| *** tdasilva has quit IRC | 00:08 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 00:15 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 00:16 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 01:23 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 02:06 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 02:13 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 02:17 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 02:18 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 02:19 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 02:32 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 02:34 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-tc | 03:20 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 03:20 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has quit IRC | 03:24 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-tc | 03:25 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 03:25 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 03:54 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 03:59 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 04:21 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 04:40 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 04:41 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 04:46 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 04:51 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 04:56 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 05:02 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 05:07 | |
| *** Luzi has joined #openstack-tc | 05:43 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 06:19 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 06:23 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 06:25 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has quit IRC | 06:29 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 06:39 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 06:46 | |
| *** altlogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 06:57 | |
| *** iurygregory has joined #openstack-tc | 06:59 | |
| *** altlogbot_0 has quit IRC | 07:01 | |
| *** ianychoi_ is now known as ianychoi | 07:01 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 07:04 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 07:17 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 07:20 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 07:21 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 07:25 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has quit IRC | 07:27 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 07:53 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has quit IRC | 07:55 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 08:09 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 08:13 | |
| *** ianychoi has quit IRC | 08:54 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 08:57 | |
| *** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc | 09:38 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 09:49 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has quit IRC | 09:51 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 10:02 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 10:05 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 10:27 | |
| evrardjp | o/ | 10:29 |
|---|---|---|
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 10:29 | |
| mugsie | o/ | 10:30 |
| *** altlogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 10:35 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has quit IRC | 10:39 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 10:41 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 10:41 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 10:45 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 10:45 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has quit IRC | 10:45 | |
| gmann | o/ | 10:52 |
| *** altlogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 10:57 | |
| *** altlogbot_0 has quit IRC | 11:01 | |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 11:01 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 11:03 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 11:57 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 12:01 | |
| mnaser | Bonjour | 12:26 |
| *** irclogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 12:33 | |
| *** irclogbot_1 has quit IRC | 12:35 | |
| *** ijolliffe has joined #openstack-tc | 12:36 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 12:52 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 12:53 | |
| *** iurygregory has quit IRC | 13:07 | |
| *** iurygregory has joined #openstack-tc | 13:20 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 13:39 | |
| *** jeremyfreudberg has joined #openstack-tc | 13:41 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 13:41 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 13:42 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has quit IRC | 13:45 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has quit IRC | 13:48 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-tc | 13:52 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 13:55 | |
| openstackgerrit | Rico Lin proposed openstack/governance master: Add team format differentiate document https://review.opendev.org/668093 | 13:55 |
| fungi | almost meeting time! | 13:58 |
| ttx | o/ | 14:00 |
| ricolin | o/ | 14:00 |
| jroll | \o | 14:00 |
| ttx | #startmeeting tc | 14:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Jul 11 14:00:49 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 14:00 |
