| noonedeadpunk | tc-members: kind reminder that a weekly meeting will happen in the channel in 57 minutes | 17:02 |
|---|---|---|
| noonedeadpunk | #startmeeting tc | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Dec 17 18:00:10 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. 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 |
| noonedeadpunk | 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 |
| noonedeadpunk | Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | #chair gmann | 18:00 |
| opendevmeet | Current chairs: gmann noonedeadpunk | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Roll Call | 18:00 |
| gmann | o/ | 18:00 |
| slaweq | o/ | 18:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 18:00 |
| frickler | \o | 18:00 |
| gtema | o/ | 18:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | courtesy ping cardoe | 18:02 |
| cardoe | I’m on. | 18:03 |
| noonedeadpunk | awesome, then we can start. Notified absence g o u t h a m r, s p o t z and b a u z a s | 18:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Last Week's AIs | 18:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | I've looked through last meting results and I don't see any AIs. Am I missing some? | 18:05 |
| gmann | I think nothing other than we have separate topics for a few of the followup | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Announcement | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | There will be no weekly meeting on 24th Dec 2024 and 31st Dec 2024. Our next meeting after this one will be on 7th Jan 2025 | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/YQHW23JKGQVGUBWPOIU6QTRKIP44AI7L/ | 18:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Update on unmaintained branches | 18:07 |
| noonedeadpunk | frickler, any updates from your side? | 18:07 |
| frickler | most things are in the review | 18:07 |
| frickler | elod has announced that his company want to keep some repos alive, we'll see how that goes | 18:08 |
| frickler | no other people interested in opting in to anything afaict | 18:08 |
| frickler | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/937515 | 18:09 |
| frickler | one question maybe: should I keep the patch in WIP state, which might hide it for some reviewers/make it less visible? | 18:09 |
| JayF | Adding to that: the Ironic community determined at PTG none of our people who work on UM branches want to keep Victoria. | 18:09 |
| frickler | or unwip and mark W-1 instead? | 18:10 |
| gmann | ++ I think removing the WIP is good idea | 18:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | though it depends on how to address elod's comment | 18:10 |
| gmann | I am not sure if elodilles_pto interested to keep all projects repo or a few of them. | 18:10 |
| gmann | if not all then this change at least can EOL the not required one | 18:11 |
| frickler | iiuc just some yet to be specified subset | 18:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | so kind of WIP makes sense then, as potentially no need to ask people for reviews anyway | 18:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | (at this point) | 18:11 |
| frickler | well not review of the content itself, but review as mentioned in the commit message by stating intent to opt-in if there is one | 18:12 |
| gmann | having +1 also a good input there to know people have reviewed it and know V is going to EOL | 18:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | as I spotted that people frwquently just miss to re-vote on patches if they updated, once they've voted on them | 18:12 |
| cardoe | How can we make it less painful going forward? | 18:12 |
| frickler | well creating this patch was easier than I expected | 18:13 |
| frickler | the painful part will be integrating the updates that elod is to make and checking the CI status | 18:13 |
| gmann | I think all -1 are something we need to address/discuss them. I do not think they will get ignore | 18:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | it somehow feels that EM was easier to manage/maintain overall. at lest that is my personal impression so far. | 18:14 |
| noonedeadpunk | and eom requires more time from more parties... | 18:14 |
| gmann | yeah, once we know the list of repo we need to keep. From TC side, a few volunteer can verify that, discuss/ack in TC meeting and give TC input there | 18:14 |
| frickler | I'd also question the usefulness of the whole concept if only a single company is interested in it | 18:15 |
| gmann | in last meeting gouthamr and I volunteer to do ^^ part. keep monitoring the -1 on EOL changes and verify the requitement to keep those as unmaintained | 18:15 |
| gmann | frickler: yeah that is good point but it is hard to deny anyone even single company/maintainer to maintain anything. even it is single company, it is still worth to keep them as unmaintained | 18:16 |
| JayF | frickler: One company willing to do the work doesn't necessarily imply there's only one company reaping the benefits. While I don't like a single point of failure, I think it's still meaningful to keep that stuff available if we believe the folks involved will keep their end of the bargain (a pretty good bet w/Elod) | 18:16 |
