Tuesday, 2026-05-05

opendevreviewGoutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Add devstack-plugin-lustre to QA  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/98731403:28
mnasiadkaI found https://review.opendev.org/c/openinfra/ansible-role-refstack-client/+/962128 which is part of retire-refstack and is blocking https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/96211606:51
mnasiadkaspotz[m], gouthamr: I think you’re part of refstack-core Gerrit group and could merge this?06:52
spotz[m]I can when I stop for gas13:58
gouthamrmnasiadka: ack, done14:48
mnasiadkagouthamr: thanks16:15
gouthamrtc-members: a (late) gentle reminder that our weekly IRC meeting will be hosted here in ~30 minutes: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting16:29
cardoeit's been a week already?16:30
cardoeI haven't even caught up from last week's todos16:30
cardoeI need you to pump the brakes on the speed of time.... kthxbai16:30
gouthamr:D i wish16:31
mnasiadkaHmm, the refstack retirement is one thing, but openinfra/python-tempestconf needs to be rehomed to some other group - did we ever discuss that and found that group?16:41
gouthamrnot that i recall16:45
gouthamrthat tool is widely used outside of refstack, but i don't know how much it matters to be under the openstack-qa team, maybe gmaan has an opinion.. 16:47
gouthamran advantage if it is rehomed is that it can get the same release treatment and github mirroring that others have under the openstack/* namespace 16:47
mnasiadkaI have a feeling that it was renamed from openstack/python-tempestconf to openinfra/python-tempestconf in the past (cc: clarkb)16:49
clarkbyes I think it was openstack/python-tempestconf and got renamed to openinfra/python-tempestconf16:51
clarkbI can probably find the change for that16:51
mnasiadkaBut I agree openstack-qa sounds like a good home to that, if gmaan agrees16:52
mnasiadka(Too many agreements in one line)16:52
clarkbhttps://opendev.org/opendev/project-config/src/branch/master/renames/20200612.yaml#L6-L7 then https://opendev.org/opendev/project-config/src/branch/master/renames/20211015.yaml#L34-L3516:52
clarkbwe've already renamed it twice do we really need to rename it a third time back to its original name?16:53
clarkb(I get the sense that no one really cares about it, maybe it is better off being retired than continuing to pass it around like a hot potatoe creating more work for the infra team. Just today I spent qutie some time trying to determine if the repo was broken in Gerrit)16:54
gouthamrit's fairly active afaict16:55
clarkbit can be active while no one cares enough to actually "own" it16:56
gouthamrnot seeking more work for infra, but, the hot potato thing here was interop 16:56
gouthamrit was a board program, not the TC's 16:56
gouthamrso we're trying to get things cleaned up for the board?16:57
clarkb(as an aside I wonder if the openstack/python-tempestconf -> openinfra/python-tempestconf redirect will handle being renamed back to openstack/python-tempestconf may be something we need to test first if we go down that path)16:58
mnasiadkaWell, I just wanted to get refstack cleaned up before somebody asks me another time about it ;)16:58
clarkbgitea does that for us so depends on whether gitea can handle it I think16:58
gouthamrsorry to pause this, 17:00
gouthamr#startmeeting tc17:00
opendevmeetMeeting started Tue May  5 17:00:54 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.17:01
gouthamrToday's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda17:01
gouthamr#topic Roll Call17:01
dansmitho/17:01
gouthamrcourtesy-ping: noonedeadpunk, frickler, spotz[m], cardoe, mnasiadka, bauzas17:02
bauzaso/17:02
frickler\o17:02
cardoeo/17:03
mnasiadkao/17:03
gouthamralright, no noted absences.. let's get started17:05
gouthamr#topic Last Week's Action Items17:05
gouthamrmnasiadka cardoe: you had one around updating the Ansible SIG's chairs17:06
gouthamrthrough an email notification to openstack-discuss17:06
noonedeadpunko/17:06
cardoeYes. I haven't done that.17:06
cardoeThat was one of the things that was still on my todo from last week.17:06
mnasiadkaI have just sent that17:07
gouthamrwow 17:07
mnasiadkaA very long mail17:07
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/NOK24Z4VKHH4XCVD5A7NYKZT3NH3WMDJ/17:07
gouthamrthank you for starting that17:08
noonedeadpunk++ awesome, thanks for it!17:08
cardoeThank you!17:09
gouthamrgood stuff, we can discuss this again next week17:09
gouthamrthere were a couple more items on cardoe's pile.. the question about importlib.metadata vs pbr - don't know if you needed to start a thread on the ML for this17:09
cardoeI will.17:09
gouthamrand you meant to discuss "manager" role doc in Keystone.. guess that happened in the policy_group meeting yesterday17:10
gouthamrsomewhat related was the thread that gmaan started on a global 'reader' persona.. 17:10
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/ZEKOWEMLY6F2RFFXVD37QRQPMB35H5PR/ ([policy][tc] RBAC global auditor (reader))17:11
gouthamrthe discussion will continue on the thread, the last update was seeking clarity on the use cases and direction17:12
