| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: [www] Setup 2026.1 Gazpacho and add project data to Flamingo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/961925 | 09:03 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: [www] Set 2025.2 Flamingo as released https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/961967 | 09:03 |
| tonyb | Catching up. Befoer I left RH I made the CentOS team ware of that Jira, so they're at least somewhat aware | 09:09 |
| bauzas | catching up too, I'm also convinced there is room for both ala. LTS OS jobs that require stability but also whats-next jobs that preemptively test against newer OS versions | 09:13 |
| bauzas | but agreed on the fact those bleeding-edge jobs have to be curated regularly by the project teams in order to have them helpful | 09:14 |
| bauzas | one example is nova-next | 09:14 |
| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: [www] Setup 2026.1 Gazpacho and add project data to Flamingo https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/961925 | 09:17 |
| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: [www] Set 2025.2 Flamingo as released https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/961967 | 09:17 |
| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/openstack-manuals master: [www] Fix 2025.2 Flamingo's release notes link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-manuals/+/962254 | 09:21 |
| opendevreview | Slawek Kaplonski proposed openstack/election master: Update tc-election-summary.py: reflect 2026.1 results https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/961604 | 10:16 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/election master: Update governance tag 0.19.0 to configuration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/961649 | 10:26 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/election master: Add email template for direct reminder about CIVS https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/958991 | 10:26 |
| TheJulia | fungi: Depending on the variation and model of processor, anything that claims bios boot support can be done in UEFI firmware. Some of the computer vendors have insisted to "keep" bios boot and that was the path they found | 12:55 |
| fungi | makes sense | 12:57 |
| fungi | these are portable devices with an "ami bios" payload that has options to swap between efi and bios boot methods, but indeed they're probably chaining from in-memory uefi to a legacy bios bootloader | 13:02 |
| *** jbernard_ is now known as jbernard | 13:25 | |
| cardoe | frickler: were you asking me to suggest someone for skyline? I spoke with Sowmya and she'd be interested. Her gerrit email is sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com | 14:13 |
| *** vhari_ is now known as vhari | 15:00 | |
| frickler | cardoe: I think that was gouthamr and it might be best to add this to the email thread for now. if there is still no reaction from the current cores after a while, we'd likely need some TC resolution in order to formalize overriding the self-maintainance of the core group? not sure whether there is precedence for that | 15:10 |
| cardoe | I don't even want to override folks. | 15:14 |
| fungi | just convincing them to communicate would be a great start | 15:15 |
| cardoe | Surely we cannot consider it healthy when an OpenStack project's maintainers won't communicate with contributors and won't respond to the fact that their CI has been broken for a while. | 15:15 |
| cardoe | I will say Wu did actually reply Tuesday evening to an email thread that someone on my team sent him in early July. Which he didn't hear back on and so that person wrote a patch and submitted it in mid-August. And Wu gave comments on the patch. I've replied back pointing out some of the other threads and patches as well. | 15:19 |
| gouthamr | the precedence i'm aware of is with freezer and watcher where current teams were completely unresponsive and we stepped in to name new maintainers | 17:41 |
| gouthamr | it's totally within the purview of the OpenStack TC to do that | 17:41 |
| gouthamr | we've tolerated, begrudgingly, that not every project team fits the mold to run regular IRC meetings, engage with the community on IRC/ML/PTGs.. we've allowed a level of autonomy that sometimes backfires; i'm not advocating that we tighten this, but, we'd be responsible to fix situations like this, through possibly unpopular means. | 17:44 |
| gouthamr | in similar vein: freyes_ has responded to our questions regarding Charms: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/962121 - i'd like some more eyes on this change | 17:45 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/election master: Update tc-election-summary.py: reflect 2026.1 results https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/election/+/961604 | 19:50 |
| cardoe | gouthamr: yeah I understand there's certain barriers folks might have to contributing when its primarily done as part of their job so happy to give some runway there. | 23:04 |
| gouthamr | ++ certainly, and i believe it's welcome.. here's a past interaction that suggests it: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/915108/comments/e3985758_9bccff66 | 23:07 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!