| ttx | Hi everyone! | 14:00 |
| ttx | #link https://giphy.com/gifs/hello-minions-waving-wAVA7WdV2jita/fullscreen | 14:01 |
| fungi | troll call ;) | 14:01 |
| gmann | o/ | 14:01 |
| ttx | Who in tc-members is here for the TC meeting? | 14:01 |
| lbragstad | o/ | 14:01 |
| mnaser | o/ | 14:01 |
| dhellmann | o/ | 14:01 |
| TheJulia | o/ | 14:01 |
| * mugsie is double booked, but wathcing | 14:01 | |
| fungi | aloha | 14:01 |
| * fungi double-booked too | 14:01 | |
| fungi | oh, no, not for another hour | 14:01 |
| * TheJulia is also double-booked | 14:01 | |
| fungi | focused then! | 14:01 |
| ttx | mugsie: come over here, I was relying on your GIF game | 14:01 |
| mugsie | :D | 14:01 |
| ttx | OK, let's start easy | 14:02 |
| ttx | #topic Follow up on past action items | 14:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Follow up on past action items (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:02 | |
| ttx | 1/6 Health check changes | 14:02 |
| ttx | asettle to update community (done), fungi to update wiki (done), mugsie to update yaml file with liasons and mnaser to update the tooling | 14:02 |
| mnaser | mugsie: picked up the tooling so thanks :) | 14:02 |
| ttx | OK so this is in the pipe, right | 14:02 |
| mugsie | mnaser: yeah, I totally forogt you were going to do it, and neeed to populate the yaml to test so I wrote a thing :) | 14:03 |
| ttx | Status: Under review | 14:03 |
| *** AlanClark has joined #openstack-tc | 14:04 | |
| ttx | #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668004/ | 14:04 |
| mugsie | http://replygif.net/i/716.gif | 14:04 |
| ttx | 2/6 Help-most-needed list | 14:04 |
| ttx | AlanClark and zaneb to update investment opportunities document | 14:04 |
| ttx | Not sure what the status is there | 14:04 |
| ttx | A bunch of things were merged for sure | 14:04 |
| gmann | so for 2019, only glance is there. are we going to add others also in that ? | 14:05 |
| fungi | that's part of the rewrite activity | 14:05 |
| ttx | gmann: plan was to convert them and add them all to 2019 | 14:05 |
| fungi | glance was just first in the queue | 14:05 |
| ttx | Status: work in progress | 14:05 |
| ttx | 3/6 Goal selection | 14:06 |
| gmann | ok. I am going to add that in my slide for openstack day tokyo next week. | 14:06 |
| ttx | lbragstad to prune the community-goals etherpad | 14:06 |
| ttx | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/community-goals | 14:06 |
| lbragstad | yeah | 14:06 |
| ttx | lbragstad: how is that going? | 14:06 |
| lbragstad | that's done | 14:06 |
| ttx | Status:Done | 14:06 |
| lbragstad | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2019-06-06.log.html#t2019-06-06T15:35:13 | 14:06 |
| lbragstad | i removed the obvious ones | 14:06 |
| ttx | 4/6 Pop-up teams | 14:06 |
| ttx | ttx to define pop-up teams | 14:06 |
| fungi | lbragstad: it does seem a good deal shorter than the last time i looked | 14:06 |
| ttx | https://giphy.com/gifs/spongebob-spongebob-squarepants-episode-12-3ohzAi9KJLc5Vi9CPm/fullscreen | 14:06 |
| ttx | That is done. However we may want to assign a TC "liaison" for the Image encryption team | 14:06 |
| ttx | Any volunteer? | 14:07 |
| fungi | can put me down as volunteer for that | 14:07 |
| ttx | Great, thanks fungi | 14:07 |
| fungi | i've been trying to keep the security sig in the loop on what's going on there anyway | 14:08 |
| ttx | #action fungi to add himself as TC liaison for Image Encryption popup team | 14:08 |
| ttx | Status: Done | 14:08 |
| ttx | 5/6 Explaining governance | 14:08 |
| ttx | ricolin has produced a draft | 14:08 |
| ttx | #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668093/ | 14:08 |
| ttx | I posted a -1 because I feel like it's presenting things backward | 14:08 |
| ttx | ricolin: I can help reorganize it to my liking, if you want | 14:08 |
| ricolin | I just update the patch according to comments | 14:08 |
| ricolin | ttx sure | 14:09 |
| ttx | ah, jinxed | 14:09 |
| ricolin | that will be super | 14:09 |
| ttx | Will rereview | 14:09 |
| ttx | Status: Under review | 14:09 |
| ttx | 6/6 Review PTL Guide | 14:09 |
| ttx | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/665699/ was merged | 14:09 |
| ttx | Status: Done | 14:09 |
| ttx | Any comment on those past action items? | 14:09 |
| ttx | https://media.tenor.com/images/c32c6ff16cd7fb47769c87f2eb5e95f4/tenor.gif | 14:10 |
| ttx | dammit | 14:11 |
| ttx | https://tenor.com/view/green-cola-no-gif-9810848 | 14:11 |
| ttx | #topic Active initiatives | 14:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Active initiatives (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:11 | |
| ttx | 1/3 Python 3 | 14:11 |
| ttx | mnaser to sync up with swift team on python3 migration and mugsie to sync with dhellmann or release-team to find the code for the proposal bot | 14:11 |
| ttx | What's up on that? | 14:12 |
| * mugsie didn't do it | 14:12 | |
| fungi | concise! | 14:12 |
| mnaser | i've personally been looking from the sidelines, it looks like things are progressing well and it seems like some effort/help from rh is coming in to help iron all these out | 14:12 |
| ttx | ok, let's carry that over | 14:12 |
| ttx | Status: In progress | 14:13 |
| ttx | 2/3 Forum follow-up | 14:13 |
| ttx | ttx to organise Milestone 2 forum meeting with tc-members | 14:13 |
| ttx | That will happen in the coming weeks | 14:13 |
| ttx | Status: In progress | 14:13 |
| ttx | 3/3 Make goal selection a two-step process | 14:13 |
| ttx | We need reviews at | 14:13 |
| ttx | #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/667932/ | 14:13 |
