| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Appoint Wuchunyang as Trove PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/902608 | 00:02 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Mark freezer project inactive https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/902623 | 00:05 |
| gmann | JayF: should we get PTL ack on those marking inactive changes so that they know about it | 00:06 |
| gmann | or send those proposal to ML also will be more visible about their status change | 00:06 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Mark Solum project inactive https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/902624 | 00:07 |
| gmann | at least sending to ML is needed so that user of those projects or any maintainers knows about it. | 00:08 |
| JayF | gmann: if PTL was active enough to ack changes; maybe the projects wouldn't be inactive? I think waiting for the PTL defeats the purpose somewhat. I'll notify the mailing list. | 00:09 |
| JayF | gmann: that being said, I think in cases where we have a PTL, it'd be good for someone on the TC with interest in those projects to reach out to them and let them know it can be backed out if criteria are met | 00:10 |
| JayF | I'll spell that out some in an email | 00:10 |
| JayF | actually, I'll draft and email and put it here, get an ack on it before I send it since it's EOD and I don't wanna stir up a hornets' nest by accident then turn off the laptop :D | 00:10 |
| gmann | k | 00:11 |
| JayF | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/qKpBTaLP_ozDCFY_M1sS is my draft email announcing inactive statuses; please comment/edit/etc | 00:21 |
| JayF | I will send it at some point tomorrow barring any changes | 00:21 |
| frickler | JayF: the draft lgtm | 06:45 |
| frickler | JayF: given that it was recently stated that there is no time limit for approval of the bylaw changes, can you explain why you are rushing this now? I would consider the leaderless and inactive changes to have much higher priority since they indeed do have a deadline coming up soonish | 07:37 |
| slaweq | JayF hi, sure, there is PTL candidate but still gate is broken in the project. IMHO we can do both mark it as inactive now and let new PTL to remove that inactive mark before M2 milestone if gate will be fixed at least. | 08:41 |
| slaweq | but I'm also fine if we will just give new PTL time to fix it without marking project as inactive. So I voted RC+1 on it but I'm fine with either way | 08:41 |
| opendevreview | Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/governance master: Modernize Openstack Networking Programming Model https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/902585 | 09:33 |
| JayF | slaweq: I am in agreement but wanted to ensure your vote was still valid | 14:18 |
| TheJulia | frickler: It is more about confidence to proceed and being risk adverse because we're about to start the individual member election which will include some bylaws sections being voted upon as well by individual members. If the TC makes an about face and refuses the changes, the board will have to go back to square one on cleaning up the bylaws and the individual member vote will just create confusion because individual | 14:26 |
| TheJulia | members might have voted on changes which can't be incorporated, and we would be back in the same state next year approaching the end of the year most likely | 14:26 |
| TheJulia | I think that is why it got framed much more as "it nice if sooner". | 14:31 |
| JayF | ++ just trying not to be the long pole on the gantt chart for the bylaws update | 14:34 |
| JayF | I think all governance changes are relatively important and should be reviewed timely | 14:34 |
| TheJulia | JayF: much appreciated, it even sounds silly for me to think, but this is one of my higher stress times of year as the chair in large part because it is up to the individual member electorate in the end, and I always worry they might not do the needful of voting. | 14:36 |
| fungi | in spi, we've been trying off an on for decades to get member quorum on bylaws changes. the last successful vote to update spi's bylaws was in 1999 | 14:37 |
| TheJulia | fungi: dude, don't make my nightmares worse :) | 14:38 |
| fungi | this includes trying to achieve quorum for a bylaws change to lower the quorum threshold, of course | 14:38 |
| TheJulia | oh, that is a hard one | 14:38 |
| JayF | Do you need me to join SPI and help? Lol | 14:38 |
| fungi | thankfully in openinfra nee openstack we already did that one | 14:38 |
| JayF | I can increase numerator and denominator by one :p | 14:38 |
| TheJulia | is there good work going on there? Would a second one help?! | 14:39 |
| TheJulia | .... Of course the question is, are members on the list that might not be able to vote | 14:39 |
| fungi | well, we did get stricter (insofar as the bylaws allow) with purging inactive members, so hopefully we'll succeed soon | 14:39 |
| TheJulia | hopefully! | 14:39 |
| fungi | the spi bylaws are amended to hell and back with spaghetti pile of board resolutions as a result | 14:40 |
| fungi | it's not pretty. makes me thankful that openinfra's members do actually vote | 14:41 |
| TheJulia | we do sort of have an forcing function which kind of helps, but yeah | 14:42 |
| gmann | JayF: 1 comment in email draft to include all the inactive projects, rest all lgtm | 19:01 |
| gmann | on bylaws, we have not seen much objection from TC and many TC involved in those changes discussion since starting so it is very very less chance that TC will reject those change and we can end up in back to ground situation | 19:02 |
| JayF | gmann: I can't land the senlin inactive one unless it restacks or unless the ec2-api one becomes mergable | 19:03 |
| gmann | but I agree to vote on those asap at lease members who are not yet on vacation. there is no reason to delay those review | 19:03 |
| gmann | JayF: yeah, maybe let's wait for them to merge so that we have complete list of inactive projects for this cycle and then email? | 19:03 |
| JayF | I think notification ASAP is more important than being comprehensive, and I was going to send one email per project anyway, just in case "how to make [project] more active" threads spin up off of them (I can hope) | 19:04 |
| gmann | at least senli n if ec2api is taking time to decide | 19:04 |
| JayF | yeah like I said, the problem is that will have to restack -- frickler would have to rebase it, and we'd have to revote | 19:05 |
| gmann | JayF: cool, then fine. email per project is god idea. then lgtm | 19:05 |
| JayF | so it's kinda "stuck" | 19:05 |
| gmann | got it. ++ | 19:05 |
| JayF | I'm hoping ec2-api gets adjudicated so we can just be done | 19:05 |
| gmann | yeah | 19:05 |
| gmann | frickler: replied to your comment on diversity requirement addition, please check if that answer your question? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/903236 | 19:18 |
| JayF | notification of inactive status email out to mailing list for solum, freezer | 19:24 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: TC resolution to approve the Dec 5th, 2023 bylaw changes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/903239 | 21:02 |
| gmann | frickler: ^^ updated the link/file upload in resolution. | 21:58 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!