| *** openstack has joined #openstack-tc | 00:22 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 00:22 | |
| gmann | let me first list all the retired projects channel and ask you to run the command for TOPIC change. should I send it on ML or just asking in opendev channel ? | 00:24 |
|---|---|---|
| fungi | i'm personally a bit slammed trying to get things ready for potential channel relocations, so ml is likely best | 00:27 |
| gmann | sure | 00:28 |
| *** iurygregory has quit IRC | 01:48 | |
| *** ricolin_ is now known as ricolin | 02:05 | |
| ricolin | fungi, yes, it make sense to make a cleanup on #openstack-auto-scaling | 02:06 |
| fungi | thanks ricolin! | 02:27 |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 02:27 | |
| *** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc | 02:31 | |
| *** ricolin_ is now known as ricolin | 02:32 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 02:39 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 02:46 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 02:50 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 02:55 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 03:17 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 03:22 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 03:36 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 03:42 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 03:47 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 03:52 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 03:56 | |
| *** jaosorior has quit IRC | 04:17 | |
| *** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc | 05:07 | |
| *** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-tc | 05:14 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-tc | 06:26 | |
| *** iurygregory has joined #openstack-tc | 06:28 | |
| *** pojadhav|afk is now known as pojadhav|rover | 06:43 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 06:48 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 06:49 | |
| *** rpittau|afk is now known as rpittau | 07:24 | |
| *** gouthamr has quit IRC | 07:34 | |
| *** jungleboyj has quit IRC | 07:35 | |
| *** jmorgan has quit IRC | 07:35 | |
| *** mnaser has quit IRC | 07:36 | |
| *** guilhermesp has quit IRC | 07:36 | |
| *** gmann has quit IRC | 07:36 | |
| *** jungleboyj has joined #openstack-tc | 07:37 | |
| *** jmorgan has joined #openstack-tc | 07:37 | |
| *** gouthamr has joined #openstack-tc | 07:37 | |
| *** mnaser has joined #openstack-tc | 07:37 | |
| *** gmann has joined #openstack-tc | 07:38 | |
| *** guilhermesp has joined #openstack-tc | 07:38 | |
| *** tosky has joined #openstack-tc | 07:46 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 08:03 | |
| *** pojadhav|rover is now known as pojadhav|dentist | 08:27 | |
| *** andrewbonney has joined #openstack-tc | 08:34 | |
| *** jaosorior has quit IRC | 09:01 | |
| *** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc | 09:16 | |
| *** jaosorior has quit IRC | 09:42 | |
| *** pojadhav|dentist is now known as pojadhav|rover | 09:49 | |
| openstackgerrit | Riccardo Pittau proposed openstack/governance master: Retire sushy-cli - Step 6 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/792348 | 10:15 |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 11:52 | |
| mnaser | sheesh | 12:13 |
| mnaser | i feel like there's a lot of kneejerk reactions going on right now | 12:13 |
| mnaser | i'm going to point out to https://freenode.net/news/freenode-is-foss | 12:14 |
| mnaser | (and let's be honest, if you thought that PMs on an IRC network was a 'private' way of communicating, and now it is not anymore because $corp .. i don't think it was any more private before) | 12:14 |
| *** lbragstad_ has quit IRC | 12:24 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 12:31 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 12:32 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 12:33 | |
| fungi | yes, dcc was ostensibly "private" but unless you encrypted between clients even that was subject to subtle mitm risks | 12:34 |
| fungi | though otr is an option for people who want that | 12:34 |
| fungi | also, for those lost in the maze of mailing list threads, i've caught up our channel registrations on oftc so now they basically parallel the active channels in which opendev operates bots on freenode | 12:35 |
| fungi | i worry that the situation with channel squatting on liberia is likely to be out of control right now, and we'd almost certainly need to coordinate handover for a ton of them with the staff there (probably easy enough for the openstack- prefixed channels, not necessarily as easy for some others) | 12:36 |
| spotz | fungi whatt do you need me to do foor those channels? | 13:05 |
| fungi | spotz: just exit from them for a bit | 13:06 |
| fungi | i can get the ansible one taken care of right away and you can rejoin | 13:06 |
| spotz | fungi: I think yoctozepto waas in the tc channel first but I'll get out of them both | 13:06 |