| ttx | Any comment on active initiatives? Anything missing? | 14:14 |
| ttx | Status: under review | 14:14 |
| mugsie | I like the 2 step process doc | 14:14 |
| gmann | i have not reviewed it yet. need to get more background on that. | 14:14 |
| ttx | I hope it will solve the approval/refinement/selection bottleneck | 14:14 |
| ttx | doing everything in a single review has proven... inefficient in the past | 14:15 |
| mugsie | we need to make sure we graduate some idea into the proposed bucket when we merge | 14:15 |
| dhellmann | I think that was part of the point of having lbragstad prune the existing etherpad, wasn't it? | 14:15 |
| fungi | gmann: we discussed it at the forum/ptg but it's basically a way to keep us from getting stuck on full quorum voting of implementation details for goal approval | 14:15 |
| ttx | we need some intermediary sandbox for ideas to mature before being selected basically. And separate goal submission from goal selection reviews | 14:16 |
| evrardjp | shouldn't be a different "kind of topic" with more lenient reviews? I thought we agreed on that | 14:16 |
| ttx | since we select a set of goals together, not just individual proposals independently | 14:16 |
| ttx | evrardjp: yes we said that refining a goal should be approved leniently | 14:17 |
| fungi | evrardjp: yeah, the implementation plan was going to be handled under documentation review process while the goal ideas would still be under formal vote | 14:17 |
| evrardjp | fungi: funny I thought it was otherwise | 14:17 |
| ttx | Anyway, feel free to ask further questions on the review for everyone to benefit | 14:17 |
| evrardjp | I thought the proposal of the idea was lenient, but the validation was to be a strict proposal | 14:17 |
| ttx | evrardjp: depends on what you mean by "validation" | 14:18 |
| fungi | evrardjp: selecting cycle goals is the formal vote, deciding how many widgets a thingamabob needs to meet the goal requirement under some circumstance is just documentation | 14:18 |
| ttx | ultimately you select them with a strict vote | 14:18 |
| evrardjp | on that we agree, those selected for a cycle are following a strict vote | 14:19 |
| fungi | so it should be easier to fix/amend the implementation details, after the goal itself is approved | 14:19 |
| gmann | I feel without having implementation details it will be difficult to have clear pic of goal . example osc-client goal. | 14:19 |
| ttx | gmann: that is why you wait until the implementation is more detailed before selecting them. | 14:19 |
| fungi | right, i stated them in reverse chronological order | 14:20 |
| ttx | but improving the goal becomes an incremental process | 14:20 |
| ttx | OK, onto our two topics of discussion for today | 14:20 |
| ttx | #topic Update on U release naming process | 14:20 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Update on U release naming process (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:20 | |
| fungi | sorry. improve/amend implementation details in the repo (as documentation reviews), prior to goal selection (which is the formal vote) | 14:20 |
| mnaser | (sorry for being a complete pita in that process) | 14:21 |
| ttx | There is a bit a confusion with the plan here -- in particular the WeChat activity to select China-friendly names | 14:21 |
| ttx | Can anyone give us an update? | 14:21 |
| gmann | fungi: +1. | 14:21 |
| ttx | (personally at this point I would go with any name the China community likes) | 14:22 |
| evrardjp | I am like ttx on this | 14:22 |
| fungi | yes, i'm inclined to just approve a non-conforming name that has some community consensus and is unencumbered and non-offensive | 14:22 |
| mnaser | i agree with ttx | 14:23 |
| mnaser | i think right now the best thing to do is let the process happen on its own | 14:23 |
| fungi | we're fast coming up on a cycle which will otherwise end up being called "unnamed" | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | agreed with fungi, that's so elegantly said, who can refuse? :D | 14:23 |
| ttx | mnaser: is the wechat poll supposed to come up with candidate names ? | 14:23 |
| mnaser | and if there are proposals that are "out of normal criteria" | 14:23 |
| mnaser | they can be proposed like train | 14:23 |
| dhellmann | so the only way to vote would be the wechat poll? | 14:23 |
| jroll | unnamed would be quite appropriate | 14:23 |
| ricolin | ttx I'm pushing that part now but most people from china community wechat group agree on the list I give last time | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: wait what? | 14:23 |
| ttx | dhellmann: no | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : I'm not sure, I don't understand what's happening :-/ | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | ok, good | 14:24 |
| * ricolin looking for the name list | 14:24 | |
| dhellmann | so the poll is what, then? coming up with suggestions? | 14:24 |
| fungi | i thought the wechat bit was asking the community there for suggestions of names | 14:24 |
| ttx | That would select a shortlist and we'd put that to our usual voting | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | ok | 14:24 |
| ttx | Just making sure all candidates on the ballot are "good" | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | ok, got it | 14:24 |
| ttx | So select between their top picks | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | that works for me, and aligns with a comment I made in channel earlier when I suggested we formalize a "local contributor" selection committee for names in the future | 14:25 |
