| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 00:04 | |
| *** ralonsoh_ is now known as ralonsoh | 05:48 | |
| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 08:03 | |
| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 11:08 | |
| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 11:25 | |
| gouthamr | tc-members: a gentle reminder that we are meeting here in ~43 minutes | 17:17 |
|---|---|---|
| gouthamr | #startmeeting tc | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Sep 10 18:00:10 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | Welcome to the weekly meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee. A reminder that this meeting is held under the OpenInfra Code of Conduct available at https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct. | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 18:00 |
| gouthamr | #topic Roll Call | 18:00 |
| gtema | o/ | 18:00 |
| gmann | o/ | 18:00 |
| dansmith | o/ | 18:00 |
| frickler | \o | 18:01 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:01 |
| cardoe | o/ | 18:01 |
| JayF | o/ | 18:01 |
| gouthamr | courtesy ping spotz[m] noonedeadpunk | 18:02 |
| spotz[m] | Here! | 18:02 |
| * gouthamr :D matrix | 18:02 | |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 18:03 |
| gouthamr | hello everyone! let's get started | 18:03 |
| gouthamr | #topic AIs from last week | 18:03 |
| gouthamr | we took a note to start the PTG etherpad; i'll bring that up in a sec | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | i voluntold spotz[m] to capture feedback from the Suwon summit; we'll check on that in a bit as well :) | 18:04 |
| gouthamr | gmann: target merging the requirement bump for oslo.policy 4.4.0 by the Feature Freeze deadline | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | ^ this happened when we were in the meeting iirc | 18:05 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/925464 (update constraint for oslo.policy to new release 4.4.0) | 18:05 |
| gouthamr | i see that you're helping some folks deal with the fall out of this on the ML; thanks gmann | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | was there any other developments to share wrt this item? | 18:06 |
| gmann | nothing else | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | ack ty | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | slaweq: revive the "leaderless" projects etherpad to manage the situation for projects without maintainers (mistral, swift, watcher, kuryr) | 18:06 |
| gouthamr | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2025.1-leaderless (Leaderless projects for 2025.1) | 18:07 |
| slaweq | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2025.1-leaderless | 18:07 |
| slaweq | this is etherpaad I did | 18:07 |
| gouthamr | ^ slaweq populated this and shared this after our meeting last week | 18:07 |
| * gouthamr adds it to the tracker.. | 18:07 | |
| gouthamr | ty slaweq | 18:07 |
| slaweq | thx | 18:08 |
| gouthamr | think that was all the AIs I was tracking; were there any other action items you folks were pursuing? | 18:08 |
| gouthamr | taking silence to mean we've got everything.. let's move on to the next topic | 18:09 |
| gouthamr | #topic 2025.1 PTG | 18:10 |
| gouthamr | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/oct2024-ptg-os-tc (TC Oct 2024 PTG Etherpad) | 18:10 |
| gouthamr | ^ here's a scratch space for us to gather topics and dump initial ideas that we'd like to bring to the discussion at the TC's PTG | 18:10 |
| gouthamr | please bookmark this etherpad; so you can fill it up with your thoughts over the next few weeks | 18:11 |
| gouthamr | any thoughts/concerns regarding the PTG? | 18:13 |
| spotz[m] | Only that a lot of teams hadn't signed up last I checked, I know some teams do their own stuff throughout the cycle though | 18:13 |
| gouthamr | ah true | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/XHCL5D7ODOP3GLIIXZOCTZF45KLXZD5G/ (PTG October 2024 Team Signup) | 18:14 |
| gouthamr | diablo_rojo didn't share a list past the sign up deadline; spotz[m] do you know if this list increased? | 18:15 |
| spotz[m] | Not that I know of but she was traveling for the last 2 weeks I think | 18:15 |
| gouthamr | ++ | 18:15 |
