| tkajinam | tc-members: I wonder if anyone from TC is aware of recent situation of requirements team. I've been struggling to get some requirements update like https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/946499 for some time and I'm afraid that the team is quite inactive these days | 07:37 |
|---|---|---|
| frickler | I can confirm that impression. I've been trying to keep at least the bot generated patches moving, but this doesn't look like a sustainable situation to me. I've also planned to veto the DPL refresh, if there was one, but it looks like we're delaying on that, too? | 07:44 |
| mnasiadka | Well, looking at the requirements-core Gerrit group members, I understand release team and infra-core is there rather not for regular reviews - so most probably the only active person there is Sean... doesn't look good. | 07:59 |
| noonedeadpunk | I agree that requirements desreves and requires more love for sure | 11:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | tkajinam: about jaeger and osprofiler - are jager bits are still expected to remain in devstack plugin? As I guess all native jaeger clients are deprecated? | 11:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | meaning this part: https://opendev.org/openstack/osprofiler/src/branch/master/devstack/lib/osprofiler#L61-L75 | 11:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | I guess not' | 11:27 |
| tkajinam | noonedeadpunk, jaeger itself may be still used for otlp plugin. what is being removed is the implementation dependent on python jaeger client. | 11:58 |
| tkajinam | we could appoint some people who made recent contributions as potential new cores but I see most of the recent merged changes were made by means frickler (and then Stephen and me, looking at first 5~6 pages in gerrit) | 12:07 |
| tkajinam | so it might not be a full solution. | 12:08 |
| tkajinam | I can help but I need someone else | 12:08 |
| fungi | yeah, release and infra folks are included so we can step in to unblock testing and release stuff in emergency cases where there's nobody from the requirements team around to do it | 12:32 |
| fungi | i don't mind helping in a pinch, but can't commit to regularly reviewing changes there | 12:33 |
| noonedeadpunk | I can try to help with requirements given a bit of onboarding to policies, if there're some unwritten rules | 12:33 |
| fungi | recording the unwritten rules would be even better ;) | 12:34 |
| noonedeadpunk | Though keep in mind, that I had a slightly different opinion from rest of cores what requirements should be vs what they actually are... | 12:34 |
| fungi | (because i don't know them either, just try to use my best judgement on the rare occasion i review something there) | 12:35 |
| frickler | there's some written rules actually, most important likely is to follow the freeze process https://docs.openstack.org/requirements/latest/#openstack-freeze-process | 12:43 |
| frickler | this also looks pretty verbose https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html . not sure how up-to-date both pages actually are, though | 12:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | frickler: well, I guess I was thinking about contraversal things, like applying bugfixed versions to stable releases for u-c, for instance | 12:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | which historically were blocked | 12:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | but https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html is really a good one | 12:47 |
| frickler | you mean updating non-openstack dependencies? otherwise I don't think there is a controversy | 12:48 |
| frickler | side-note: unless I messed up when checking, neither of the current DPLs would seem to be eligible as PTL candidate in the current election | 12:49 |
| noonedeadpunk | `In stable branches, we usually only update constraints for projects managed within the OpenStack community. Exceptions are made for other projects when there are gate issues. ` -> I was always wondering why not to have exception for other projects in case of found vulnarabilities, for instance | 12:49 |
| frickler | noonedeadpunk: yes, this is a valid discussion. it kind of relates to how/whether u-c is being used in deployment projects or whether they are expected to update dependencies independently | 12:50 |
| frickler | currently IIUC the latter is assumed, but essentially doesn't happen at least for kolla | 12:52 |
| noonedeadpunk | doesn't happen for osa either | 12:52 |
| noonedeadpunk | the basis was always limited capacity of team to make promises of regular updates. | 12:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | which is fair | 12:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | but if smth is already discovered and is quite important to cover... why not to make an exception from time to time... | 12:53 |
| frickler | noonedeadpunk: yes, I'm not opposed to doing that | 12:59 |
| fungi | requirements liaisons should propose themselves and/or frequent reviewers as extra-acs for that team | 13:06 |
| fungi | that will make them eligible, though the deadline may already have passed, i haven't looked | 13:07 |
| fungi | looks like next week is the deadline? | 14:04 |
| fungi | though that's according to the release schedule, not the election schedule | 14:04 |
| frickler | the release team has a reminder that the runtime definitions for the next cycle are due next week, anybody wants to propose a patch? (cf. https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/flamingo-relmgt-tracking#L282) | 14:19 |
| frickler | likely we'll need to discuss whether to add trixie and py3.13 right away | 14:19 |
| fungi | (reminder: tomorrow is the scheduled release day for debian 13/trixie) | 14:20 |
| frickler | fungi: did you see any feedback on whether things are going as planned? | 14:24 |
| fungi | as planned for...? | 14:25 |
| frickler | for the trixie release | 14:26 |