| gmann | I think it is same as single company maintaining our many of projects alone | 18:16 |
| JayF | And given we don't even make maintenance promises for UM branches; the SPOF issue is even less of a concern. | 18:17 |
| gmann | starting the V is good idea as in this change we can filter out the repo continuing in unmaintained from the other branch EOL | 18:18 |
| frickler | anyway I think we're fine with this for now and we'll see how things turn out next month | 18:18 |
| gmann | ++ | 18:18 |
| noonedeadpunk | and I assume we move on with W and X once V is done, correct? | 18:19 |
| frickler | that's the idea, yes | 18:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, thanks for the update. moving on then | 18:19 |
| gmann | yeah I think till zed | 18:19 |
| frickler | W, X, Y and Z | 18:19 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | well. for Y I have a specific concern, but let's probably come to it first... | 18:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Update on election and changes | 18:20 |
| slaweq | regarding election, there is patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/937408 with proposed dates for the upcoming election | 18:20 |
| slaweq | please take a look if you want | 18:21 |
| noonedeadpunk | was looking for the link, thanks :) | 18:21 |
| frickler | would be good to actually merge it this week IMHO | 18:21 |
| slaweq | there is also patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/934908 from gouthamr which needs reviews | 18:21 |
| gmann | slaweq: any date you are planning to merge it? I see many TC members reviewed it | 18:22 |
| slaweq | gmann I didn't plan but I will sync with ianychoi about it tomorrow morning | 18:22 |
| gmann | thanks | 18:22 |
| slaweq | and we should merge it this week as frickler said | 18:22 |
| gmann | yeah, ++ | 18:22 |
| noonedeadpunk | it has majority of TC votes as well | 18:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | which is probably fine already | 18:24 |
| slaweq | yeah, I just noticed after I gave link here :) | 18:24 |
| slaweq | thx | 18:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | great, anything else on the topic? | 18:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic Status on migrate CI to Ubuntu Noble | 18:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | I see a big progress was made in this regard | 18:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/migrate-to-noble | 18:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | So far the most blocking thing is PBR from what I see | 18:26 |
| gmann | yeah, overall good progress by many projects except the 3 open bugs | 18:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | And then couple of issues with tacker | 18:26 |
| clarkb | is pbr blocking anything? | 18:26 |
| gmann | and the doc job (PBR one) | 18:27 |
| gmann | it is blocking doc job migration to noble | 18:27 |
| gmann | openstackdoctheme fail due to pbr bug | 18:27 |
| gmann | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/pbr/+bug/2088360 | 18:28 |
| clarkb | as mentioned previously does installing setuptools not fix that? | 18:28 |
| clarkb | I feel like we keep going in circles on this topic | 18:28 |
| clarkb | my understanding is that pbr works fine you just need to preinstall setuptools on python3.12 or newer | 18:29 |
| clarkb | has anyone refuted that and found that this isn't the case? | 18:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | I've just marked one of tacker issue as resolved | 18:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/tacker/+bug/2090859 | 18:29 |
| gmann | noonedeadpunk: that is not yet resolved, bug is in devstack-plugin-container whihch hongbin is looking into | 18:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | I indeed haven;t seen real issues with pbr, but indfeed setuptools is required | 18:30 |
| gmann | for tacker k8s job which were failing due to this, I kept nodeset as jammy until this is fixed | 18:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | ooops | 18:30 |
| clarkb | gmann: also I'm -2 on your suggestion to remove python2.7 from pbr | 18:30 |
| clarkb | you will instantly break any software running python2.7 that uses pbr | 18:30 |
| gmann | clarkb: I think failure was about distutils usage as explicit ? | 18:31 |
| clarkb | gmann: yes distutils usage is explicit but setuptools includes distutils | 18:31 |
| noonedeadpunk | And I can't change the status back /o\ | 18:31 |
| clarkb | if you install setuptools you should be able to import distutils | 18:31 |
| noonedeadpunk | I will reach folks about that after the meeting | 18:31 |
| gmann | let me try that | 18:32 |
| clarkb | to be clear my understanding of pby with python3.12 is that it works fine if you install setuptools | 18:32 |
| gmann | clarkb: one question, is it ok to do that in pbr instead of all other places, | 18:32 |
| gmann | i mean this one change only | 18:32 |