| gouthamr | yes; we might get an update alongside a request to plan slots on the schedule | 18:16 |
| gouthamr | we've ~46 project teams; and several SIGs and WGs as well - i do expect to see that list to have increased a bit more after the reminder | 18:17 |
| gouthamr | anything else about $topic? | 18:19 |
| gouthamr | lets move on.. | 18:20 |
| gouthamr | #topic Release team project health check | 18:20 |
| gouthamr | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/dalmatian-relmgt-tracking#444 (Release team project tracking) | 18:20 |
| gouthamr | frickler shared this on the channel in the past week | 18:20 |
| frickler | I think the link misses an "L", also stuff moved again | 18:21 |
| gouthamr | AH | 18:21 |
| frickler | this ia about the "Project teams health scorecard" | 18:21 |
| gouthamr | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/dalmatian-relmgt-tracking#L452 | 18:21 |
| frickler | so missing a release review can happen, but if it repeats, this is reason for concern IMO | 18:22 |
| frickler | but I'm also not sure what we can actually do about it, ideas welcome | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | goes along with elodilles's post on the ML as well: | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/QBNRSPUROJYTF2E3TYZLRPL6WDZTAFXJ/ ([horizon][ironic][swift][qa] cycle-with-intermediary deliverables without recent release) | 18:23 |
| gouthamr | regarding bot patches: sometimes CI's failing and no-one's looking at these and they'll eventually get buried | 18:25 |
| gouthamr | but, many bot patches are ignored even when CI votes positively | 18:25 |
| gouthamr | just an example: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/venus/+/913417 | 18:26 |
| gouthamr | we can remind PTL/DPL Liaisons that they must press the buttons and merge these.. very little likelihood that these patches need a ton of attention from someone working on the projects | 18:27 |
| gouthamr | if the bot/tooling is broken the release team would find out very soon | 18:27 |
| frickler | I'd really like to hear other TC member's opinions on this | 18:29 |
| * slaweq needs to finish earlier today, sorry for that | 18:29 | |
| * slaweq will catch up with rest of the discussion from the logs | 18:29 | |
| spotz[m] | test | 18:30 |
| gouthamr | maybe we could use a timely reminder to the release liaisons of each project regarding this sorta thing... it shouldn't be something that deems a project "unhealthy" (although unfortunately is) | 18:30 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m]: passed | 18:30 |
| gouthamr | slaweq: ack | 18:30 |
| frickler | most affected projects don't have release liaisons other than the PTL | 18:31 |
| spotz[m] | Had a message my connectivity had been dropped:( | 18:31 |
| frickler | maybe s/most/many/, that's just off the top of my head | 18:32 |
| gmann | I think we discussed it many time in past about making PTL/release liaison +1 a mandatory requirement to release their deliverables | 18:33 |
| gmann | and release team were not comfortable on that as it can leave many project unreleased or delay the final release | 18:33 |
| frickler | yes, we even have the ptl-approved flag for release changes | 18:33 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:33 |
| frickler | but we often need to override it | 18:33 |
| gmann | but unless that is mandatory I am not finding that flag as very useful as release happen without their +1 also | 18:34 |
| frickler | so you would not release some things, then? | 18:34 |
| gmann | making it mandatory has its own pros and cons | 18:35 |
| gmann | I am not saying do not release, if we are releasing then it is ok if PTL/liaisons are not ack that | 18:36 |
| JayF | Like, what's the value? If we're trying to encourage behavior, I don't think being punative does the trick. | 18:36 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:36 |
| JayF | I think about ways we can put the next step in front of people's faces, in the same way was done for elections -- emailing all contributors that PTL is needed. | 18:36 |
| gmann | as frickler you mentioned earlier, I am also not sure what TC can do actionable on this? | 18:37 |
| gmann | and leave it to release team | 18:37 |