| fungi | typically no news is good news. they don't schedule the release until their criteria are met, so it's "just" a matter of lining up the iso images and whatnot. when there's something broken that impacts the release team's work they usually say so | 14:30 |
| fungi | there's been nothing new in the debian-devel mailing list or on #debian-devel in oftc that i've seen, and the debian-release coordination mailing list is always just a flood of unblock requests anyway, no real discussion happening there | 14:31 |
| fungi | sometimes the release team will do a release party in irc on release day while the final switches are being flipped, though i haven't seen mention of one this time | 14:32 |
| fungi | though some of the regional release parties happen on various irc channels and conference lines: https://wiki.debian.org/ReleasePartyTrixie | 14:34 |
| fungi | https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2025/07/msg00003.html was the last announcement afaik | 14:35 |
| fungi | if there's no release announcement tomorrow, i'll be surprised | 14:36 |
| frickler | ok, that sounds good, thx | 14:40 |
| fungi | while debian doesn't have strict time-based releases, they do schedule them in order to give people a chance to coordinate related activities, the final scheduling is just usually not done more than a month ahead | 14:46 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset oslo project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956912 | 14:49 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset watcher project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956913 | 14:50 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset requirements project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956915 | 14:50 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset Release Management project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956916 | 14:51 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset ironic project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956917 | 14:51 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset freezer project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956918 | 14:52 |
| fungi | just to confirm, opt-in requires each listed dpl to -1 the change, right? or did the process change? | 14:56 |
| gouthamr | yes | 14:56 |
| gouthamr | i should have called that out in the commit message | 14:56 |
| fungi | perfect, thanks | 14:56 |
| gouthamr | i'll add a comment now for visibility, thanks for checking | 14:56 |
| fungi | er, i should say each listed liaison | 14:57 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset freezer project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956921 | 15:00 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset ironic project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956922 | 15:01 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset oslo project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956923 | 15:01 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset Release Management project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956924 | 15:01 |
| gouthamr | UGGGH | 15:01 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset requirements project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956925 | 15:01 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset watcher project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956926 | 15:01 |
| gouthamr | duplicates :| | 15:01 |
| fungi | accidentally removed/reset the change-id? | 15:02 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset oslo project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956912 | 15:02 |
| gouthamr | yeah :( | 15:02 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset watcher project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956913 | 15:03 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset Release Management project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956916 | 15:04 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset requirements project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956915 | 15:06 |
| opendevreview | Goutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Reset freezer project leadership from DPL back to PTL https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956918 | 15:06 |
| * gouthamr should start the day with coffee | 15:07 | |
| gouthamr | apologies for the noise | 15:07 |
| gouthamr | i must admit, i meant to do this before our weekly meeting this week.. please add your +/-1s on the open changes.. ty! | 15:08 |
| gmaan | gouthamr: thanks for proposing those | 15:32 |
| gmaan | I sent it on ML also | 15:32 |
| gmaan | I reminded myself to do these 2 weeks before and then got distracted with other things | 15:33 |
| gouthamr | nice ty gmaan | 15:46 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-manuals master: Glossary - remove core service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/948639 | 16:22 |
| gouthamr | frickler: noonedeadpunk: i can haz a review on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/956024 ? | 18:27 |
| noonedeadpunk | sure | 18:28 |
| gouthamr | Ty! | 18:29 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/governance master: wip https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/941893 | 20:07 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/governance master: wip https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/941893 | 20:07 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/governance master: Freezer - remove information about Disaster Recovery from description https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/941893 | 20:10 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/governance master: Freezer - remove information about Disaster Recovery https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/941893 | 20:11 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!