| *** tosky has quit IRC | 00:30 | |
| spotz | Oh wow the instal guide never got updated for Victoria! | 01:56 |
|---|---|---|
| fungi | i assume there's just some change or handful of changes needed to the openstack-manuals repo to add it? | 02:28 |
| fungi | it's all piecemeal from the various projects anyway so presumably what's missing is the central index? | 02:29 |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc | 02:48 | |
| *** timburke has joined #openstack-tc | 02:53 | |
| *** ricolin_ has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** ianw has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** ianw has joined #openstack-tc | 03:00 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:00 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:00 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:01 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:01 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:01 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:01 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:02 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:02 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:03 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:03 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:04 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:04 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:05 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:05 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:06 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:06 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:07 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:07 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:11 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:11 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:17 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:17 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:22 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:22 | |
| *** dirk has quit IRC | 03:25 | |
| *** dirk has joined #openstack-tc | 03:26 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:28 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:28 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:32 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:32 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:38 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:38 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:43 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:43 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:49 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:49 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:53 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:53 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 03:59 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 03:59 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 04:25 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 05:00 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 05:00 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 05:26 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 05:26 | |
| *** evrardjp has quit IRC | 05:33 | |
| *** evrardjp has joined #openstack-tc | 05:33 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 06:00 | |
| *** timburke has quit IRC | 06:42 | |
| *** timburke has joined #openstack-tc | 06:47 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 07:06 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-tc | 07:13 | |
| *** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-tc | 07:21 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 07:39 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-tc | 07:42 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-tc | 07:59 | |
| *** rpittau|afk is now known as rpittau | 08:14 | |
| *** andrewbonney has joined #openstack-tc | 08:26 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 08:30 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 08:45 | |
| *** JanZerebecki[m] has quit IRC | 09:00 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 09:12 | |
| *** njohnston has quit IRC | 12:16 | |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 13:11 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-tc | 13:14 | |
| *** iurygregory has quit IRC | 13:47 | |
| *** iurygregory has joined #openstack-tc | 13:50 | |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 14:44 |
| spotz | o/ | 14:45 |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 14:51 | |
| *** tosky_ has joined #openstack-tc | 14:51 | |
| *** tosky_ is now known as tosky | 14:51 | |
| ttx | o/ | 15:01 |
| gmann | meeting time | 15:01 |
| mnaser | #startmeeting tc | 15:01 |
| gmann | mnaser: ping | 15:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Feb 18 15:01:18 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mnaser. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 15:01 |
| jungleboyj | :-) | 15:01 |
| gmann | :) | 15:01 |
| ricolin | o/ | 15:01 |
| dansmith | o/ | 15:01 |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 15:02 | |