| fungi | yep | 13:06 |
| spotz | Ok out | 13:06 |
| fungi | spotz: all done, you can rejoin #openstack-ansible there. thanks! | 13:08 |
| fungi | once yoctozepto sees my e-mail i can take care of the other one | 13:08 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 13:24 | |
| spotz | If I accidently claimed any othhers let me know | 13:25 |
| *** ralonsoh has quit IRC | 13:26 | |
| *** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-tc | 13:27 | |
| fungi | spotz: will do. if there are, it's channels already registered by someone (maybe you), i was just working through the ones which weren't already registered because getting control of them later is a much bigger hassle | 13:32 |
| spotz | fungi: I just joined channels I haven't registered anything. I knew you had said you had made some so I just assumed they were done | 13:33 |
| fungi | yeah, a lot were (roughly 35) but any we added after ~2014-ish needed to be added (100 or so) which i did yesterday | 13:34 |
| fungi | and there were a few outliers which i've been working through to get everything consistent | 13:35 |
| dansmith | mnaser: there's also too much "let's show solidarity with these people and move 100+ channels over to a new network that was struggling under load as recently as yesterday" going on | 13:38 |
| dtantsur | there's also too much "let's stay on the network that has lost all its maintainers and is maintained by god knows whom" ;) | 13:48 |
| dtantsur | I think it's wrong to look at this problem from the angle of who is right and wrong. The damage has been done, we have no control over it, we now need to understand what it means to us. | 13:49 |
| TheJulia | dtantsur++ I suspect now might be a good time to start transitioning. There is nothing saying everyone needs to move at once, but without a decision on where we want to also coalescence, individual project communities are going to start making decisions on their own to meet their needs. | 13:50 |
| dansmith | my comment is specifically about not caring about the drama or who is right or wrong, it's about minimizing disruption to a ton of people actually trying to get work done when there's no real reason (yet, that I see) | 13:51 |
| TheJulia | Regardless, some of us will end up with clients connected to old channels on freenode as long as it takes for people to not find us there based on old presentations or whatnot. | 13:51 |
| TheJulia | Again, there is nothing saying people *must move this very moment* | 13:52 |
| dtantsur | dansmith: I cannot agree that "all maintainers have apparently rage-quitted" is "no real reason", even if they're the wrong people here | 13:52 |
| dtantsur | And the only guarantee that freenode won't disappear tomorrow is the promise of the new owner. | 13:53 |
| dansmith | dtantsur: all the maintainers that seemed to have some ill intentions? anyway, if those maintainers leaving brings stability problems, then totally agree, but... | 13:53 |
| mnaser | there's not any more guarantees that libero wont disappear tomorrow either. | 13:53 |
| fungi | from a technical perspective, a "move" would be a flag day where the opendev collaboratory switches which network its irc bots are pointed at | 13:53 |
| dtantsur | dansmith: even if they have ill intentions, that does not cancel the fact that this network no longer has maintainers | 13:53 |
| TheJulia | the productivity impact can be minimized, but the decision must be made *where* otherwise delaying or putting off means no decision, and individual project communities will just do what they need to and not move later. So for the integrity of the larger project's communications, swift decision making is necessary. | 13:53 |
| mnaser | libero has a total existance of 2 days now | 13:54 |
| dtantsur | mnaser: note that I don't seriously suggest libera. We have a more stable alternative (OFTC) that has been previously considered | 13:54 |
| mnaser | right, but it seems like 'planning' has done to migrate to libera/libero/whatever it's called | 13:54 |
| dtantsur | my other favourite option would be to use Matrix hosted by Element | 13:54 |
| dansmith | fungi: you mean from an infra perspective.. the impact to the thousands of people who have to reconfigure and dozens of people who have to maintain a foot in each network for a while is non-trivial | 13:54 |
| fungi | people can definitely stay on or join multiple networks, but "what is #openstack-nova" will mostly come down to where the logbot is running to publish copies of conversations to eavesdrop, where the gerritbot is reporting review updates, et cetera | 13:54 |
| dtantsur | mnaser: I don't have the same information. The conversations yesterday (in which I took part at least) were around OFTC and potentially Matrix in the future | 13:54 |
| mnaser | for those who want to propose this subject | 13:55 |
| mnaser | https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 13:55 |