| clarkb | the only reason it does not work is that python3.12 does not include setuptools like every other python before it did | 18:32 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/pbr/+/924216/8/doc/requirements.txt | 18:32 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'm pretty sure clarkb is right here as can recall fixing smth that way already | 18:33 |
| clarkb | gmann: you cannot add setuptools as a dependency of PBR itself, but I think adding setuptools to the doc requirements should be fine | 18:33 |
| clarkb | the reason for not adding it as a general dependency is that PBR runs as a setuptools script so setuptools must already be installed for it to work | 18:34 |
| clarkb | the modern way to do this is via pyproject.toml which is why they removed setuptools from stdlib (or one reason they did it) | 18:34 |
| gmann | k, let me try to install it on openstckdoctheme and if nowhere else we need than we do not need in pbr itself. if needed we can do in doc/requirements only | 18:34 |
| gmann | yeah | 18:34 |
| clarkb | anyway I just want to be 100% clear that I maintain projects with python3.12 support that use pbr and it works as far as I know if you install setuptools. | 18:35 |
| clarkb | I don't liek the idea that PBR is blocking anything when I've now asked like 3 times in three different meetings for people to just install setuptools and report back if it works | 18:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ | 18:35 |
| gmann | k | 18:35 |
| gmann | other than pbr, I still did not see response from skyline team | 18:36 |
| cardoe | It works if you install setuptools. I agree. | 18:36 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, hopefully we've solved that at last now :) | 18:36 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/935604/2 | 18:36 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/935600/5 | 18:36 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/935601 | 18:36 |
| gmann | so not sure if this inactiveness can cause any issue in release and we need to react in advance? | 18:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | well, the last one is not in it's best shape from what I see | 18:37 |
| gmann | but this is the only project I find with no response on this migration | 18:37 |
| gmann | yeah, console is good but there is no review to merge it | 18:37 |
| gmann | and apiserver failing gate and no response from team | 18:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | frickler: do you have poc within skyline team? | 18:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | (point of contact) | 18:38 |
| gmann | as long as team ack and response even fix is taking time, i am ok but no response does not seems good | 18:38 |
| frickler | not directly, can ask in the channel | 18:38 |
| noonedeadpunk | aha, gotcha. used to be tricky to get any attention there iirc... | 18:39 |
| gmann | I can send another ML reminder to them as separate ping also | 18:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | yes, would be much appreciated! | 18:39 |
| cardoe | As far as openstackdocstheme and pbr, I've just been advocating us (OpenStack) taking a "less is more" approach. A lot of things were created when there were a lot more folks. e.g. separate docs team. | 18:40 |
| cardoe | In a lot of cases, upstream projects have caught up to what OpenStack has done but implemented slightly differently. So where it makes sense and we can lessen maintenance burden it would be a + | 18:41 |
| clarkb | yup we could use built in sphinx templates and possibly switch out pbr with other tools if we give up on some features (or find a way to integrate those features into other installation tools) | 18:42 |
| clarkb | on the theming side of things in particular that woudl get better mobile device support instantly I think | 18:42 |
| JayF | ++ | 18:43 |
| cardoe | Yeah that'd be a ++ from me too. | 18:43 |
| JayF | I think part of the issue is it's chicken:egg -- doing something like retiring that theme pays off in the long term, but is likely more work in the short term. | 18:44 |
| cardoe | pbr wise I think it brings a lot of value to the build side. But from the runtime side, it's mostly a wrapper of functionality that's finally upstream (or at least in another package) | 18:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | and then also fully giving up on docs branding... not super cool either | 18:45 |
| JayF | noonedeadpunk: the "branding" is already highly inconsistent when you navigate to our docs from the front pages | 18:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | I totally see how right now some stuck-with-other-platfrom CTO would look on native sphinx theme when considering migration out | 18:46 |
| cardoe | noonedeadpunk: if I had the ability to easily switch between the versions, good mobile support and functional indexes then I'd take docs that were titled "hello world" | 18:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | Is it? As I kind of doesn;t see that a lot, except when talking about not-so-well maintained projects lagging behind with docstheme versions | 18:47 |
