Tuesday, 2026-02-03

spotz[m]Traveling back from FOSDEM today will most likely miss again06:55
*** vhari_ is now known as vhari14:47
gouthamrtc-members: a gentle reminder that our weekly meeting will be hosted here in ~57 minutes16:03
gouthamrack sp16:17
gouthamrack spotz[m] 16:17
gouthamr#startmeeting tc 17:00
opendevmeetMeeting started Tue Feb  3 17:00:04 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.17:00
opendevmeetUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:00
opendevmeetThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'17:00
gouthamrWelcome 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.17:00
gouthamrToday's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee17:00
gouthamr#topic Roll Call17:00
gtemao/17:00
aprice[m]o/17:00
mharley[m]o/17:01
cardoeo/17:01
noonedeadpunko/17:01
frickler\o17:01
gouthamrnoted absence: m n a s i a d k a, s p o t z17:02
gouthamroh and to n y b17:02
gouthamrcourtesy-ping: bauzas17:02
gouthamralright, we might see folks trickle in... lets get started 17:04
gouthamr#topic Last Week's AIs17:04
gouthamrwe noted that we'd like tc-members to help vet nomination patches17:05
gouthamrnominations open tomorrow (Feb 4th 2026) at 23:45 UTC 17:05
gouthamrso please add "openstack/election" to your gerrit notification list17:06
gouthamrwe'll need a volunteer to chair the TC meeting on 17th Feb at 0800 UTC 17:06
gouthamri'll check back about this next week, unless one of you knows that you'll be able to do it already :) 17:06
gouthamri took an AI to chat with aprice[m] about the foundation marketing themes and the user messages ... she beat me to it17:07
noonedeadpunkI *should* be around, but it's not granted17:07
gouthamrugh, s/user messages/user survey17:07
gouthamrnoonedeadpunk: ack, *fingers crossed* 17:07
aprice[m]haha sorry :) 17:07
gouthamrwe'll be chatting about the user survey updates next17:08
fungitoo proactive!17:08
gouthamrstill need to abandon all the open monasca changes, i've not had a chance to do that last week.. i'll try to get to it this week17:08
gouthamrwe prompted everyone to register to attend the OpenInfra PTG17:09
gouthamrif you haven't done that already, please click some buttons here :) 17:09
gouthamr#link https://ptg.openinfra.org/17:09
gouthamrthat's all the AIs i was tracking, did anyone else have stuff to note?17:10
gouthamr#topic Streamlining the User Survey (aprice)17:10
gouthamraprice[m]: welcome, thank you for joining us.. 17:10
aprice[m]thank you for having me! 17:11
aprice[m]for some background, this came up at the informal board meeting in Paris 17:11
aprice[m]but basically, we want to look at the OpenStack User Survey and try to lower the barrier for operators to complete 17:11
aprice[m]#link openstack.org/usersurvey17:11
aprice[m]the largest complaint we have received that is a barrier is that it is VERY long and complex 17:12
gouthamr++17:12
aprice[m]it has been updated over the years which often results in lengthening it which is counterproductive. 17:12
aprice[m]What I would like to work with the TC on as well as the PTLs is what information in the user survey is critical for the upstream community to know. 17:12
aprice[m]this will also be complemented by outreach to other groups in the community, like Member marketing teams, but I wanted to start here 17:13
aprice[m]the goal is to start the conversation today and schedule dedicated time to then update the User Survey by the end of August when we typically open the new version17:13
aprice[m]I would really appreciate the TC's help in getting feedback from PTLs 17:13
aprice[m]and input on what forum makes the most sense. I want to have some synchronous conversations, but also give async opportunities for other TZs to participate17:14
aprice[m]it's a very valuable tool so I don't want to make any decisions too hastily. 17:14
gtemapls define the form for the feedback17:15
aprice[m]What I imagine (and am open to feedback on) is having an etherpad with all existing questions so folks can note the questions they think are critical to keep. 17:15
aprice[m]Then once I pull the ones that do not have that level of engagement, I can do a second round to ensure we would be OK with either 1) removing them 2) making them optional17:16
fungishould we shake the etch-a-sketch to mostly empty the current survey, and then ask ptls or other stakeholders with a vested interest in specific question to say they want it added back?17:16
aprice[m]within that etherpad, I would also outline what I see as the goal for the user survey to ensure we are all on the same page 17:16
aprice[m]fungi: that works as well 17:16
fungia lot of stuff sticks around simply because the people who should say they no longer need it aren't here any more17:17
aprice[m]100% 17:17
gouthamrsounds good, i think we could also collect "generic" feedback? we'll probably get more opinions on what's currently not working for community members that are either taking or putting together the survey17:17
