22:08 |
| dhellmann | I still think being able to observe support-related traffic would be useful, fwiw | 22:09 |
| clarkb | dhellmann: beyond the issue tracker(s), mailing lists, and IRC? | 22:12 |
| clarkb | (we should be able to observe all of that traffic today) | 22:12 |
| clarkb | ask.openstack.org too | 22:12 |
| dhellmann | the article/research implies that combining the lists isn't going to automatically make it more likely that developers are going to start answering more questions from users | 22:12 |
| dhellmann | by "observe" I mean "I want to read" | 22:12 |
| dhellmann | rather than meausre | 22:13 |
| dhellmann | I'm not doing that with the bug trackers or ask.o.o but I'm on all of the mailing lists today | 22:13 |
| clarkb | oh got it, yup I think even if it doesn't cause people to support more users, it should make it easier for that to happen or to loop in specific individuals once traige is done | 22:14 |
| dhellmann | yeah, that's a good point | 22:15 |
| dhellmann | and I don't think that was a significant factor in our decision anyway. avoiding fracturing the community was the main thing in my mind, at least | 22:15 |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 22:20 | |
| *** mriedem is now known as mriedem_gone | 22:23 | |
| *** mriedem_gone has quit IRC | 22:24 | |
| *** openstackstatus has quit IRC | 22:28 | |
| *** openstackstatus has joined #openstack-tc | 22:29 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus | 22:29 | |
| dims | thanks dhellmann queued it up for reading | 22:32 |
| fungi | yeah, it had some good design consideration takeaways for the storyboard team too | 22:33 |
| fungi | i removed three retired teams and added one new team to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_health_tracker#Project_Teams | 22:39 |
| fungi | it should now match https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/projects/ | 22:39 |
| fungi | i also split the board committees/working groups from the uc teams/working groups and synced them up with their respective governance pages | 22:59 |
| fungi | and i added a couple of missing sigs | 23:02 |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 23:15 | |
| *** spotz has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** spotz has joined #openstack-tc | 23:55 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!