| JayF | Many of our contributors, especially for smaller projects, are likely just not embedded enough in openstack-life to know they missed a thing. | 18:37 |
| frickler | which is a problem in itself I think | 18:37 |
| JayF | I don't disagree, but there's no pool of extra-engaged contributors to pull from -- so the options are try to make it easier for someone to engage part time or to lower scope to that which we have enough engaged contributors on. | 18:38 |
| gmann | if they are volunteer to maintain projects then release is the very first things they should care about | 18:38 |
| JayF | So there are tradeoffs; but I don't think moving policies around about +1ing something on time is going to make a difference to folks who likely are missing they need to do the thing in general. | 18:39 |
| gmann | I do not think we can lower scope than 'do not care about release' | 18:39 |
| gmann | * lower scope *to* | 18:39 |
| JayF | gmann: honestly, that's not been true at almost any place I've worked. Many people consume from git, and treat releases as neccessary chores rather than the goal. | 18:39 |
| spotz[m] | I know this election cycle as far as PTLs is over. But would it help to have an onboarding/responsibility session at the PTG and/or before the next election? | 18:39 |
| JayF | gmann: so I agree in theory, but in a world where people have limited time & attention; I can see why that gets missed | 18:40 |
| gmann | yeah but not all right and as maintainer of project I need to take care of all kind of users, git consumer, released consumer etc | 18:40 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m]: I think so; we can definitely bring this up in the TC+project leadership discussion that we'll likely plan | 18:40 |
| gmann | I think everyone knows about this responsibility and we have discussed it many times in TC PTGs also. | 18:41 |
| gmann | I think unless we are making it mandatory there is less hope in improvement which is fine for me | 18:41 |
| gmann | I mean how things are going is ok unless release team raise some alert for TC to take action on | 18:42 |
| gouthamr | as a release liaison for a project for several years; and a downstream consumer as well - I agree a bit with JayF .. In most cases, i'm okay with the release team releasing any merged code.. my involvement has been to point over semver changes or hold off something to get a few more patches in | 18:42 |
| gouthamr | so its my -1 that matters more than my +1 really | 18:42 |
| fungi | you'd be surprised how many (relatively popular) open source projects don't even bother to make releases at all | 18:42 |
| JayF | gmann: my point is more that if someone's pager is going off, and they're fixing security bugs, and generally busy, doing the "paperwork" for a release might be something that slips their mind. I know when I was PTL that happened a time or two. | 18:43 |
| JayF | fungi++ | 18:43 |
| JayF | That's why I'm mainly saying I think thinking in a direction of "how can we enable people to see the signal of 'release maintenance' in their noisy work life otherwise" | 18:44 |
| JayF | the PTL-needed emails to contributors for the election is an A+++ example of us doing this to positive effect | 18:44 |
| gmann | sure, then we should continue it as it is and let release team handle it as their best effort. | 18:44 |
| gouthamr | and probably publish their thoughts to the ML about the pain points | 18:45 |
| frickler | well, with my release team hat on, I would like to have an option to avoid having to chase +1's from PTLs | 18:45 |
| frickler | but maybe we need to discuss this within the release team first | 18:46 |
| gmann | I think release team send a good reminder on the release deadlines, it helps. I get reminder about Tempest release evrytime I see release email | 18:46 |
| gmann | frickler: ++ | 18:46 |
| JayF | frickler: fwiw, I'd generally be ok with a "you have a set time to veto the patch with a -1" policy; but I also think we should pair it with ways to help engage folks too | 18:46 |
| JayF | frickler: but I think we shouldpair everything with that so :) | 18:46 |
| gouthamr | frickler: thanks for bringing this up; i'd like to wrap up the discussion with what you said: "discuss this within the release team first" | 18:47 |