| mnaser | #topic rollcall | 15:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "rollcall (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:02 | |
| gmann | o/ | 15:02 |
| mnaser | thanks for hosting last week btw, gmann | 15:02 |
| diablo_rojo | o/ | 15:02 |
| ricolin | o/ | 15:02 |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 15:02 |
| * mnaser has been dealing with all sorts of fun | 15:02 | |
| mnaser | #topic Follow up on past action items | 15:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Follow up on past action items (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:03 | |
| mnaser | gmann continue to follow-up on using direct dependencies for l-c jobs | 15:04 |
| gmann | I posted the result of direct deps in l-c test #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-February/020556.html | 15:04 |
| gmann | and the proposal alternate to removal of l-c testing | 15:05 |
| gmann | which is what was initially proposed in ML | 15:05 |
| gmann | let's wait for more response on that and then we can discuss/document that | 15:05 |
| mnaser | ack, thanks for all the follow up on this | 15:05 |
| gouthamr | o/ | 15:06 |
| mnaser | diablo_rojo to send the k8s steering meeting details on ML and add section for new meeting in etherpad | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | Already added a new section to the etherpad | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | but I need to send an email | 15:07 |
| mnaser | ok, we have it as a discussion item, so i will leave it for us to talk bout it when we get to it potentially ? | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | I don't think it warrants a whole section now that its been mentioned and I will send the email lol | 15:08 |
| mnaser | ok so we can drop that section them | 15:08 |
| diablo_rojo | Want to link the etherpad? | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | Yeah, mnaser I think so. | 15:09 |
| mnaser | yeah taht might be helpful | 15:09 |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/kubernetes-cross-community-topics | 15:09 |
| gmann | L29 | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, to the rescue | 15:09 |
| gmann | sorry L20 | 15:09 |
| gmann | :) | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | as I fumble around with tab complete | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | Yes line 20, feel free to add topics | 15:10 |
| mnaser | can we keep a rolling action item to add topics there | 15:10 |
| mnaser | i'd really like us to take advantage of this :> | 15:10 |
| diablo_rojo | Yeah go for it :) | 15:11 |
| belmoreira | o/ | 15:11 |
| jungleboyj | ++ | 15:11 |
| mnaser | #action diablo_rojo send out email to ML wrt k8s cross-community discussion | 15:11 |
| mnaser | #action tc-members fill out https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/kubernetes-cross-community-topics with topics | 15:11 |
| diablo_rojo | +2 | 15:11 |
| mnaser | cool, anything else about this? | 15:12 |
| diablo_rojo | Nope I don't think so | 15:12 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser drop k8s steering commitee meeting from agenda | 15:12 |
| mnaser | gmann to follow up with monasca team for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/771785 | 15:12 |
| gmann | I pinged Monasca PTL chaconpiza no IRC as well as sent email to him but no response. I will wait for tomorrow afternoon otherwise push the changes and add monasca team as reviewer | 15:12 |
| mnaser | hmm | 15:13 |
| mnaser | wonder if we just dont have an active email too | 15:13 |
| mnaser | https://review.opendev.org/q/owner:martin%2540chaconpiza.com | 15:13 |
| ricolin | I also pinged him but no response as well | 15:13 |
| mnaser | does monasca team have a scheduled team | 15:14 |
| * mnaser opens eavesdrop.openstack.org | 15:14 | |
| mnaser | http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Monasca_Team_Meeting | 15:14 |
| mnaser | Weekly on Tuesday at 1300 UTC in #openstack-monasca (IRC webclient) | 15:14 |
| mnaser | http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/monasca/2021/monasca.2021-02-16-13.00.log.txt | 15:14 |
| ttx | there was a meeting this week | 15:14 |
| mnaser | maybe we can add something to their team agenda - https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/monasca-team-meeting-agenda | 15:14 |
| gmann | sure, that will help | 15:15 |
| mnaser | cool, so lets try that route | 15:15 |
| gmann | +1 | 15:15 |
| mnaser | ill keep the action item for the next week if that's cool | 15:15 |
| gmann | sure | 15:15 |
| mnaser | #action gmann to follow up with monasca team for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/771785 | 15:15 |
| mnaser | #topic Audit SIG list and chairs (diablo_rojo) | 15:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Audit SIG list and chairs (diablo_rojo) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:15 | |
| diablo_rojo | I let this fall down my todo list again but I will make progress by next week. | 15:16 |
| diablo_rojo | So.. no updates atm | 15:16 |
| mnaser | ok cool no problem :) | 15:17 |
| mnaser | #topic Gate performance and heavy job configs (dansmith) | 15:17 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Gate performance and heavy job configs (dansmith) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:17 | |