| ttx | ricolin: my point is, it's also OK to add non-geographic-but-very-popular-in-china options to the list, imho | 14:25 |
| gmann | +1, easy and less controversial way | 14:25 |
| ricolin | location： Urumqi Ussri(Ussri River）Ulanqab Ulanhot Ulansu(Ulansu sea) Urad (乌拉特中旗) Ujimqin(东/西乌珠穆沁旗）Ula (Ula nara) | 14:25 |
| ricolin | others：Unnamed Undefined Unique Unicorn Undead Uncle Umpire Utopia umbrella ultimate | 14:25 |
| dhellmann | yeah, please let's just get a list of 5-10 names and start voting | 14:25 |
| ricolin | These are raised from WeChat group, but not formal voting yet | 14:26 |
| ttx | I'm just afraid we put 3 chinese names and "unnamed" on the list and our US/EU community selects unnamed out of familiarity | 14:26 |
| ttx | and we miss an opportunity | 14:26 |
| dhellmann | yeah, I think unnamed and undefined have negative connotations and I would not support including those on the ballot | 14:26 |
| gmann | me too. we can avoid those | 14:27 |
| mugsie | ttx: the vote is only an "indicative vote" right? We don't have to take it if we feel there is an issue with the name | 14:27 |
| ttx | unicorn would work, if people in China end up liking it | 14:27 |
| fungi | we should probably limit voting to geographical/place names if we have enough to make a reasonable length ballot with them | 14:27 |
| ttx | mugsie: yes there is still a... marketing filter | 14:27 |
| ttx | + a trademark one | 14:27 |
| ttx | but that is done after the ranking | 14:27 |
| evrardjp | but who doesn't like a unicorn? | 14:28 |
| mugsie | I personally would not put unnamed on the ballot at all | 14:28 |
| ttx | Like "Unupgradeable" would probably not make it | 14:28 |
| ricolin | the most popular are Ussri and Urumqi IIRC | 14:28 |
| evrardjp | ttx: oh surprise?! | 14:28 |
| fungi | one benefit of ranked voting. you can safely eliminate ineligible candidates after the poll closes without significantly mipacting the relative popularity of the remainder | 14:28 |
| ttx | Undead maybe... | 14:28 |
| evrardjp | ricolin: ussr-i? | 14:28 |
| fungi | i was hoping for unpossible... oh well | 14:29 |
| evrardjp | fungi: haha | 14:29 |
| evrardjp | I guess we completely disgressed now | 14:29 |
| fungi | naming the bikeshed | 14:29 |
| evrardjp | anyway, is there something to decide? | 14:29 |
| ttx | ricolin, mnaser: so.. what is the next step ? Wechat activity ranking a top 5 options and then us vetting that list, and putting it into a vote? | 14:29 |
| ricolin | evrardjp, it' Russian | 14:30 |
| ricolin | ttx I do plan for such thing, but when will be the deadline for it? | 14:30 |
| ttx | ricolin: I'd say ASAP | 14:30 |
| evrardjp | ricolin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw | 14:31 |
| fungi | our technical election officials need to plan our upcoming elections, and need a cycle name to associate with those | 14:31 |
| fungi | which was a big part of the urgency on this | 14:31 |
| mnaser | if we put an arbitrary say | 14:31 |
| mnaser | next wednesday is that ok? | 14:31 |
| ttx | oh sure | 14:31 |
| mnaser | do we want to just do a resolution to say that for this release | 14:32 |
| ricolin | ttx Horace said he will use official wechat for the polling activity, not sure how that goes for now | 14:32 |
| *** Luzi has quit IRC | 14:32 | |
| ricolin | will check | 14:32 |
| mnaser | we'll be accepting anything that's "china" related | 14:32 |
| mnaser | so that is atleast landed by the time we have suggestions so they're all 'valid' | 14:32 |
| ttx | and popular with the Chinese community | 14:32 |
| mnaser | not to delay things any longer? | 14:32 |
| ttx | ++ | 14:32 |
| mnaser | thatll give it the week it needs for formal-vote | 14:32 |
| mnaser | ok, i'll work on that | 14:33 |
| mnaser | o' | 14:33 |
| ricolin | +1 | 14:33 |
| mnaser | i'll use the train thing as the template and urge tc-members to vote asap so we can have its grace period | 14:33 |
| mugsie | ++ | 14:33 |
| gmann | +1 | 14:33 |
| ricolin | +1 | 14:33 |
| ttx | ok, sounds like we have a way forward | 14:33 |
| fungi | awesome, thanks! | 14:33 |
| ttx | Did not want to stall it until Tony is back from vacation | 14:33 |
| ttx | Next topic... | 14:34 |
| ttx | #topic What are retired repos ? | 14:34 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "What are retired repos ? (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:34 | |
| ricolin | evrardjp, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussuri_River | 14:34 |
| mnaser | context: i started work on a ci job that checked if a repo was properly retired because we had some disagreements on landing a governance change if the repo was retired (or not) | 14:34 |
| fungi | we use the term "retired" to mean several different things in different contexts | 14:35 |
| mnaser | yep, that's what surfaced in the ML thread with a bunch of projects that acutally still are somewhat maintained, with commits, but not "official" | 14:35 |
| dhellmann | being "out of governance" and "retired" are different | 14:35 |
| evrardjp | ricolin: thanks for the link, TIL :) | 14:35 |
| mnaser | our governance does not reflect that difference right now, afaik | 14:36 |
| fungi | there are also repos which have been "retired" from use in master but still have stable branches maintained | 14:36 |
| ttx | should we use different terms then | 14:36 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : our governance only reflects being in or out of governance, which seems appropriate. | 14:36 |
| gmann | but as per new namespace, are we going to maintain anything non official under openstack/ namespace. that is most confusing part | 14:36 |