| frickler | +1 | 18:48 |
| gouthamr | okay; lets move to regular programming | 18:48 |
| gouthamr | #topic A check on gate health | 18:48 |
| gouthamr | any gate issues to discuss this week? | 18:48 |
| frickler | we have the new raxflex cloud in operation now | 18:49 |
| fungi | yeah, it's not a lot of quota yet (32 nodes), but keep an eye out for any job failures that might be specific to that location | 18:49 |
| frickler | and there seems to have one issue because this is the first cloud in some time that uses internal network + FIPs instead of provider network again | 18:49 |
| fungi | the swift team discovered for example that they were baking in assumptions that the public ipv4 address was bound locally on interfaces | 18:50 |
| clarkb | ya swift hit that but they were also able to fix it quickly | 18:50 |
| gouthamr | ^ crap i know devstack-plugin-ceph may have a problem with that | 18:50 |
| gouthamr | etcd3 also needs a local bind address i think | 18:50 |
| clarkb | considering that everything hasn't caught fire they may be using 0.0.0.0 | 18:51 |
| clarkb | in swift's case they were trying to bind only to the fip specifically which isn't configured on the host and that failed | 18:51 |
| clarkb | but switching to 0.0.0.0 would fix it | 18:51 |
| gouthamr | noted clarkb.. i'll keep a look out if multinode ceph jobs run okay here; binding MONs, Ingress/NFS to 0.0.0.0 or even a local IP would work fine for single node | 18:53 |
| gouthamr | but new capacity is good news | 18:53 |
| gouthamr | thank you for sharing the news, frickler | 18:53 |
| * gouthamr "sjc3" - US west coast too, nice | 18:54 | |
| JayF | Whoa, that *is* a new Rackspace site! | 18:54 |
| gouthamr | anything else about the gate? | 18:55 |
| * gouthamr would like to skip over the TC tracker and discuss any open items in Open Discussion | 18:56 | |
| gouthamr | #topic Open Discussion | 18:56 |
| gouthamr | spotz[m]: i meant to chat prior to the meeting to seek a Suwon recap; but would you be able to do that for us next week? | 18:56 |
| JayF | Might be worth noting that | 18:57 |
| JayF | #link https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/events/open-infra-days | 18:57 |
| spotz[m] | Sure, and it was videoed! It was really just a nice chat with a potential new contributor | 18:57 |
| JayF | OpenInfra Days in NA next year is co-located with SCALE, in March 2025 | 18:57 |
| spotz[m] | About 7 folks in the room | 18:57 |
| gouthamr | very nice | 18:58 |
| spotz[m] | Yeah and SCALE's CFP is open and our talks will go through there but we haven't started work on it yet, trying to get through Indy first:) | 18:58 |
| clarkb | ends November 1 right? | 18:58 |
| gouthamr | yes | 18:59 |
| gouthamr | #link https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/cfp (CFP for SCaLE '25) | 18:59 |
| gouthamr | alright folks; we're at the top of the hour.. | 18:59 |
| gouthamr | thank you all for attending | 19:00 |
| JayF | I'll note Julia and I spoke at SCALE20x, it's a nice conference and I suggest proposing talks -- OpenInfra-y or not. | 19:00 |
| gouthamr | will see you here again, next week | 19:00 |
| JayF | o/ ty gouthamr | 19:00 |
| gouthamr | JayF++ | 19:00 |
| gouthamr | #endmeeting | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Sep 10 19:00:27 2024 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2024/tc.2024-09-10-18.00.html | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2024/tc.2024-09-10-18.00.txt | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2024/tc.2024-09-10-18.00.log.html | 19:00 |
| gtema | ty | 19:00 |
| spotz[m] | yep clarkb | 19:03 |
| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 19:58 | |
| gouthamr | timburke: o/ checking if you/the swift team had any further thoughts on swift's leadership model. If you're looking to continue as PTL, could you propose a patch to governance like this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/927962 to add 2025.1 to the list? https://opendev.org/openstack/governance/src/commit/8f68b36a89413843f22cae065b6e93b88f4c307f/reference/projects.yaml#L2420-L2423 | 21:57 |
| *** bauzas_ is now known as bauzas | 23:08 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!