| dansmith | nothing really new since last week or so, | 15:17 |
| dansmith | I haven't gone checking to see if things have been dropped, | 15:17 |
| dansmith | gate perf is still pretty bad | 15:17 |
| mnaser | dansmith: is there any easy measurable signal we can all look at to track if things are trending better or worse? | 15:17 |
| dansmith | we have merged one big improvement to devstack time, and would like to advocate for another which will make a big deal | 15:17 |
| dansmith | mnaser: that metric is super hard to generate, so it's more of a gut feeling sort of thing | 15:18 |
| dansmith | I imagine gmann also has a gut feeling | 15:18 |
| mnaser | i wonder if zuul has some 'avg wait time for change in gate' | 15:18 |
| dansmith | I tried to get some attention in the cinder channel to the test failures last week but got no replies | 15:18 |
| mnaser | wasn't there some twitter bot that would whine when our queues were long :) | 15:18 |
| dansmith | so I will try them again, as it seems like in terms of gate resets they're the high offender | 15:18 |
| dansmith | mnaser: the gate queue depth is easy to see, | 15:19 |
| dansmith | and I watch my patch time-to-run values with dash.py, | 15:19 |
| mnaser | so i think the reset's are what hurt the most right | 15:19 |
| gmann | did tripleo optimization done? | 15:19 |
| dansmith | gmann: I don't know I haven't checked | 15:19 |
| dansmith | they were collecting votes, but not sure if it actually happened | 15:19 |
| fungi | the average wait time is going to vary a lot depending on activity levels and time of day/week too, so it's hard to know what you're comparing against | 15:19 |
| gmann | k | 15:20 |
| mnaser | fungi: but i think a good signal that we can focus on is # of gate failures correct? | 15:20 |
| mnaser | the more gate fails/resets, the worse it gets, esp with gate being high prio | 15:20 |
| fungi | previous week? same week in the previous development cycle? same week in the prior year? | 15:20 |
| dansmith | mnaser: gate resets hurt a lot, but load is a huge part of it right now I think | 15:20 |
| gmann | i am not sure if that came in past also, can we have some user flag to stop the run ? | 15:20 |
| mnaser | it may be a bit of a domino effect too | 15:20 |
| fungi | gate reset count also varies depending on the depth of the queues themselves | 15:20 |
| mnaser | fungi: yes, good poin | 15:20 |
| gmann | so that i can stop if i see some job failing and i do not want rest of other to continue | 15:20 |
| dansmith | right, the gate queue isn't that deep right now | 15:21 |
| mnaser | gmann: you could abandon your patch | 15:21 |
| dansmith | so a reset would suck, but it wouldn't be huge | 15:21 |
| fungi | the deeper the queue, the more changes have a chance to fail more than once as changes ahead of them fail | 15:21 |
| gmann | well that need abandon and restore right | 15:21 |
| dansmith | gmann: or push a new rev | 15:21 |
| gmann | many case i see failed in gate pipeline so we have to do recheck anyways to why to wait for other | 15:22 |
| gmann | at least gate pipeline can be helpful | 15:22 |
| gmann | remove the review if any of the job fail | 15:22 |
| dansmith | I think the TC should focus on the people stuff we can resolve, | 15:22 |
| mnaser | fungi: multinode jobs and jobs that pause and wait for another job (container stuff) -- do these enforce a cloud in the same nodepool-pool? | 15:22 |
| dansmith | technical brainstorming and feature implementation is really not a TC thing, and we can discuss those things in -infra | 15:23 |
| dansmith | so I'll try to check on the optimization efforts to lower the test load before next week's meeting here | 15:23 |
| fungi | mnaser: yes, if builds depend on one another then zuul asks nodepool to fill them all from the same provider | 15:23 |
| dansmith | and see if we need some reminders | 15:23 |
| fungi | so that their network communication (if any) will be as local as possible | 15:23 |
| mnaser | thats's fair. dansmith: is there a script that generates your 'usage per project' thing? | 15:23 |
| mnaser | so we can track if we need to ping more people and if so, who | 15:23 |
| dansmith | mnaser: yes, linked in my email | 15:23 |
| mnaser | #link https://gist.github.com/kk7ds/5edbfacb2a341bb18df8f8f32d01b37c | 15:25 |
| mnaser | ok, i'll try and see if i can run that to look over it here too | 15:25 |
| mnaser | ok, lets keep the item for now, i don't know if there's a whole lot more we can immediately do | 15:25 |
| mnaser | #topic Mistral Maintenance (gmann) | 15:25 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Mistral Maintenance (gmann) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:25 | |
| gmann | we are good on this. Renat replied to try the DPL model in Xena. | 15:26 |
| mnaser | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-February/020137.html | 15:26 |
| mnaser | ok great, so i think we can drop this from the agenda and have DPL patches for next time around? | 15:26 |
| gmann | yeah. | 15:26 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser drop Mistral Maintenance tp[oc | 15:27 |