| dtantsur | fungi: I think it's more of "what is written in docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributing" :) | 13:55 |
| fungi | dansmith: i wasn't describing the impact, just the "how do you define a move event" part | 13:55 |
| mnaser | feel free to add it to the meeting agenda. | 13:55 |
| fungi | dtantsur: if there is a topic set in #openstack-nova on freenode and a minimum number of people hanging out there to redirect newcomers, that's probably a reasonable transition while waiting for docs changes to merge | 13:56 |
| dtantsur | yep | 13:57 |
| fungi | but as far as the public record of what was said in #openstack-nova, the moment the meetbot (which performs channel logging) moved from one network to another signals the move of the "channel" | 13:57 |
| fungi | at least from a historical perspective | 13:58 |
| * dtantsur wonders if there is #openstack-ironic on OFTC already | 13:58 | |
| fungi | dtantsur: it has been registered there since 2014 | 13:58 |
| dtantsur | oh? | 13:59 |
| fungi | with master access assigned currently to the opendevaccess account | 13:59 |
| fungi | the opendev sysadmins can add any other chanops to it as desired | 13:59 |
| * TheJulia waves to dtantsur on OFTC's #openstack-ironic | 13:59 | |
| dtantsur | I guess our glorious PTL deserves an ops status :) | 13:59 |
| TheJulia | blah | 14:00 |
| * TheJulia hides | 14:00 | |
| * TheJulia goes back to stacking performance fixes | 14:00 | |
| fungi | for those who didn't follow the ml discussion closely, the infra team always considered oftc a safe fallback position if something were to happen to freenode, and has been making plans/preparations for that safety net for years. freenode has never been particularly stable, and the recent drama is just another episode | 14:01 |
| fungi | at the moment i'm just waiting for yoctozepto to be around and drop from one channel i haven't been able to get officially registered there (not mentioning which one for now so that we don't wind up with more people i need to ask to part from it) | 14:04 |
| gmann | agree, libero is too early to move that much load and rely on. | 14:07 |
| fungi | so anyway, to a great extent i agree with dansmith and mnaser that a hurried move solely on the basis of this week's freenode drama is hasty. however i do see it as yet more validation of my many-years-growing opinion that freenode is probably not a great place for our channels | 14:08 |
| dansmith | yup, and if this gives us the big excuse we've been expecting for years, then that will be unsurprising | 14:08 |
| fungi | (and that carries over to liberia probably not being a great choice for the same reasons/history) | 14:08 |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 14:58 | |
| gmann | tc-members: meeting time | 15:00 |
| *** diablo_rojo_phon has joined #openstack-tc | 15:00 | |
| gmann | #startmeeting tc | 15:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu May 20 15:00:18 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 15:00 |
| mnaser | bonjour o/ | 15:00 |
| gmann | #topic Roll call | 15:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Roll call (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:00 | |
| gmann | o/ | 15:00 |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 15:00 |
| yoctozepto | o/ | 15:00 |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 15:00 | |
| diablo_rojo | o/ | 15:00 |
| dansmith | o/ | 15:01 |
| ricolin | o/ | 15:01 |
| JayF | o/ | 15:01 |
| spotz | o/ | 15:01 |
| gmann | let's start | 15:01 |
| gmann | #topic Follow up on past action items | 15:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Follow up on past action items (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:01 | |
| gmann | we have two action item | 15:02 |
| gmann | dansmith Draft the ML to explicit Alert/highlight the ELK services maintenance help with ref to current thread | 15:02 |
| dansmith | done, but zero replies, so not sure it was impactful | 15:02 |
| gmann | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-May/022439.html | 15:02 |
| gmann | yeah | 15:02 |
| dansmith | I know the rdo people are working on seeing if they can help, which is cool | 15:02 |
| gmann | +1 | 15:03 |
| spotz | Maybe something we add to the next board meeting agenda? | 15:03 |
| gmann | yes that is next AI | 15:03 |
| gmann | thanks dansmith for that, i have referenced it in two place at least | 15:03 |
| gmann | gmann to bring the ELK/infra help to Board | 15:04 |
| gmann | I talked to allision and she agree to add this in next Board meeting agenda. | 15:04 |
| gmann | I am also adding it in upstream investment opportunity #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/792049 | 15:04 |
| gmann | so that we have a some clear written doc link for them or corporate people would like to help or at least circulate it | 15:05 |
| gmann | please review that to get it merged before Board meeting next month | 15:05 |
| jungleboyj | Ooh, that is a good add. | 15:06 |