| cardoe | https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/admin/config-routed-networks e.g. where am I wrt to the docs tree there? | 18:47 |
| clarkb | many of the themes do allow for adding logos at least | 18:47 |
| clarkb | zuul is using a stnadard theme but sticks its logo on the pages | 18:47 |
| JayF | noonedeadpunk: I experience this with Ironic; if we're using the wrong version of the docs theme let me know and I'll fix it *today* | 18:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, probably I'm just not in the full context of the issue... | 18:48 |
| noonedeadpunk | and we also need to move on, but I'd suggest adding this topic for the next meeting to have a focus on it | 18:49 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic A check on gate health | 18:49 |
| gtema | noonedeadpunk - it doesn't make sense to re-add a topic that we discussed multiple times and people simply being afraid to touch anything (do not touch a running system, while we, well, have no maintainers left) | 18:50 |
| gmann | one issue i know was introduced by Tempest last week which failed cinder testing, is fixed now. | 18:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd say that in everything we do, there should be a volunteer to step in and build some POC docs as a showcase | 18:51 |
| gmann | other than that I have not observed any new failure in gate | 18:51 |
| noonedeadpunk | which may make ppl be less afraid of the change | 18:51 |
| gmann | noonedeadpunk: ++ | 18:52 |
| gtema | I volunteered and proposed update to openstackdocstheme. What has happened? nothing | 18:52 |
| gtema | and we spend quite lot time "discussing" | 18:52 |
| noonedeadpunk | gmann: ok, nice that it's fixed in a timely manner | 18:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | I don't have anything to report on gate health so far. | 18:53 |
| gmann | yeah, we added some cinder tests in tempest gate to avoid these in future | 18:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | Horizon plugins has been fixed wrt to noble support | 18:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | (not sure if I've already said that last week or not) | 18:54 |
| gmann | yes, that is all good now. manila horizon plugin also passing | 18:54 |
| cardoe | gtema: I believe I +1'd it. | 18:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic PTG AIs and the TC Tracker | 18:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-2025.1-tracker | 18:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | there're quite some action points on gouthamr there | 18:57 |
| noonedeadpunk | also eventlet goal was reworked and waiting for reviews | 18:58 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/931254 | 18:58 |
| noonedeadpunk | but at first look feels like huge amount of context was removed from it | 19:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | and we are out of time now :( | 19:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | #endmeeting | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Dec 17 19:00:34 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.2024-12-17-18.00.html | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2024/tc.2024-12-17-18.00.txt | 19:00 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2024/tc.2024-12-17-18.00.log.html | 19:00 |
| JayF | noonedeadpunk: much of that context was put into the wiki under eventlet | 19:00 |
| JayF | noonedeadpunk: also, re: docs, I think we're both half-right? | 19:00 |
| JayF | https://docs.openstack.org/2024.2/ if you navigate here, and click on any of the links, it looks like a different webpage | 19:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | gtema: issue with docs theme was basically that there;'s nobody to vote on the change? | 19:01 |
| gmann | thanks noonedeadpunk for Charing. | 19:01 |
| clarkb | gtema: SvenKieske gmann I've responded on 924216 with explanations and suggestions for making progress | 19:01 |
| JayF | however I noticed this time that you are right; the headers match on some built docs, and not on others | 19:01 |
| JayF | so I think it's like, 50% consistent if you're up to date :) | 19:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | I randmoly clicked on https://docs.openstack.org/blazar/2024.2/admin/ and it looks same to me. but I'm bad at visual things and art | 19:01 |
| gmann | clarkb: perfect. testing the setuptool things in openstackdocthemes, it should be enough, worked locally https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstackdocstheme/+/935460 | 19:01 |
| gtema | noonedeadpunk - yes | 19:01 |
| slaweq | o/ | 19:01 |
| clarkb | I think splitting that change up into separate components will really help and reduce the confusion. Basically I suggest that we start with a chnge to make pbr testing run on noble, then a change to deal with distutils being deprecated, then followup with trying to find a reliable way to install pbr with setuptools when setuptools isn't present by default | 19:02 |