| mnaser | #undo | 15:27 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: #action mnaser drop Mistral Maintenance tp[oc | 15:27 |
| mnaser | #action mnaser drop Mistral Maintenance topic | 15:27 |
| mnaser | #topic Student Programs (diablo_rojo) | 15:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Student Programs (diablo_rojo) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:28 | |
| diablo_rojo | Another reminder! | 15:28 |
| diablo_rojo | Tomorrow the GSoC applications close. | 15:28 |
| diablo_rojo | Still have some more time to apply for outreachy. | 15:28 |
| mnaser | do projects need to register or what exactly is actionable here? | 15:28 |
| diablo_rojo | I'm happy to help however I can if people are interested in applying for interns. | 15:28 |
| diablo_rojo | For outreacy mentors need to apply with a project for interns to work. | 15:29 |
| diablo_rojo | Similar for GSoC | 15:29 |
| diablo_rojo | We've only been accepted to GSoC once though so I am less familiar with the process. | 15:29 |
| mnaser | by we = openstack, or a specific openstack project, or osf, or? | 15:30 |
| diablo_rojo | OpenStack | 15:30 |
| diablo_rojo | for GSoC | 15:30 |
| diablo_rojo | OpenStack has long been a participant in outreachy- projects varied under that umbrella | 15:31 |
| mnaser | i'd hate for us to miss out on taking advantage of the opportunity :X | 15:31 |
| mnaser | taking advantage sounds like a poor taste of wording but | 15:32 |
| mnaser | i cant find anything better :) | 15:32 |
| diablo_rojo | Still :) Making use of the opportunity | 15:32 |
| jungleboyj | wah wah wah | 15:32 |
| diablo_rojo | Let me know if you need help! Otherwise, we can move onto ttx's topic | 15:32 |
| mnaser | i'd probably ask if openinfra can take advantage of this | 15:33 |
| mnaser | but yeah, sure | 15:33 |
| gmann | I am going to put application for QA today | 15:33 |
| mnaser | ack | 15:33 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, for outreachy? | 15:34 |
| diablo_rojo | mnaser, I have passed along both to all open infra folks. | 15:34 |
| diablo_rojo | (zuul, kata, etc) | 15:34 |
| gmann | need to check which one or both | 15:34 |
| mnaser | diablo_rojo: awesome, sorry, i meant opendev, but yeah :p | 15:34 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, sounds good, let me know if I can help. | 15:34 |
| gmann | sure | 15:34 |
| mnaser | ok great | 15:35 |
| mnaser | #topic Recommended path forward for OSarchiver (ttx) | 15:35 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Recommended path forward for OSarchiver (ttx) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:35 | |
| ttx | Hi! Was just looking for a bit of guidance, on behalf of the Large Scale SIG | 15:35 |
| ttx | OVHCloud released https://github.com/ovh/osarchiver as open source (BSD-3) | 15:35 |
| ttx | It's a tool to help with archiving OpenStack databases, but it is relatively openstack-agnostic | 15:35 |
| ttx | They are interested in making the tool more visible to OpenStack users by placing it under OpenStack governance | 15:35 |
| *** timburke_ has joined #openstack-tc | 15:36 | |
| ttx | There are multiple ways to get there | 15:36 |
| ttx | - We could just host it under the Large Scale SIG | 15:36 |
| ttx | ...but it's not really large scale specific | 15:36 |
| ttx | - We could leverage the https://opendev.org/openstack/osops common repository (owned by the "Operation Docs and Tooling" SIG) | 15:36 |
| ttx | ...but that SIG and repository are not very active/visible, so it's unclear that would be a win | 15:36 |
| ttx | - We could make it its own smallish project on the "Operations tooling" side of the OpenStack map | 15:36 |
| ttx | ...but a full project team may be overkill as the tool is mostly feature-complete | 15:37 |
| ttx | What would be the TC's recommendation for them to follow? | 15:37 |
| ttx | Placing it under OpenStack governance involves relicensing it under Apache-2, so I feel like we should not ask them to move/relicense if that does not really increase the tool visibility. | 15:37 |
| mnaser | the difference between this and the built-in openstack tools is that this archives things in another db, right? | 15:38 |
| ttx | also works for any project, iiuc | 15:38 |
| *** timburke has quit IRC | 15:38 | |
| mnaser | i mean, a sig can have deliverables | 15:39 |
| ttx | (which raises the other alternative solution: keep it where it is because it's actually not that useful) | 15:39 |
| dansmith | either they relicense and get the visibility or don't right? | 15:39 |
| dansmith | isn't apache license a requirement for openstack? | 15:39 |
| mnaser | ansible-sig publishes the openstack collections | 15:39 |
| fungi | apache license is a loose requirement for deliverables shipped as a part of openstack | 15:39 |
| mnaser | they are not an official deliverable of openstack | 15:39 |
| fungi | we have a number of exceptions documented | 15:39 |
| ttx | dansmith: yes it is. They are happy to relicense. but if it's to end up in a dark corner of OSops, that might not be worth the pain | 15:39 |
| dansmith | ack | 15:40 |
| mnaser | and im pretty sure because of legacy reasons, openstack collections werent apache 2 | 15:40 |