| dansmith | good grammar nits from spotz, are you going to fix those? | 15:06 |
| gmann | I am explicitly adding as ELK help | 15:06 |
| dansmith | if so, let me scan through and try to find some others right after this meeting | 15:07 |
| gmann | i see, will fix that quickly after meeting. did not notice | 15:07 |
| gmann | dansmith: cool. | 15:07 |
| gmann | will wait for that | 15:07 |
| gmann | #topic Gate health check (dansmith/yoctozepto) | 15:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Gate health check (dansmith/yoctozepto) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:07 | |
| gmann | any news to share on this? | 15:08 |
| dansmith | I don't have anything new for this topic this week | 15:08 |
| dansmith | other things have had me occupied so I don't even have a gut feeling for cinder fails like I usually do :P | 15:08 |
| gmann | ok | 15:09 |
| gmann | I have not seen any frequent failure in this week | 15:09 |
| gmann | one thing to notice is that devstack has dropped the bionic support now. | 15:09 |
| gmann | from master only. old stable branch devstack keep supporting it | 15:10 |
| fungi | there was the base job nodeset change to ubuntu-focal and devstack's master branch dropping ubuntu-bionic support both this week, yeah | 15:10 |
| fungi | disruption from those seems to have been minimal | 15:10 |
| fungi | a few fixes merged here and there | 15:10 |
| yoctozepto | well, it was well-planned :-) | 15:11 |
| gmann | yeah. and one in devstack unite test script itself for that fix is up in gate | 15:11 |
| jungleboyj | dansmith: I have had to recheck less. | 15:11 |
| gmann | nice | 15:11 |
| *** andreykurilin has joined #openstack-tc | 15:11 | |
| gmann | anything else on this topic? | 15:12 |
| gmann | #topic Planning for TC + PTL interaction (gmann) | 15:12 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Planning for TC + PTL interaction (gmann) (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:12 | |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-ptl-interaction | 15:12 |
| gmann | I am still looking forward to get more feedback or vote on the two option written there | 15:13 |
| gmann | also i wrote a draft agenda at L15 | 15:13 |
| gmann | feel free to comment or add anything you think will be good thing to discuss | 15:13 |
| diablo_rojo | Can do! | 15:13 |
| gmann | thanks | 15:14 |
| gmann | I will keep this for next week once we have more input in etherpad. | 15:14 |
| jungleboyj | Looks like a good start. | 15:15 |
| gmann | or discuss that time unless there is any question or something to discuss from anyone? | 15:15 |
| gmann | if nothing else let's move next | 15:16 |
| diablo_rojo | I think keeping it for next week sounds good | 15:16 |
| gmann | #topic Open Reviews | 15:16 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Reviews (Meeting topic: tc)" | 15:16 | |
| gmann | k | 15:16 |
| jungleboyj | ++ | 15:16 |
| gmann | one item in open review is ATC->AC #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/790092/ | 15:17 |
| gmann | dansmith: modified the patch based on feedback | 15:17 |
| spotz | +1 | 15:18 |
| gmann | on Bylaws things, I think we can add one resolution saying about ATC is maintained as subset of AC in TC | 15:18 |
| jungleboyj | Looking. | 15:18 |
| gmann | which will fill the Bylaws requirement also | 15:18 |
| gmann | similarly we did for “OpenStack Technical Committee Approved Release” term in #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20200920-tc-approved-release.html | 15:19 |
| fungi | yes, that seems like a reasonable approach | 15:20 |
| jungleboyj | +1 from me. | 15:20 |
| spotz | +1 | 15:20 |
| fungi | though effectively, with the proposed implementation, the set of acs would be the set of atcs, because the bylaws allow the tc to add extra atcs who aren't code contributors | 15:21 |
| gmann | yeah | 15:21 |
| fungi | so you could even just note it as an equivalent term | 15:21 |
| *** risson has joined #openstack-tc | 15:21 | |
| gmann | cool, so we are all set for ATC/AUC/AC thing. | 15:22 |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-tc | 15:22 | |
| fungi | they don't have to be differentiated for the sake of the bylaws, just need some way to say that atcs include other non-code-contributors approved by the tc as allowed in the bylaws | 15:22 |
| jungleboyj | \o/ | 15:22 |
| gmann | I will push resolution patch unless dansmith want it to do :) | 15:22 |
| gmann | fungi: right | 15:23 |
| belmoreira | o/ sorry being late | 15:23 |
| dansmith | go for it | 15:23 |
| gmann | k | 15:23 |
| gmann | #action gmann to push the resolution for ATC/AC terms | 15:23 |
| gmann | we already talked about ELK upstream investment patch | 15:24 |
| gmann | Retire sushy-cli is new one, we can review it | 15:24 |
| gmann | I saw this setup.cfg update things many place | 15:25 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/791360 | 15:25 |
| gmann | not sure just merge or reject as setuptools are not into pic now for install or so | 15:25 |