noonedeadpunkglobal reader is amazing thing I was annoying gmann with in Vancouver :D17:12
noonedeadpunkhappy to see some traction and that there're other orgs looking for it as well17:12
cardoeYeah I think this is also in my court to submit something to the ML and patches to keystone17:12
gouthamrfrom the policy_group meeting yesterday, the original design with scopes tried to address these different use cases.. 17:13
gouthamrack, ty both.. it'd make sense to flush out the design on gerrit17:13
gouthamrthis will not be a part of the SRBAC goal however, because like gmaan noted to the ML yesterday, that goal is heading towards wrapping up the "project" scoping correctly.. 17:15
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/NYJOVFQ6FTXL7DKSOFIQJMOMX7R7CXLE/ ([policy][cinder][tacker][aetos][aodh][barbican] Removal of enforce_scope impact)17:15
gouthamrany concerns there?17:15
gouthamrnext up we have the venus and vitrage transitions17:18
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/981959 (Retire Venus Project)17:19
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/PGT5EUDSNEILHHA2GY6DOQ7FRFIXHTC7/ ([venus][tc] Retirement of the Venus project)17:19
gouthamrit's been a month since the post went out, and we haven't heard any concerns on the ML17:19
gouthamrnoonedeadpunk: think we can proceed with the patches now17:19
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/982869 (Deprecate vitrage project)17:20
gouthamr#link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/QS3TFDCMT5ZBSNFXUVYGLXTKPKIOQDOZ/ ([vitrage][tc] Deprecation of the Vitrage project)17:20
gouthamr^ same with vitrage's deprecation17:20
gmaannoonedeadpunk: i know, sadly we did not progress on that.17:20
noonedeadpunkgmaan: to be fair, I also lacked time to push this forward afterwards...17:21
gouthamranything to note regarding venus, vitrage?17:21
noonedeadpunkI think it's time to proceed with deprecation/retriement17:22
gouthamrack, thank you..17:22
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22retire-venus%22 (Venus cleanup patches)17:23
gouthamr^ guess these would need reviews17:23
* gouthamr will take a look after the meeting17:23
mnasiadkaI reviewed the project-config and openstack-manuals ones, so needs another core17:24
gouthamrty mnasiadka 17:24
gouthamrnext, we had:17:24
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/982062 (Add PQC Migration popup team)17:24
gouthamrjust needs more eyes ^17:25
dansmithjust added my RC+117:26
gouthamrty17:26
bauzasRC+1 dittpo17:26
gouthamri still need to update irc-meetings repo to drop APAC slot 17:26
gouthamrmissed this from last week17:26
gouthamrty bauzas 17:26
gouthamrthat's all the Action Items I was tracking from last week, did anyone else want to note anything?17:27
dansmithyes17:27
dansmithyou had an action item to stop calling them AIs, which as far as I can tell you're smashing. thank you :D17:28
gouthamrhahaha, :P i tried17:28
gouthamr#topic TaCT SIG approval for agentic-workflows (bauzas)17:28
gouthamrfloor is yours, bauzas 17:28
* gouthamr added the hashtag on the review, clearly missed it17:29
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/984958 (Add agentic-workflows to TaCT SIG)17:29
gouthamrbauzas ?17:30
bauzaswell, I don't know what to say17:30
bauzasI just want to know whether we would accept this project or not17:31
bauzasany concerns, questions ?17:31
gouthamrno concerns from me i think, but, it looks like the contentious parts would be regarding the contents of this repository17:32
gouthamrfrom what i recall, your intention is to make it abundantly clear that this isn't imposing rules on the community, but serves to assist use of agentic tools in code development17:33
bauzasat the moment, we have some a lot of https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/agentic-workflows+status:open17:34
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/agentic-workflows/+/985082/1/README.md 17:35
bauzasI also provided https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/986765 but given the concerns, I'll abandon it17:36
gouthamrwe'll talk about that one separately?17:36
dansmithI just RC+1d the repo one17:36
bauzasokay thanks17:37
gouthamrspeaking for myself, i feel the TaCT SIG needs to adopt this and feel liable towards:17:37
gouthamr(a) what the project does (b) how it is governed17:37
bauzasthat's good questions17:38
bauzasif we agree this, then we would discuss about those by #openstack-agentic-workflows 17:38
gmaanI might have missed the discussion but it is also good fit as TC repo17:39
gouthamrthat said, i don't think i've a TC objection towards it.. my suggestion would be to try hard at every juncture to note that this isn't imposing new workflows on the community. It's about "consider this if it helps"17:39
dansmithgouthamr: the SIG chair +1d right?17:39
gouthamryes17:39
dansmithI think having it be not under the TC helps it be viewed as "a resource but not a mandate" personall17:39
bauzasthis project would only be for having some skills17:39
bauzasdansmith: correct17:39
gmaanyeah, that is good point17:40
bauzasbut I'd rather prefer that we have a project for discuss those17:40