| fungi | we likely should start by (don't hit me) coming up with new names for some of those concepts? | 14:36 |
| * mnaser is going to be playing devils advocate | 14:36 | |
| evrardjp | well I have the impression it's a per branch thing _again_ | 14:36 |
| mnaser | that means we no longer -1 things if there is no retirement commit | 14:37 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: ^ | 14:37 |
| * mnaser is just trying to find a thing we can all agree too for project-update retirement changes | 14:37 | |
| dhellmann | mnaser : We could say that. Or we could look at each case, and decide what to do based on what the intent is. If we want to encourage folks to follow the full retirement process, we could keep repos under governance until they have done that. If they don't intend to retire the repo, then we don't need to do that. | 14:38 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: +1 | 14:38 |
| fungi | in the past (before we switched to just using the openstack namespace for everything) the idea was that if a project became unofficial it would have to be renamed out of the openstack namespace. i think that has some problems of its own now that we have redirects in place, since it becomes a lot less obvious to source code consumers when something stops being a part of openstack | 14:39 |
| evrardjp | historically OSA for example, has waited for things to be empty on all branches before asking for a retirement, and that was fine | 14:39 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : we've seen problems in other projects that didn't do that | 14:39 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: could those problems have been solved by the right docs? Saying how to properly retire something over time? | 14:40 |
| gmann | yeah. out of governance means it should be out of openstack/ namespace. because cmg to governance is cmg under openstack/ namespace | 14:40 |
| fungi | being listed in governance means that commits to that repository's stable branches still count as contributions to openstack | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | I think our lives would be simpler if the retirement process required that, but that's not what's confusing here, right? It's that we have projects that left governance with the intent to retire and then didn't, or that left governance with the intent to keep running and weren't renamed. | 14:40 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: I guess I misunderstood the problem :p | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : the problem you mentioned is related, but not the same | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | the first question in my mind is, do we have someone willing to go around and fully retire the repos that look like they have been abandoned? | 14:42 |
| fungi | yes, i've in recent years come to the conclusion that we should be forcing projects who want to leave openstack to fork, so we can replace the content in the version which remains behind in the openstack namespace with a notice saying it's no longer part of openstack and where it has gone or what has happened | 14:42 |
| dhellmann | and the second question is, do we have someone willing to follow fungi's suggestion and enforce a fork for all of the repos that left governance and are still active? | 14:42 |
| evrardjp | fungi: agreed. | 14:42 |
| smcginnis | fungi: That is how I've seen some non-OpenStack projects handle that. | 14:42 |
| fungi | i don't know that there's a ton of benefit to doing that for historical exits, but for future ones i do | 14:42 |
| evrardjp | what is the workload we are talking about? | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | I am fine working on cleaning things up | 14:43 |
| dhellmann | we should write down this new policy as a formal governance document | 14:43 |
| mnaser | i sent a mailing list post with all of the things that "should be retired" | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | ofc, else it would be unpossible to apply said policy | 14:43 |
| fungi | in cases like fuel where they left openstack and then within a year stopped working on the project but still had users who were becoming increasingly out of date and exposed and thought they were still using openstack software, i think that damage is probably already done. cleanup might be nice but doesn't fix things | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | (see what I did there?) | 14:43 |
| mnaser | the change https://review.opendev.org/#/c/669549/ | 14:44 |
| mnaser | http://logs.openstack.org/49/669549/2/check/openstack-tox-linters/4084f9c/job-output.txt.gz#_2019-07-06_17_42_15_763974 | 14:44 |
| mnaser | the list | 14:44 |
| gmann | other example is networking-l2gw which was out of governance (neutron stadium) but in active developement under openstacl/netowkring-l2gw | 14:44 |
| * mnaser thinks dhellmann approach makes sense of saying if we have someone to go and do this first | 14:45 | |
| dhellmann | networking-l2gw sounds like a case where we should encourage them to fork to create a new repo | 14:45 |
| mnaser | ++ | 14:45 |
| evrardjp | dhellmann: the more we are discussing this, the more I am wondering if this shouldn't be int he project-team-guide instead | 14:45 |
| fungi | for projects which have already been removed from our governance but are still lingering in the openstack namespace, we should probably give them one last opportunity to rename out of the namespace | 14:45 |