aprice[m]I want everyone to ask themselves "what do I want to know about OpenStack operators / OPenStack environments that can help my team improve our project(s)"17:17
aprice[m]absolutely gouthamr 17:18
fungithe tc has implemented or adjusted processes in recent years to implement dead-man-switch type continuous opt-in so that the default is things are dropped when there's no longer anyone around to say they should be kept17:18
aprice[m]my plan is to also pull in some operators who have either taken it several times as well as those who I know are running openstack that have never taken it 17:18
aprice[m]I like that 17:18
aprice[m]I also anticipate the OpenInfra Governing Board wanting to be involved, so I'd like to ensure we keep that group updated17:19
aprice[m]so perhaps for an AI, I can start an etherpad to start collecting 1) feedback on the current survey and 2) what people want to see out of a refreshed version17:20
aprice[m]I can share it on the OpenStack-discuss ML and then if I can have the TC's help in getting PTLs to participate, that would be super helpful. 17:20
gouthamr+1 i like the concept of starting afresh... we have all the history for someone to dig into and we may lose context for comparison.. but the contention is that this isn't totally useful.. 17:21
gouthamrfor one, the TC didn't analyze the results that were shared with us :( because we lacked bandwidth and the outcomes just didn't seem interesting to us17:21
gouthamrwhich is a bummer since we curated those questions.. but, you can tell, with time some of it became irrelevant 17:21
gouthamraprice[m] ++17:21
aprice[m]that is already great feedback 17:21
aprice[m]OK, I can take that AI and then keep the TC meeting window open for a while so I can join and we can discuss progress. 17:22
gouthamrthat sounds like a great plan... we're at a crunch-time during the release - i.e., M-3/Feature Freeze is upon us shortly17:22
gouthamrso we should expect delayed responses, so this feedback period may stretch out, realistically until the PTG17:23
* noonedeadpunk thinks we need to replace the "AI" with smth different, as it triggers completely wrong notes each single time17:23
aprice[m]OK and we have some time. I would like to basically gather as much input as we can before the PTG and then have some synchronous time to walk through the input 17:23
gouthamryes, true.. 17:23
aprice[m]let's get through Gazpacho first 17:24
gouthamrsounds good to me 17:24
fungiis there a planning pad for tc ptg sessions yet?17:25
gouthamrnope, i can make one up with the generic naming we use17:25
fungithough maybe a dedicated cross-project slot for the survey would be called for anyway17:25
gouthamrhttps://etherpad.opendev.org/ p/ apr2026-ptg-os-tc (something like this?) 17:26
funginot urgent, just trying to make sure i don't forget to add it17:26
aprice[m]gouthamr: that's all I had17:26
gouthamrlet me do that, and fix it up after the team surveys are done and the bot builds all the scaffolding17:26
mharley[m]Hi, guys.17:26
gouthamrthanks a lot aprice[m], this was informative17:27
mharley[m]Will we have a “general subjects” topic today?17:27
gouthamrmharley[m]: yes, "Open Discussion" at the end of the meeting17:27
mharley[m]Got it. Thanks!17:27
gouthamrany other questions or concerns to share with aprice[m]?17:27
* gouthamr notes that she has a hard stop at :30, but, we can communicate async 17:28
aprice[m]I am happy to answer any questions folks may have and will try to send the etherpad to the mailing list later today17:28
gouthamrty, looks like none right away.. lets move to the next topic17:30
aprice[m]thanks! 17:30
gouthamr#topic Cyborg project revival (sean-k-mooney)17:30
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/4YDLAPWBQ2OLYWRAN5SBK3BMCRA737C3/17:30
gouthamr^ this topic was prompted by this ML discussion17:31
gouthamrgood chatter there so far, i was wondering if sean-k-mooney is around and needed to discuss anything here17:31
gouthamror if anyone else has thoughts/concerns to share17:32
sean-k-mooneyo/17:32
fungiwe got openstack-admins added to the cyborg-core team on launchpad, but it's not an administrator so i can't change the team owner quite yet17:33
funginor can i add other members17:33
gouthamrah :/ 17:33
sean-k-mooneyi reached out about that but didnt gete a responce17:33
gouthamri see, i can help with this17:33
fungibut i can make adjustments to the openstack-cyborg project on lp now, if requested17:33
sean-k-mooneyi was also added to the team directly so i will start creating the series tomorrow17:34
fungioh, perfect17:34
sean-k-mooneyso we can track bugs but i have mostly been waiting for feedback before chanign anything17:34
gouthamrack, so you're not blocked by that.. just for correctness we need to get "openstack-admins" to be the team owner17:34
gouthamr?17:34
fungiyes17:34
fungimore for future-proofing17:34
sean-k-mooneycorrect it not a blaocker but we need a active admin to be able to mange group membership17:34