| dansmith | I guess if it's not a deliverable per se, maybe the license requirement isn't a thing? | 15:40 |
| fungi | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/licensing.html Licensing requirements | 15:40 |
| belmoreira | for me the main question is to have a visible "place" in the community were ops can share their tools | 15:40 |
| dansmith | I'm also not sure how much the "being under the big tent umbrella awning" or whatever really increases visibility anymore, but.. | 15:40 |
| ttx | if it's a SIG thing, does not have to be apache-2. But relicensing is not really the issue | 15:40 |
| ttx | I'm reulctant to encourage them to move in if it does not really increase visibility | 15:41 |
| mnaser | something i will openly admit | 15:41 |
| mnaser | people don't like gerrit | 15:42 |
| ttx | belmoreira: would you say OSops is such a place? Can anyone name one tool that is there? | 15:42 |
| mnaser | projects will _actually_ get less contributions if they are on gerrit. | 15:42 |
| ricolin | ttx how's large scale SIG feel about it if we end up put it under large scale SIG? | 15:42 |
| fungi | people don't like lots of tools. some people also don't like github, or gitlab, or bitbucket, or... | 15:42 |
| ttx | The people at OVH are happy to place it under Gerrit fwiw | 15:42 |
| * dansmith hates github | 15:42 | |
| dansmith | there, I said it | 15:42 |
| mnaser | same. | 15:42 |
| mnaser | but we're a minority :) | 15:42 |
| belmoreira | if we have a light weight project that can have releases, like other projects, it would have a lot of visibility | 15:43 |
| ttx | dansmith: I still don;t understand how to use it properly, and when I ask, I realize nobody else uses it properly | 15:43 |
| ricolin | dansmith, you're not alone there:) | 15:43 |
| mnaser | if they don't mind it being under gerrit, then i don't see why they can't have it as a repo for their project | 15:43 |
| dansmith | ttx: that's mostly what I hate about it.. encourages bad behavior, like "here are 23 commits that finally end up with all the typos fixed, kthx" | 15:43 |
| ttx | anyway, that's a tangent. I guess the rael question is, do y'all think OSops is going to be back ni fashion | 15:44 |
| ttx | in* | 15:44 |
| fungi | i'm not sold on the visibility argument, i'll admit. i think the reasons for becoming an official deliverable would need to be for something more than just increased visibility to make it worthwhile (we can't guarantee increased visibility/adoption) | 15:44 |
| dansmith | fungi: that's my feeling, stated above | 15:44 |
| ttx | if not, would you entertain OSarchiver to be a full project/openstack deliverable, or is it overkill | 15:44 |
| ttx | if not, I guess that leaves the Large Scale SIG hosting solution | 15:45 |
| mnaser | ttx: we were doing some stuff here.. https://opendev.org/vexxhost/openstack-tools -- i think the hardest thing about osops is we all do things differently and velocity can slow things down. i would maybe suggest osarchiver to be a sig deliverable -- https://opendev.org/openstack/governance/src/branch/master/reference/sigs-repos.yaml | 15:45 |
| ttx | or leave it where it is and link to it where we can | 15:45 |
| mnaser | hosting under large scale sig would be my vote tbh | 15:45 |
| ttx | mnaser: maybe all we need is some doc page that points to tools | 15:45 |
| ttx | wherever they are hosted | 15:45 |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 15:45 | |
| ttx | and promote THAT instead | 15:45 |
| fungi | i don't think it's overkill to make a project team for something like that, but the team responsible for the software would need to make the judgement call there as to whether it's worthwhile *for them* | 15:45 |
| mnaser | ttx: i think that would be a lot more successful instead of a centralized repo | 15:46 |
| ttx | right, the overhead of common repository governance is just not worth it | 15:46 |
| ttx | So the trick is to find a good place to document external tools | 15:47 |
| mnaser | if they want to take advantage of gerrit + opendev + ci access, move it into the sig, if none of that interests them, it can stay at github, and we can point some osops 'tools' page to include them | 15:47 |
| ttx | or SIG-maintained tools | 15:47 |
| ttx | any suggestion on where we could document those? I guess we could have a page on the openstack website, if all else fails | 15:48 |
| ttx | not sure our official docs would work a lot better | 15:48 |
| mnaser | maybe the osops repo can have doc/ added to it | 15:48 |
| ricolin | ttx I think I agree on to provide docs and visibility at this stage will be more important than to put it all in most reason place | 15:48 |
| mnaser | and we can publish that there and point to it from the openstack website | 15:48 |
| ttx | I think OSops is over-complex in a world where repos are cheap | 15:48 |
| mnaser | i just prefer any form of code review over wiki | 15:49 |
| gmann | we can add link in openstack map too as 'external tools which can be useful' | 15:49 |
| ricolin | an deep dive article might be some good option too:) | 15:50 |
| ttx | OK, so how about... for OSarchiver it can stay where it is or get hosted under Large Scale SIG. We list that tool (and others) on some page, ideally maintained by the Operations Docs/Tooling SIG | 15:50 |