| dhellmann | evrardjp : process docs, yes, but policy docs no | 14:45 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: at the time, my intention was to post to the ML in the hopes that the projects/teams themselves pick it up and take care of it | 14:45 |
| evrardjp | on that we agree. | 14:45 |
| fungi | retroactively imposing a requirement to fork on them is not super friendly | 14:46 |
| gmann | fungi: yes but they are not aware of that. we should communicate them about renaming | 14:46 |
| dhellmann | rename, then? | 14:46 |
| ricolin | fungi, including rename on Pypi? | 14:46 |
| mnaser | pypi doesnt inclue a prefix | 14:46 |
| mnaser | things on pypi aren't openstack/foo (afaik) | 14:46 |
| fungi | ricolin: there are no namespaces on pypi | 14:46 |
| evrardjp | are we focusing on the right things for the right people? I want to make sure if we are making a policy, it's for clarity of the users, not to have a policy | 14:47 |
| fungi | (that is a separate conversation the pypi maintainers and users seem to have ~annually) | 14:47 |
| mnaser | ok lets take a step back, someone has to retire the abandoned projects first | 14:47 |
| mnaser | those have to be done regardless of policy or whatever, they're actually retired projects | 14:48 |
| fungi | evrardjp: i think the "policy" is simple (only current official projects in the openstack namespace). the *process* for ensuring that is what needs fleshing out | 14:48 |
| evrardjp | so 1) define abandonned project, 2) create a policy about moving them out of governance | 14:48 |
| mnaser | does anyone feel like maybe going over those projects and making commits to retire them properly? | 14:48 |
| mnaser | or at least following up with the teams to do so? | 14:48 |
| mnaser | (some people felt very strongly we don't merge anything that was 'retired' but had code, so perhaps a good time to help enforce this :) ) | 14:49 |
| fungi | i do think that the process for the current cases (historical removals) can and probably should follow a different process from what we want to do going forward | 14:49 |
| mnaser | i don't like this, but alternatively, we can enforce retired-on in legacy.yaml and have the checks only check those past a date, but then we'd have two sets of rules :) | 14:50 |
| fungi | i my opinion projects who have already left openstack can be renamed into a different namespace if their maintainers wish it, and then we tell all official projects that any which leave openstack in the future have to fork so we can retire the openstack namespace repo with a prominent notice | 14:51 |
| dhellmann | that works for me -- let's get that written down as a resolution or something | 14:51 |
| gmann | +1. that will be very clear for everyone | 14:51 |
| ricolin | +1 | 14:52 |
| fungi | maybe give existing teams a deadline too in case they have some they want to move out of openstack before that rule goes into effect, though that's less important in my mind | 14:52 |
| ttx | Alright, who is taking that todo? | 14:52 |
| mnaser | dhellmann: just wanna double check the wfm comment is re what fungi said? | 14:52 |
| dhellmann | mnaser : yes, I like his proposal but think we should write it down formally before acting on it | 14:52 |
| fungi | i will draft a resolution later today | 14:53 |
| mnaser | thanks fungi -- i can try helping with the logistics once it lands | 14:53 |
| fungi | appreciated! | 14:53 |
| ttx | #action fungi to draft a resolution on proper retirement procedures | 14:53 |
| mnaser | talking to teams / getting abandonded code properly retired / renaming things (if needed) | 14:53 |
| ttx | #topic Open discussion | 14:53 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: tc)" | 14:53 | |
| fungi | i'll attempt to encapsulate the historical context for the decision as well | 14:54 |
| ttx | Next meeting should in theory be on August 1st but that may be a bit too close from now. | 14:54 |
| AlanClark | hey ttx slow reply. I contributed several suggestions to the Glance investment opportunities document. I also also sent suggestions for the documentation document. Are there others? | 14:54 |
| ttx | I was wondering if having next ones on August 8 and September 5 would not spread them out more evenly. | 14:54 |
| mnaser | seems reasonable | 14:54 |
| fungi | AlanClark: no new ones yet i don't think, though expect a few more in coming months | 14:54 |
| evrardjp | AlanClark: would you mind reiterate on a new one? :D | 14:54 |
| ttx | AlanClark: there will be others we'll propose a rewrite from. I suspect we'll call you for input on those when ready | 14:54 |
| mnaser | thanks for being involved AlanClark | 14:55 |
| AlanClark | thanks | 14:55 |
| ttx | yes that really helps | 14:55 |
| lbragstad | ++ thanks AlanClark | 14:55 |
| evrardjp | thanks for the help indeed :) | 14:55 |
| mnaser | in other related open topics ,i wanted to ask which tc-members plan/might/will be in shanghai? | 14:55 |
| ricolin | thanks AlanClark:) | 14:55 |
| fungi | we did also get that first one promoted in the osf newsletter yesterday | 14:55 |
| fungi | #link https://superuser.openstack.org/articles/osf-newsletter-july-9/ | 14:55 |
| ttx | mnaser: I plan to be there, pending visa acceptance | 14:55 |
| mugsie | I am planning on it, looks likely I will be there | 14:55 |
| * mnaser wanted to fill out the ptg tc form | 14:55 | |
| * jroll will not be there | 14:55 | |
| gmann | mnaser: I will be there (yet to start the visa process though) | 14:55 |
| mnaser | how much min/max time do we feel like we want? | 14:55 |
| ricolin | definitely:) | 14:55 |
| * lbragstad is TBD | 14:55 | |
| evrardjp | mnaser: I do not know yet | 14:56 |