sean-k-mooneyas a member of the group i can update the thigns that need to be updated but cant add anyone else17:35
gouthamrack, will get a request to LP admins going17:35
fungithe new ptl or tact sig liaison should also be made a team admin, at minimum17:35
fungibut i can do that once openstack-admins is an administrator17:35
gouthamr+117:35
gouthamrdid we sort out the gerrit core group permissions?17:36
fungii wasn't asked to do anything for that, but can if it's needed17:36
sean-k-mooneyyep. speaking of it was suggested i put my name forward for the ptl election so ill do that once the nomination open. in termes fo core right no that hs not been modifed17:36
sean-k-mooneyill check with li liu adn wepeng if they are ok to add me to those groups again17:37
sean-k-mooneyso far they have not responded ot the mail thread17:37
gouthamrif they're responsive, yes.. an ack from them would be great.. 17:37
fungias a fallback, i can add you to the cyborg groups in gerrit if the tc asks me to17:37
gouthamrbut, if they're not around and this is preventing release critical patches in, i think we should adjust the group and add any active committer that would like to help maintain the project17:38
sean-k-mooneyack for now im not fromally askign the tc to do that but i can if we get clsoer to FF without mergign the patches requried to make cyborg compatible with oslo17:38
sean-k-mooneywe could revisit that next week perhaps?17:39
sean-k-mooneyor at m317:39
gouthamrwe can, ty for checking with the maintainers17:40
sean-k-mooneyis there anything i should be doing that i have not started doing?17:40
sean-k-mooneyrestarting the irc meeting for cyborg is on my list17:40
sean-k-mooneywe will need to figure out of we have a vPTG sesssion too17:40
sean-k-mooneybut that lower down my priority list for right now17:41
gouthamrthat would be great17:41
sean-k-mooneyif not i dont have anything else to bring up today on this topic17:42
gouthamrack, ty for working on this sean-k-mooney 17:42
gouthamrwill circle back on the launchpad thing17:43
gouthamr#topic A check on gate health17:43
gouthamr^ we haven't done this in a few weeks17:43
gouthamrare there any gate issues/updates to note17:43
sean-k-mooneynova is blocked but we have a fix in flight (boht in cidner and nova) so hopefully that will be resolved later today.17:44
sean-k-mooneymelaine sent an email to the list and we will update it once the issue is resolved to avoid recheks17:44
fungithere's been a recent uptick in xen issues on newer kernels causing rackspace classic test nodes to boot with only a single cpu regardless of flavor. opendev has a change in flight to fail jobs early in pre-run when that happens so they'll be retried automatically17:45
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/NJY3OPFIB2AGENG3JV3PDWGIPV4OUBSR/ 17:45
fungi#link https://review.opendev.org/c/opendev/base-jobs/+/975474 Apply the cpu count hardware check in our base job17:46
gouthamrah, ack ty17:46
sean-k-mooneyfungi: oh i remember that so it will fail in the pre-run pahse and auto retry17:46
fungithat's the plan17:46
sean-k-mooneyis there a planned retriment timeline for that old rax space hardware. its being replaced wth the flex provider correct?17:47
fungithere is not yet, we have waaay more quota in classic than flex17:48
sean-k-mooneyack17:48
fungialso a majority of our long-running control plane servers are in rackspace classic17:48
fungiflex does not yet support ipv617:48
fungior didn't last we checked anyway17:49
gouthamrhmm, fingers-crossed on getting through FF with minimal other issues... 'course, make sacrifices to zuul on the sidelines 17:49
gouthamrlets switch topics to Open Discussion and chat through open reviews as well17:49
gouthamr#topic Open Discussion17:50
gouthamrmharley[m]: hey there, how can we help?17:50
mharley[m]Hey.17:50
mharley[m]I’m the current Barbican PTL and would like to raise a point.17:51
gouthamr..17:52
mharley[m]It’s been quite a while since there’s no attendance in the weekly meeting.17:52
mharley[m]For that sake, I changed its frequency to bi-weekly, but even so the attendance is quite low.17:53
mharley[m]So I wanted to understand if we are OK with suppressing it until we understand it shall be back to business. Thoughts?17:53
fungithere are definitely teams that don't hold synchronous meetings and just coordinate ad hoc in irc or through the openstack-discuss mailing list17:54
noonedeadpunkit's usually extremely hard to recover if stop metings at all17:54
noonedeadpunkbut yes, I think some semi-regular updates about the project state in ML might be a good alternative, imo17:54
gmaanit is almost same case for me for RBAC meeting where I am the only one but I moved it to monthly and hold it to keep momentum on17:55
gouthamr+1 ; it's not mandatory to have Team Meetings.. here's the guidance on this:17:55
gouthamr#link https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/open-community.html#public-meetings-on-irc 17:55