| spotz | I -1 workfloowed thhe one for the UC repo | 15:26 |
| gmann | if in future we end up doing wuith setuptools then it is just good to merge | 15:26 |
| gmann | but no strong opinion, so you can add your objection in gerrit. | 15:27 |
| gmann | that' all I have for today from agenda. | 15:27 |
| gmann | anything else anyone would like to discuss? | 15:27 |
| spotz | ttx and clarkb came in hhere and there was a discussion which is why I did it. I was surprised the repo still existed to be honest | 15:28 |
| gmann | spotz: yeah, I am on UC repo cleanup which i will do next week. | 15:28 |
| gmann | there are few repo can be moved to SIG side | 15:29 |
| gmann | for example this one -openstack/scientific-wg | 15:29 |
| gmann | if nothing else let's close meeting. | 15:30 |
| gmann | thanks everyone for joining | 15:30 |
| gmann | #endmeeting | 15:30 |
| *** 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/" | 15:31 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu May 20 15:30:59 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:31 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-05-20-15.00.html | 15:31 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-05-20-15.00.txt | 15:31 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-05-20-15.00.log.html | 15:31 |
| jungleboyj | Thank you! | 15:31 |
| spotz | Thanks! | 15:31 |
| jungleboyj | gmann: Reviewing the community investment patch. | 15:31 |
| gmann | jungleboyj: thanks | 15:31 |
| diablo_rojo | Thanks! | 15:32 |
| yoctozepto | thanks | 15:32 |
| JayF | Would it require a TC resolution for OpenStack to change IRC networks? Or does that decision lie elsewhere? | 15:33 |
| gmann | JayF: we can discuss about it in next meeting, feel free to add it in agenda. | 15:33 |
| gmann | if we decide then yes it require TC resolution | 15:34 |
| JayF | That's not exactly the question I was asking; I'm saying is a TC resolution a prereq to moving networks | 15:34 |
| JayF | ack; okay, so it's going to be at least a week then. I won't be on freenode by then to participate in this meeting. Hopefully you all come to a conclusion | 15:34 |
| jungleboyj | I don't personally see an urgency to changing networks at the moment. | 15:35 |
| spotz | JayF: There's also the ML thread | 15:35 |
| JayF | spotz: I'm very active on the ML thread :) | 15:35 |
| JayF | I was just curious who actually held the hammer to take action on it. | 15:36 |
| gmann | sure, we should discuss it more like happening in ML or can do in TC meeting if anyone would like to add in agenda. | 15:36 |
| JayF | jungleboyj: I'm surprised at the lack of a sense of solidarity with the folks who left freenode. We all participate in a large open source project; how would we feel if tomorrow $billionaire somehow purchased the OpenStack Foundation and tried to change our governance? | 15:37 |
| JayF | That's what is happening at freenode, and as a large open source project we have an ethical duty to not participate in this network after it's been taken over. (IMO) | 15:38 |
| *** ozzzo has joined #openstack-tc | 15:39 | |
| jungleboyj | JayF: Sorry, I have been in OpenSource for a long time but always working for large corporations so I am more numb to these things and avoid conflicts. | 15:40 |
| spotz | We have to make the best decision on where to go and when. Quickly moving to an unstable platform doesn't help. fungi and others are working on things in the background so we can make the right decision on where to go and when | 15:41 |
| dansmith | I also do not think acting "in solidarity" is in the best interest of the openstack community.. it sends a message, sure, but I'd rather focus on the impact to us | 15:41 |
| jungleboyj | spotz: ++ | 15:41 |
| JayF | I've spent a long time working for large corporations so I make an explicit point not to let my values around open source communities and software get watered down. | 15:41 |
| jungleboyj | dansmith: ++ | 15:42 |
| JayF | spotz: I'm OK with "we want to move; we need $time to prepare". The message I've heard is a few upset people (including me), a few people trying to leverage the chaos to change protocols, and a lot of people going collectively "meh". | 15:42 |
| JayF | I'm very OK with waiting for technical gears to turn. I am concerned with the lack of urgency OpenStack is showing when compared to many other, much larger open source projects. | 15:42 |
| fungi | if by "move" you mean where opendev's services are connecting, then it's a decision the opendev sysadmins will have to make, but we decide these things based on input from the projects we're hosting | 15:43 |
| spotz | If you've followed this chhannel the last few days you'd see we've been working on things. Even CentOS whho have said they are going to libera.chat have said they won't go until it's stable. But thhe point is we're workingg on hhaving our infrastrructure/channels/etc in place iin possibly multiple places so we can move to the right place at the rright time | 15:44 |