| dhellmann | I am not planning to attend | 14:56 |
| mnaser | i think last time a day was .. okay | 14:56 |
| ttx | #info next TC meeting: August 8 | 14:56 |
| ricolin | https://i.imgur.com/kzC6MOx.gif | 14:56 |
| evrardjp | ricolin: I am glad you're here for sending the gifs :) | 14:56 |
| fungi | mnaser: if my visa is approved (and assuming no natural disasters at home this year) then i'll be there | 14:56 |
| mnaser | i'm trying to see if we're going to have enough of us there to actually need a ptg-one-day-meeting like we had | 14:57 |
| ttx | I'd say 0.5 min/1 day max | 14:57 |
| ricolin | evrardjp, I can't resist! | 14:57 |
| mnaser | i think that's reasonable ttx | 14:57 |
| mnaser | 10-15 people room probably? | 14:58 |
| dhellmann | if it's a public meeting, we should allow for observers | 14:58 |
| gmann | round chair one right ? | 14:58 |
| ttx | we might have others come in.. maybe 18-20 | 14:58 |
| mnaser | or maybe 20ish i guess | 14:58 |
| ttx | That PTG is so full of unknowns | 14:58 |
| mnaser | ok, fair nuff, i think i have all that i need to give kendall. | 14:58 |
| mnaser | yeah.. | 14:58 |
| ricolin | mnaser, 18-20 sounds reasonable, counting observers | 14:58 |
| fungi | yeah, we have in the past had as many observers as tc members present. no idea if it will be the case again in shanghai | 14:58 |
| fungi | who knows, maybe our chinese community are curious about what an elected governing body actually looks like in the flesh | 14:59 |
| ricolin | will we be able to get extra chairs if we needed? | 14:59 |
| mnaser | i think so | 14:59 |
| ttx | I hope it will encourage more to run | 14:59 |
| ttx | so it's a bit of a publicity exercise too | 14:59 |
| fungi | i agree | 15:00 |
| ttx | not a formal onb-boarding, but a bit like it | 15:00 |
| mnaser | voila, sent it over, thanks | 15:00 |
| ttx | "this is what the TC does" by example | 15:00 |
| fungi | show folks how we operate, yeah | 15:00 |
| ttx | Alright, we are done here | 15:00 |
| ttx | #endmeeting | 15:00 |
| *** 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 | https://governance.openstack.org/tc/ | channel logs http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/" | 15:00 | |
| mnaser | thanks ttx | 15:00 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Jul 11 15:00:45 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-07-11-14.00.html | 15:00 |
| ttx | Thanks everyone | 15:00 |
| lbragstad | thanks all | 15:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-07-11-14.00.txt | 15:00 |
| ricolin | thx ttx | 15:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-07-11-14.00.log.html | 15:00 |
| gmann | thanks ttx for chair | 15:00 |
| ttx | been a while | 15:00 |
| mnaser | now office hours. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668071/ -- do we want to pick this up? | 15:01 |
| mnaser | if tonyb is on vacation? | 15:01 |
| fungi | thanks ttx! | 15:01 |
| mnaser | to get it through quicker? | 15:01 |
| * fungi *is* double-booked for this hour, security sig meeting starting now too | 15:01 | |
| openstackgerrit | Mohammed Naser proposed openstack/governance master: Allow broader set of names for U release https://review.opendev.org/670330 | 15:01 |
| mnaser | and also this is up ^ | 15:01 |
| mnaser | just kinda wrote it quickly, so hoping to iterate on it | 15:01 |
| ttx | mnaser: I can post a new rev, but evrardjp seemed to be more opinionated about it than I was | 15:02 |
| ttx | so I'll defer to him | 15:02 |
| mnaser | tbh id just drop all the links | 15:02 |
| evrardjp | on 670330? | 15:02 |
| ttx | yes | 15:02 |
| ttx | yes to drop all links - evrardjp on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668071/ | 15:02 |
| fungi | i wholeheartedly concur | 15:03 |
| ttx | evrardjp: I'll do it if you don;t want it | 15:03 |
| fungi | especially google links in a document about stuff involving a country whose inhabitants can't reach google | 15:03 |
| ttx | mnaser: I won't try out my Chinese though and translate the province names | 15:04 |
| evrardjp | fungi: correct | 15:04 |
| mnaser | well fungi mentioned that the whole document was going to be translated so | 15:05 |
| mnaser | that should happen.. naturally | 15:05 |
| evrardjp | should I edit said patch? | 15:06 |
| evrardjp | would someone be against me editing the 668071? | 15:06 |
| evrardjp | (removing links) | 15:06 |
| mnaser | nope | 15:06 |
| mnaser | go for it ;) | 15:06 |
| mnaser | go for it :) | 15:06 |
| openstackgerrit | Jean-Philippe Evrard proposed openstack/governance master: Be specific about regions in the 'U' release name poll https://review.opendev.org/668071 | 15:07 |
| evrardjp | done | 15:07 |
| evrardjp | better ask for forgiveness than permission, that's the saying, right? | 15:07 |
| fungi | at least i thought some of the chinese-fluent folks working with tonyb[m] on this were planning to translate the poll description and names | 15:07 |
| mnaser | now that you made that edit, dhellmann brings a point on 670330 | 15:07 |
| mnaser | should we just put " | 15:07 |
| mnaser | "china" there and call it a day? or? | 15:07 |
| ttx | I would support that | 15:07 |
| dhellmann | yeah, otherwise we'll have a resolution in conflict with the regular doc | 15:08 |
| fungi | wfm | 15:08 |
| ricolin | Why we need to list then all anyway? | 15:09 |
| ricolin | s/then/them/ | 15:09 |
| evrardjp | Well, tony (and team I guess) did quite an effort to work on those to list them accordingly to our guidelines, so I expect we don't want to throw his work into garbage bin. | 15:09 |
| evrardjp | I am not saying I am against replacing it with China, I just say I don't want to do it :p | 15:10 |