| ttx | Then link to that page from openstack.org | 15:50 |
| mnaser | i like that | 15:50 |
| jungleboyj | Makes sense. | 15:51 |
| ttx | OK, I'll check with teh Ops tooling/Docs SIG if maintaining such page works for them. It's probably a better use of time that administering OSops | 15:51 |
| mnaser | ttx: i think maybe we can keep this agenda item for next week to see where things are with this in terms of your final idea | 15:52 |
| ttx | and it can still self-reference OSops tools | 15:52 |
| ttx | Sure, I'll try to be around next week as well. | 15:52 |
| ttx | Thanks everyone! | 15:52 |
| mnaser | thanks for bringing this up | 15:52 |
| mnaser | #topic open reviews | 15:53 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open reviews (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:53 | |
| mnaser | i think https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/770616 can merge | 15:54 |
| mnaser | we need a follow up patch to mv it to the cycle goal | 15:54 |
| mnaser | checking in on the other patches | 15:55 |
| mnaser | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+is:open | 15:55 |
| mnaser | ok great, everything can land | 15:57 |
| mnaser | so we just have the monasca stuff | 15:57 |
| gmann | +1 | 15:57 |
| mnaser | and we'll be fully cleared out on that | 15:57 |
| mnaser | anything else? :) | 15:58 |
| gmann | nothing from me. | 15:58 |
| jungleboyj | Nothing from me. | 15:59 |
| mnaser | great | 15:59 |
| mnaser | thanks all!!! | 15:59 |
| mnaser | #endmeeting | 15:59 |
| *** 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/" | 15:59 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Feb 18 15:59:45 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-02-18-15.01.html | 15:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-02-18-15.01.txt | 15:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-02-18-15.01.log.html | 15:59 |
| jungleboyj | Thank you! | 15:59 |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 16:00 | |
| gmann | thanks | 16:00 |
| ricolin | mnaser, thanks | 16:00 |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 16:14 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Retire tempest-horizon https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/774379 | 16:14 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add assert:supports-api-interoperability to cinder https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/773684 | 16:23 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add assert:supports-api-interoperability tag to neutron https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/773090 | 16:23 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 17:23 | |
| *** rpittau is now known as rpittau|afk | 17:47 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 18:01 | |
| *** ralonsoh has quit IRC | 18:15 | |
| *** andrewbonney has quit IRC | 18:34 | |
| jroll | for visibility/transparency - I'd like to give up my admin access to github.com/openstack. I poked mnaser and he suggested adding him while he works on a better way to manage that access | 18:53 |
| jroll | so I'm doing that | 18:53 |
| mnaser | ^ i'm going to work on openstack/project-config changes to manage those records via ansible | 18:55 |
| gmann | +1 | 18:55 |
| fungi | cool, integrate them with the bits which add/remove repos from the org i guess? | 19:01 |
| *** diablo_rojo_phon has joined #openstack-tc | 19:05 | |
| *** e0ne_ has joined #openstack-tc | 19:08 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 19:08 | |
| mnaser | fungi: yeah! i'm trying to see if there's something that can manage access for the org users | 19:23 |
| fungi | ttx wrote most of that, i think, so may be able to answer questions if you can't figure out what's already there | 19:34 |
| *** e0ne_ has quit IRC | 20:09 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 20:21 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 20:22 | |
| *** e0ne_ has joined #openstack-tc | 20:24 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 20:24 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 20:26 | |
| *** tbarron|out has joined #openstack-tc | 20:38 | |
| *** mgagne has quit IRC | 21:08 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 21:12 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 21:14 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 21:26 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 21:37 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 21:39 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 21:40 | |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 21:50 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 22:38 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 23:07 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 23:15 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has joined #openstack-tc | 23:15 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 23:31 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has quit IRC | 23:53 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 23:54 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!