clarkbbauzas: it might also be useful to document pitfalls and traps. Things like considering whether you actualyl want copilot cli to have access to all of your github orgs when you think you're running it locally. And agent sandboxing etc17:40
gmaanbauzas: ++17:40
clarkbbasically one portion to capture practical considerations for doing agentic work safely and another how to do it effectively17:40
gouthamri'd love to work on the agent sandboxing thing, personal itch to scratch17:40
bauzasinstead of each of each trying to see to use LLMs17:40
bauzasclarkb: that's a good point too, indeed17:41
clarkb(I think both pieces are important as only one of the other is an incomplete set of tooling)17:41
bauzas(I mean, having some way to have a sandbox)17:41
bauzasanything else to discuss ?17:43
gouthamrnope, tc-members: please vote there.. i've added a "project-update" hashtag on this17:44
gouthamrhttps://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/house-rules.html#other-project-team-updates17:44
gouthamrso it can merge as it gains the necessary votes, but, i'd hate to do it early if there are disagreements that we want to air out.. 17:45
gouthamrbauzas: do you want to chat about your goal proposal?17:46
gouthamr#link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/986765 (Add AGENTS.md community goal proposal)17:46
bauzasgouthamr: given all the concerns, I'll abandon it17:46
gouthamrack, thanks for proposing it, and giving people food for thought.. 17:46
bauzasinstead of a governance TC goal, we could find a way to get our projects to be discussing with the SIG if they want17:47
bauzas(I mean, the TaCT SIG, or at least the agentic-workflows community if they want)17:47
bauzasdo people would prefer to create another SIG instead of this goal ?17:48
gouthamrnah, looks like you have an IRC channel?17:48
bauzasor, as I said, just discussing with the agentic-workflows community ?17:48
gouthamroh not an official channel17:49
bauzaswe have #openstack-agentic-workflows at the moment, but as I said, I'll make sure that we have logs for it17:49
bauzasyeah, this is not a official channel atm because https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/984958 isn't yet accepted17:49
bauzaswe could create another channel or discussing as a SIG, I don't know exactly17:50
gouthamrhmm, i think for something that's expected to promote informal collaboration, we don't need too much of a formality - that's my view.. 17:50
bauzasif we don't have a TC goal, I'm fine but I don't want our service projects to create wrong AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md 17:50
bauzas(that was why I proposed a goal, but I agree, this shouldn't be mandatory)17:51
gouthamr:P my view, at one point during the review was that the project shipping one would be wrong17:51
gouthamrit'd break my workflow for one.. and i'd shake my fist at you.. 17:52
bauzasyeah I saw your questions 17:52
bauzasgouthamr: oh wait, really ? :(17:52
gouthamrbut, as someone trying to learn nova's code base, conventions etc, i can't thank you enough for sharing more of the sausage making17:52
bauzasgouthamr: yeah, the context is more important than skills honesltu17:53
bauzashaving a way for our contributors to know about our tribal knowledge 17:53
gouthamrguess we should do more of this... and a good takeaway seemed to be in improve contributor docs for humans and tools17:54
bauzasanyway, we're late for the meeting17:54
bauzasso let's discuss this in the TaCT SIG gerrit proposal17:54
gouthamrack, thank you17:54
bauzasor after the meeting17:54
gouthamranything else for $topic from anyone else?17:54
gouthamri guess we don't have time today for standing topics.. but, we can roll them into:17:55
gouthamr#topic Open Discussion17:55
gouthamr#link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-2026.2-tracker (2026.2 TC tracker)17:56
gouthamrplease do take a look at this, you'll find items moved from the old tracker, and assigned to various folks17:56
gouthamrdo post updates on the tracker with anything you'd like to share.. it'd be useful for async catch up17:57
mnasiadkaI started work on https://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:%22inactive-projects-badge%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged) - because that was somewhere assigned to me17:57
gouthamrw00t17:57
mnasiadkaBut I’d probably need guidance for properly testing this :)17:57
gouthamrif only we had a project to mark inactive? :P17:57
mnasiadkaWell, it’s going to come17:58
gouthamr:( 17:58
mnasiadkaZun has merged my enginefacade patch17:58
mnasiadkaBut it’s still a one person project...17:58
gouthamrack, that hurts17:58
gouthamranything to note regarding the gate?17:59
gouthamrty for fixing up gerrit yesterday17:59
bauzas- about gater18:00
mnasiadkaSomehow Gerrit always gets OOMed by the hypervisor on the EU timezone shift :)18:00
gouthamrlaunchpad and all other Canonical services have gone back online after a weekend outage - but can be flaky occasionally. 18:00
bauzasooof18:01
gouthamralright we're over the hour, let's wrap this up18:01
gouthamrthank you all for participating18:01
gouthamrsee you here next week!18:01
gouthamr#endmeeting18:01