| gmann | but every name in potential list is from those location ? if not then just saying 'china' is ok. why to spend so much time on that :) | 15:10 |
| ricolin | I mean why we need `plus all top level administrative divisions up to two hops from Shangha` at first place? | 15:10 |
| evrardjp | anything goes | 15:12 |
| ricolin | +1 on let's use `Shanghai, China` and close the day:) | 15:14 |
| dhellmann | I think the point is we don't want to restrict the list more than necessary given how hard it seems to be to come up with good candidates. The work the team did to put together a list of districts followed the process, so it wasn't wrong, but we're learning it might not be what we want | 15:14 |
| mnaser | ricolin: doesnt that eliminate a bunch of choices | 15:14 |
| mnaser | like afaik some of the suggestions come from popular places in china, but not shanghai | 15:15 |
| mnaser | im ok with anything, but i think changing that to just say 'china' might be the easiest path to suces. | 15:16 |
| ricolin | mnaser, we can do find naming from both Shanghai and China that's what I mean | 15:16 |
| ricolin | most of names from the list I got not even have anything to do with shanghai anyway:) | 15:17 |
| mnaser | ..exactly thats because the options are limited if we say shanghai only, ricolin ? | 15:17 |
| fungi | yeah, ideally we'd be selecting from place names in the shanghai administrative area, but there likely aren't enough options. broadening it to all of china loses some of the shanghai spirit maybe. but for expedience i'm fine saying "china" and keeping it simple | 15:18 |
| mnaser | so we need to make it open to all of china to make a lot more compatible ones that are nicer | 15:18 |
| ricolin | indeed shanghai is in China, so just `China` +1 from me | 15:19 |
| evrardjp | can someone propose and we'll be done with that? | 15:21 |
| ricolin | I can do that:) | 15:22 |
| openstackgerrit | Rico Lin proposed openstack/governance master: Be specific about regions in the 'U' release name poll https://review.opendev.org/668071 | 15:26 |
| *** AlanClark has quit IRC | 15:26 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 15:36 | |
| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 15:41 | |
| *** jeremyfreudberg has quit IRC | 15:43 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 15:53 | |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 15:56 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 16:06 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has quit IRC | 16:07 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 16:45 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| *** weshay is now known as weshay|rover | 17:12 | |
| *** tdasilva has quit IRC | 17:24 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 17:24 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 17:25 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 17:30 | |
| *** altlogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 17:31 | |
| *** altlogbot_0 has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 17:37 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 17:43 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 17:45 | |
| *** altlogbot_2 has quit IRC | 17:45 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 18:02 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 18:27 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 18:30 | |
| *** bnemec has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** bnemec has joined #openstack-tc | 18:47 | |
| openstackgerrit | Jeremy Stanley proposed openstack/governance master: Volunteer as TC liaison for Image Encryption PUT https://review.opendev.org/670370 | 19:00 |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 19:21 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 19:26 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 19:29 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 19:33 | |
| *** bnemec has quit IRC | 19:38 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 19:40 | |
| *** altlogbot_3 has quit IRC | 19:41 | |
| *** bnemec has joined #openstack-tc | 19:46 | |
| *** ijolliffe has quit IRC | 20:01 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 20:14 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 20:16 | |
| *** iurygregory has quit IRC | 20:24 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 20:31 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 21:01 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has joined #openstack-tc | 21:24 | |
| *** irclogbot_0 has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| *** irclogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 21:30 | |
| *** irclogbot_1 has quit IRC | 21:32 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 22:19 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 22:20 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has quit IRC | 22:24 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 22:52 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has joined #openstack-tc | 22:58 | |
| *** altlogbot_1 has quit IRC | 22:59 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has joined #openstack-tc | 23:01 | |
| *** irclogbot_3 has quit IRC | 23:06 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 23:07 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has joined #openstack-tc | 23:09 | |
| *** irclogbot_2 has quit IRC | 23:16 | |
| *** ijolliffe has joined #openstack-tc | 23:22 | |
| *** ijolliffe has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