| fungi | so if the openstack tc wants to switch which irc network it's officially using, that's a major factor in opendev's decision | 15:44 |
| JayF | fungi: I'm just trying to figure out who to lobby ;) | 15:44 |
| fungi | JayF: primarily the leadership of openstack, zuul, airship, starlingx, kata, openinfralabs, et cetera, though openstack is (like with most things) the vast bulk of what we're supporting, so you're asking in the correct place | 15:45 |
| JayF | spotz: it's sometimes hard to tell the difference between "preparing for a contingency" and "waiting to make a decision until we can execute on it". I didn't realize the technical work was a prerequisite to making the policy decision. | 15:45 |
| spotz | It's part of the process, If we can't get our channel names etc thaat can affect the ultimate decision | 15:46 |
| fungi | JayF: it's not entirely a prerequisite, but having somewhere to go before you decide to go tends to make for a smoother transition | 15:46 |
| JayF | fungi: you're the zuul guy, right? Where do I send the bribe /s hehe | 15:46 |
| fungi | it's like deciding not to renew your lease before you figure out where you want to move | 15:47 |
| gmann | exactly | 15:47 |
| JayF | Yeah, I can see that as part of the process. It might help if someone posted that to the mailing list, instead of that thread being a bikeshed-fest about how to chat on the internet | 15:47 |
| fungi | i've been posting on there about it. just today i replied that i've caught up all our channel registrations on oftc | 15:48 |
| JayF | Yeah, I saw that this morning (thank you for doing all that, I know infra folks work super hard to keep stuff going) | 15:48 |
| fungi | i'm also doing my best not to constantly inject my opinion because this is a large community and i value what others have to say | 15:49 |
| JayF | That's fair. I think I had an expectation that we would, or could, move as fast as some other projects do. Not really a valid expectation, I guess? | 15:50 |
| *** rpittau is now known as rpittau|afk | 15:50 | |
| spotz | If the platform isn't stable yet we could take one down easily with the incrreased traffic | 15:51 |
| JayF | I would've had a concern about that if anyone was seriously proposing a move to libera.chat; OFTC is pretty well scaled and long lived at this point. Someone who is an admin there told me directly that they would welcome the increased usage. | 15:52 |
| fungi | JayF: so just to provide a data point, i went through and groomed/evaluated roughly 200 of our channels yesterday... how many irc channels are those other communities using? | 15:53 |
| fungi | it's harder to turn a cruise ship than a dinghy | 15:54 |
| ttx | I expect we'll lose a lot of people in any change... which is why it's appealing to consider a larger change at the same time. But changing under pressure is probably the worst option | 15:55 |
| JayF | fungi: I don't think any of the discussion has been about "geeze why can't we move today" vs "why can't we decide that moving /is the right thing to do/?" | 15:55 |
| fungi | similar problem. how many people were involved in making those other decisions? | 15:56 |
| fungi | on the related topic of switching communication technologies, it does sound like taking advantage of oftc's matrix bridge might be worthwhile | 15:57 |
| JayF | I don't know. I didn't even know it was under the purvue of the TC for sure until I asked above. | 15:57 |
| JayF | Yeah, one thing that comes out of this is now I'm curious about checking out Matrix. | 15:57 |
| spotz | need to run for a bit | 15:59 |
| ttx | I encourage people to check out the recent presentations th Matrix guys did at FOSDEM | 15:59 |
| ttx | including https://rap.mirror.cyberbits.eu/fosdem/2021/M.misc/matrix_communities.webm | 16:00 |
| ttx | like their new "space" concept | 16:01 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 16:13 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 16:16 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 16:23 | |
| dansmith | does oftc not support connection-based authentication for nickserv other than via cert? | 16:36 |
| dansmith | that's unfortunate | 16:36 |
| fungi | technically more secure than password auth, and supported by popular irc clients for more than a decade | 16:37 |
| fungi | but yes, it would be a difference for people who relied on that | 16:38 |
| dansmith | oh I know it is more secure in a lot of cases, but not so much if I have to leave my cert on my VPS that runs znc | 16:38 |
| fungi | also oftc is far less of a spam target than freenode ever was, so i expect we'd drop our registration requirement for most normal channels if we moved there | 16:38 |
| dansmith | presumably that transfers over to oftc if everyone goes there | 16:39 |
| fungi | yeah, but seems like for the most part they aren't | 16:39 |
| fungi | i expect the drama and griefing to follow the former freenode staff to liberia. they have a lot of enemies on other irc networks | 16:41 |