| gmann | I think that should be enough for noble/py3.12 migration but I will see if it is needed many places or so | 19:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | and then discsussion we had was that it's not up to tc to head the project | 19:02 |
| clarkb | I also tried to explain the python2.7 situation | 19:02 |
| gtema | clarkb: I am unfortunately not sure Sven is going to continue working on the change (he is the initial author) | 19:03 |
| noonedeadpunk | but I think what TC can do is to assign new volunteers through resolution or establish some ptl/dpl for docs? | 19:03 |
| JayF | We have a volunteer to work as PTL for docs!? hooray | 19:05 |
| gtema | noonedeadpunk - we spent 30-40 minutes few weeks back on that topic and people were explicitly against of adding TC to the maintainers list at least to unblock the unmaintained project | 19:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | JayF: but if it's just old doc/requirements.txt pinning - it should be doable to fix that | 19:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah, but it doesn't mean TC can't appoint new core reviewrs to it if there're volunteers | 19:05 |
| gmann | yeah, it does not need to be TC to maintain the things. any volunteer can be added in existing team setup | 19:07 |
| noonedeadpunk | and given that TC is changing and ppl in TC have a very different technical background - I see as well how it might be not the best idea to have that on TC themselcves | 19:07 |
| gmann | problem here is not team setup, problem is lack of volunteer to maintain it | 19:07 |
| JayF | gmann++++ | 19:07 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah. But then kind of same problem would be with any different theme or migration to it | 19:07 |
| gtema | from which pool of volunteers? I went investing my private time on helping out project without maintainers and there is nobody able to +2 it | 19:07 |
| gtema | and neither openstackdocstheme nor pbr are from my primary area. | 19:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | there is no issue with pbr so far? | 19:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | except requirement of having setuptools? | 19:09 |
| gtema | I am not going to repeat the same stuff over and over again | 19:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd raise my hand for stepping in for docs theme, though my frontend skills are almost absent. so stepping in for judging on theme would be crazy at this point | 19:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | Sounds like out of everyone, only horizon team does deal with that kind of frontend things... Not sure if they will to take docstheme though :D But thinking about who is even able to... | 19:16 |
| noonedeadpunk | or indeed, it should be TC, but not as direct maintainer of the project, but somehow have a right to vote due to inactivity or absent volunteers, while project is considred as required | 19:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | but it should be worded better... | 19:18 |
| cardoe | Well would gtema want to step up to maintain the docs theme? Or is this just a one time fix? | 19:26 |
| cardoe | Cause if its a one time fix, let's just +2 it and make a plan to test out a non-custom theme to move to. | 19:26 |
| gmann | I think its going to be more than just one time things, for long term consideration, it make sense to add more active maintainer there. | 19:27 |
| gmann | I am +1 to add gtema as maintainer in doctheme if he is ok | 19:29 |
| cardoe | Me too. +1 | 19:30 |
| gtema | gmann cardoe: I am ok. I can check what we need to do to evtl. deprecate openstackdocstheme overrides in favor of sphinx builtin theme adding branding into it. The only thing what stays for sure is the pdf customization. But starlingx should be also on board with that since they base on openstackdocstheme (in the same repo) | 19:33 |
| cardoe | I just want to unblock you for the work you've done but also not saddle you with extra work forever because you've done a good deed. | 19:34 |
| gmann | indeed | 19:34 |
| gtema | thks | 19:36 |
| gmann | As docstheme is under oslo team, I added this topic in oslo meeting to discuss and take further action. feel free to join the discussion even you are not in oslo team or add your input in etherpad if you are not able to join it https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-oslo-meeting-tracking#L103 | 19:53 |
| gmann | gtema cardoe noonedeadpunk tc-members ^^ | 19:54 |
| clarkb | https://sphinx-themes.org/#themes I'll drop this here | 19:59 |
| clarkb | the number of failed builds in there is interestnig | 19:59 |
| -opendevstatus- NOTICE: Gerrit will be restarted to pick up a small configuration update. You may notice a short Gerrit outage. | 21:02 | |
| -opendevstatus- NOTICE: You may have noticed the Gerrit restart was a bit bumpy. We have identified an issue with Gerrit caches that we'd like to address which we think will make this better. This requires one more restart | 22:14 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!