gmaanand was for QA meeting where it was mostly me but now I have more attendance 17:55
noonedeadpunkbut also I wonder what is going on with the project? Are there some specs to work on, are there some proposals, or we can consider barbican more "feature complete" now and maintain it's state more or less?17:55
mharley[m]Nice. Thanks, folks. I’ll suppress the meeting for now.17:55
fungithe critical point is that the team, as it exists, should resist the temptation to fall back on private conversation, so have some venue to keep design discussions public, logged and available for everyone who wants to participate17:56
noonedeadpunkbtw I personally find extremely hard to follow bi-weekly schedule...17:56
mharley[m]There are a few parches pending to be reviewed, noonedeadpunk. 17:56
gouthamrin other words, are you seeing a drop-off in contributors/maintainers? or just a lack of interest in meetings17:56
sean-k-mooneymharley[m]: one thin we foudn helps engament is havign the meetign in the team channle. if you currently use a dedicated mettign channel you coudl use the barbican one and see if that helps with engement. just a tought.17:56
gmaanIMO, keep holding meeting even less frequency and short one can be helpful for future instead of stopping completely 17:56
noonedeadpunkoh, well, there're quite some patches indeed17:56
noonedeadpunkand they are quite fresh as well17:56
mharley[m]@gmaan, with a random frequency?17:57
gmaanno, I have fixed frequency, mponthly for RBAC and biweekly for QA17:57
gtemathis has nothing to do with the reality, there are just no active contributors, the same is true for Keystone. Keeping meetings changes nothing, moving them from online to offline changes nothing, making them some other type changes nothing17:57
fricklerunrelated, but since it is time critical: gouthamr are you going to merge the three open "Reset DPL" changes so that these projects can take part in the elections?17:58
gmaanwell, it changed in QA. I see more participant since last month17:58
noonedeadpunkgtema: have you checked https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/barbican+status:open ?17:58
gouthamr^ was going to bring that up frickler, perhaps here after this meeting? 17:58
noonedeadpunkas I see couple of independent contributors during this cycle17:58
noonedeadpunkso "no active contributors" is arguable to me17:59
* frickler needs to leave soonish, but a couple of minutes may be fine17:59
* gouthamr time check 1 min17:59
mharley[m]Well, I’ll do like this:  suspend the meeting for now and observe the behavior.17:59
noonedeadpunkI'd really raised that in ML if it has not been done18:00
gouthamrmharley[m]: ack, please do share this on the ML and let us know how things are going 18:00
gouthamrwe're at the hour18:00
gouthamrwanted to note the concern frickler brought up regarding the DPL reset patches18:01
gouthamrhttps://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:%22dpl-reset%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged)18:01
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:%22dpl-reset%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged)18:01
gouthamrwe've partial responses from oslo (need an ack from damani)18:01
gouthamrrequirements (need an ack from tonyb)18:02
gouthamrfreezer (need an ack from khry0n) 18:02
gouthamrkhyr0n*18:02
gouthamrbut, without these, i'll end up merging them tomorrow, and creating election directories for these18:02
gouthamrteams18:02
noonedeadpunkyeah, I tried to ping them yesterday on a meeting without much success18:03
gouthamri'll poke them on their respective IRC channels again, but, if folks are away, we might end up with leaderless teams at the end of the election for us to fix up the governance ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:03
gouthamrfrickler: anything more to add?18:04
fricklerI just added another comment to the reqs team patch, otherwise I'm fine with this18:04
gouthamrack ty frickler 18:04
gouthamralright, that's a wrap 18:04
gouthamrwe're a bit over, apologies for that.. but thank you for participating!18:05
gouthamrthis meeting returns next week at 1700 UTC18:05
gouthamr#endmeeting18:05
opendevmeetMeeting ended Tue Feb  3 18:05:24 2026 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:05
opendevmeetMinutes:        https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-02-03-17.00.html18:05
opendevmeetMinutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-02-03-17.00.txt18:05
opendevmeetLog:            https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-02-03-17.00.log.html18:05
gouthamrjust a heads up, there are 173 open changes in Monasca repos, i'm abandoning all of them, i've made a list of what these are in case, but, i think we don't care.. 22:19
gouthamrrecorded them here for posterity, ofc they can be found with gerrit querying: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/monasca-retirement22:21

Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!