| fungi | looking into whether my client has pkcs#12 support, since that would allow to decrypt the private key at startup and solve the at-rest risk for such scenarios | 16:46 |
| fungi | chatzilla and thunderbird both seem to support pkcs#12 | 16:48 |
| fungi | looks like weechat has an ssl_password setting to support encrypted private keys | 16:58 |
| fungi | dansmith: maybe whatever you're using has a similar option? | 16:58 |
| dansmith | not AFAICT, but I haven't looked hard | 17:01 |
| fungi | looks like weechat's supporting pcks#8 encrypted private keys | 17:06 |
| fungi | though weechat more generally allows its configuration to be symmetrically encrypted and then decrypted on start by prompting the user for a passphrase: https://weechat.org/files/doc/devel/weechat_user.en.html#secured_data | 17:09 |
| fungi | which i suppose makes embedding the pkcs#8 decryption key in the config safe to do | 17:10 |
| dansmith | seems like znc doesn't | 17:10 |
| dansmith | with sasl I can make my desktop client run a command on first connect after restart to get the bouncer reconnected | 17:10 |
| dansmith | but with cert auth, looks like I have to have it resident on disk | 17:10 |
| dansmith | even if I had it encrypted, the password would have to be in the config | 17:11 |
| fungi | and znc can't encrypt its config, i guess | 17:11 |
| dansmith | anyway, with people complaining about IRC's ancient-ness and auth being one point, OFTC doesn't seem like they've kept with the times | 17:11 |
| dansmith | obviously I can just generate a throwaway cert to use only for oftc and leave it on the disk and not care much, just surprised they don't support SASL as well | 17:13 |
| *** ralonsoh has quit IRC | 17:37 | |
| fungi | looks like the oftc org on github has a year-old fork of atheme services code, though i can't find any mention of whether they were evaluating it for possibly switching. if so, that would in theory support sasl auth as an option | 17:38 |
| dansmith | well, just another thing in the series of steps all our users will have to work out | 17:39 |
| dansmith | like "is my nick available there?" and "last time I reconfigured for SASL auth when we required registered nicks, now I have no go back to nickserv command on login or set up certs" | 17:40 |
| dansmith | not a blocker for most of the active people I'm sure, but yet another thing | 17:40 |
| fungi | absolutely | 17:45 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 17:46 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 17:46 | |
| *** andrewbonney has quit IRC | 17:48 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 17:51 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 18:08 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has joined #openstack-tc | 18:09 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 18:13 | |
| openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/governance master: Replace ATC terminology with AC https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/790092 | 18:36 |
| dansmith | spotz: jungleboyj: yoctozepto demanded changes at gunpoint, so please re-apply your vote ^ | 18:40 |
| yoctozepto | I did not demand but you delivered :-) | 18:43 |
| dansmith | :) | 18:43 |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 18:57 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| spotz | Thanks dansmith | 19:16 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| fungi | per some discussion in #zuul just now, the ansible project is planning to decide on wednesday what they're doing about moving off freenode and where they would go, so openstack isn't the only project taking a measured approach to the situation | 19:23 |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 19:24 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 19:32 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 19:35 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 19:52 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 20:07 | |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 20:11 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 20:20 | |
| *** slaweq has joined #openstack-tc | 20:22 | |
| *** slaweq has quit IRC | 20:29 | |
| *** tdasilva_ has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| *** thiago__ has joined #openstack-tc | 20:33 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has joined #openstack-tc | 20:53 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 20:56 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur_ has quit IRC | 21:11 | |
| *** dansmith has quit IRC | 22:02 | |
| *** dansmith has joined #openstack-tc | 22:06 | |
| *** dansmith has quit IRC | 22:25 | |
| *** dansmith has joined #openstack-tc | 22:25 | |
| *** njohnston has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 23:02 | |
| *** tosky has quit IRC | 23:52 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!