opendevmeetMeeting ended Tue May  5 18:01:58 2026 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)18:01
opendevmeetMinutes:        https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-05-05-17.00.html18:01
opendevmeetMinutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-05-05-17.00.txt18:01
opendevmeetLog:            https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-05-05-17.00.log.html18:01
bauzas++ thanks gouthamr18:02
gouthamrclarkb: o/ jlarriba tried to transfer https://launchpad.net/~telemetry-drivers to ~openstack-admins, could you check if you received any notification?18:03
clarkbgouthamr: I did18:04
gouthamrawesome, does he need to do anything else to get openstack-admins to own the group?18:04
clarkbgouthamr: I guess with fungi out this week I should go do that? Let me get logged into launchpad18:04
clarkbgouthamr: I don't think so. I think an openstack-admins member has to go and accept the change18:05
gouthamryes please, sorry to bother you with it.. we may have a security bug that we're not able to get properly routed to the VMT18:05
clarkback I'll get logged in now and see if I can approve that change18:05
gouthamr++ ty18:06
clarkbgouthamr: I'm comparing to say nova-drivers and in that case openstack administrators is the owner not a member18:12
clarkbthis invite is to make openstack administrators a member18:12
clarkbis it possible that we have to be members first?18:12
clarkbI don't do a lot of launchpad stuff and want to avoid accidental disclosures via email for example and want to amke sure it is done right18:13
clarkbI think the risk is low though18:13
clarkblooking at prior emails and https://launchpad.net/~cyborg-team/+members#active I think that fungi accepted openstack-admins as a member of cyborg-team then maybe made openstack-admins the owner then deactivated the membership?18:14
clarkbgouthamr: anyway do you know if there is a process written down or an expected end state?18:15
clarkbya I see a comment from fungi in the emails for cyborg-team that openstack-admins can readd itself at any time if necessary as it is the owner18:16
clarkbso I think the process must be get added as a member, then escalate to owner, then drop the membership. I'll proceed under that assumption18:17
clarkbgouthamr: ok that is done. I don't appear to have the ability to change the owner to openstack admins18:19
clarkbI think because openstack-admins is merely an approved member not an administator18:20
gmaanyeah, that is flow we followed in past. once openstack-admins is owner then we can remove it from membership. but yes it needs to be administration to change the owner18:27
gmaanit seems tkajinam_ is administration there so he can also change openstack-admins to administration ?18:29
gouthamroh, :( sorry for being the noisy filter between folks here.. will get have jlarriba check again if he followed: https://documentation.ubuntu.com/launchpad/user/how-to/projects/transfer-project-ownership/18:32
gouthamrty clarkb 18:33
gouthamryeah gmaan tkajinam_ could help too, but expect this to be quite late in the day for both of them 18:34
gouthamrclarkb: gmaan: the ownership transfer is done now, OpenStack-admins can drop off of that group19:46
clarkbgmaan: do you want to do that? I'm busy with the opendev team meeting currently19:46
gouthamrno rush :)19:48
gouthamri suspect tkajinam_ jlarriba will take care of the sharing settings to set private security bugs to be routed through the VMT19:49
clarkbgouthamr: gmaan I have deactivated openstack-admins membership in telemetry-drivers now that it is the owner20:02
gouthamrthank you clarkb! 20:02
gouthamrinteresting: https://www.mirantis.com/blog/a-new-chapter-for-mirantis20:58
opendevreviewGoutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Add project tracker management guide  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/98743321:22
opendevreviewGoutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Add project tracker management guide  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/98743321:24
gouthamrnoonedeadpunk: looking at the venus retirement patches21:42
gouthamrnoonedeadpunk: i can't +2 any of them.. because we haven't updated the gerrit config to retired.config.. 21:43
gouthamrfrickler helped me with the monasca repos using his infra core status21:44
gouthamrbut, i'm thinking another option is to just adjust the gerrit config to set retired.config in  the first step of the retirement process: https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-manual/latest/drivers.html#step-1-end-project-gating21:45
gouthamrdoing that will give "tech-committee" +2 powers21:45
clarkbgouthamr: I think the reason for not doing it early is then you're responsible for removing the repo content rather than the project maiantiners21:48
clarkbI guess if those individuals aren't around anymore then that makes sense21:48
clarkbso depends on the specific project retirement if one approach is less work than another21:48
gouthamryeah :( probably do this only when the TC initiates the retirements21:49

Generated by irclog2html.py 4.1.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!