20:01:02 <jbryce> #startmeeting
20:01:03 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Mar 10 20:01:02 2011 UTC.  The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:01:05 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
20:01:32 <jbryce> hello! who all is here?
20:01:36 <joshuamckenty> hi
20:02:07 <joshuamckenty> what's the date for the next election?
20:02:16 <dendrobates> o/
20:02:16 <jbryce> http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB - agenda is on this page
20:02:35 <joshuamckenty> and is the PPB member list up to date?
20:03:03 <jbryce> http://www.openstack.org/blog/2011/03/openstack-governance-nominations-and-election-process/ - march 21st
20:03:11 <dendrobates> joshuamckenty: This will be my last meeting
20:03:20 <joshuamckenty> gotcha
20:03:37 <joshuamckenty> and there are no TPL members yet, right?
20:03:42 <joshuamckenty> (Technical Project Lead)
20:04:02 <jbryce> joshuamckenty: correct
20:04:59 <joshuamckenty> #idea can we suggest new projects post a manifesto similar to the redis manifesto?
20:05:08 <joshuamckenty> #link http://antirez.com/post/redis-manifesto.html
20:05:28 <joshuamckenty> As an extension of item #3.4
20:06:37 <dendrobates> and point 2 needs to be specific.  What does gather community feedback mean?
20:07:24 <jbryce> good q
20:07:33 <jbryce> i'm thinking along the lines of what eday has been doing with burrow
20:08:10 <dendrobates> alsoin 3.4, the use of 'enhance value'  does not sound right.
20:08:43 <joshuamckenty> We need a time span for how often (if at all) a project can resubmit for inclusion
20:09:14 <jbryce> do you think the eday type mailing list/wiki process for community feedback works?
20:09:20 <jbryce> joshuamckenty: good point. any suggestions?
20:09:23 <dendrobates> yes
20:09:24 <jbryce> 6 months?
20:09:26 <joshuamckenty> 6 months?
20:09:26 <joshuamckenty> yeah
20:09:41 <jesse_> perhaps 3 months instead?
20:09:46 <joshuamckenty> also for migration from incubation, I would suggest we review those at the design summits
20:09:50 <dendrobates> perhaps once per release
20:10:37 <joshuamckenty> well, release cycle is per project as well
20:10:56 <joshuamckenty> PPB review should be consistent, I think once every 3 months is reasonable / generous
20:11:01 <jbryce> ok
20:11:06 <jesse_> joshuamckenty: I like the idea that it is presented at summits
20:11:28 <jbryce> so a project that is not accepted must wait 3 months before resubmission
20:11:57 <anotherjesse> jbryce: seems reasonable - since not being accepted just means it isn't part of core - it can still integrate deeply
20:11:57 <jbryce> projects in incubation will be reviewed at design summits
20:12:12 <jbryce> should all projects be reviewed at design summits?
20:12:24 <joshuamckenty> I think that's a PPB scheduling question
20:12:28 <dendrobates> reviewed by whom?
20:12:42 <joshuamckenty> seems like a good time, but I don't want to turn it into a giant roundtable, it'll become a popularity debate
20:13:21 <joshuamckenty> PPB review, step 4
20:13:28 <dendrobates> This should not require RW meetings IMHO
20:14:20 <joshuamckenty> Is there a process for a project to *leave* OpenStack?
20:14:23 <joshuamckenty> Just a weird question
20:14:52 <dendrobates> I think that would be by forking it
20:15:17 <joshuamckenty> Well, it still remains in OpenStack as well, technically, at that point.
20:15:30 <dendrobates> the name does at least
20:15:37 <dendrobates> that is the real question
20:15:54 <dendrobates> do we own the name of an existing project after they join
20:15:57 <joshuamckenty> Yeah, that's not covered by this process
20:16:23 <joshuamckenty> The name is owned (by default) by the project founders, correct? Unless someone files trademark
20:16:30 <joshuamckenty> e.g., who own's 'nova'?
20:16:45 <dendrobates> I think it is an important question
20:16:57 <joshuamckenty> I know who owns @novacc and novacc.com, and it's not OpenStack
20:17:00 <joshuamckenty> proposals?
20:17:03 <anotherjesse> joshuamckenty: that is me
20:17:05 <anotherjesse> ;)
20:17:46 <anotherjesse> Also it is called OpenStack Compute from the project perspective
20:17:47 <dendrobates> I think we need a process for a project to leave and take its name with it.
20:18:00 <joshuamckenty> I still have @novacc passwords, buddy ;)
20:18:12 <anotherjesse> perhaps we talk about naming separately?
20:18:16 <joshuamckenty> Well, I think maybe the OpenStack name for the project should be distinct
20:18:24 <joshuamckenty> k, separate agenda item?
20:18:28 <anotherjesse> ya, burrow might become openstack queue if accepted
20:18:32 <jbryce> yes
20:18:49 <jbryce> #todo start discussion around naming and transitions out of openstack for projects
20:19:20 <joshuamckenty> jbyrce, is there a charter doc that would need to be signed by the project
20:19:30 <joshuamckenty> e.g., like the code of conduct doc for members
20:19:52 <jbryce> there is not...that's one of the things i was thinking about as i was putting together the process
20:20:16 <jbryce> we know how we are running nova/swift/compute but we haven't actually codified it anywhere as a coherent set of openstack development processes
20:20:47 <joshuamckenty> there was the original HACKING.txt file
20:21:16 <jbryce> which things are required, which are optional - launchpad, bzr, jenkins, release cycles - those kinds of things
20:21:18 <joshuamckenty> I think we can codify that as we go, minimum PEP8 numbers, minimum test coverage, etc.
20:21:44 <jbryce> the other question that was raised is how does a project split into 2, like pulling volumes and networking out of nova
20:22:24 <joshuamckenty> same criteria applies, right - size of dev team, available technical lead, etc.
20:22:41 <joshuamckenty> Probably a vote from the existing core team on the split?
20:22:48 <jbryce> i made updates to the wiki to try to address the points you all raised (except anything about the design summit)
20:23:12 <jbryce> who initiates?
20:23:30 <jbryce> the existing core team votes to split and the ppb ratifies?
20:23:51 <johnpur> if a project splits, is there an election for PTL? does this add a seat to the PPB?
20:24:08 <jbryce> if it becomes a full project, it would add a seat to the ppb
20:24:35 <joshuamckenty> I think core team votes, and PPB ratifies, yes
20:24:48 <joshuamckenty> And probably the old core team votes for PTL of new project?
20:25:01 <joshuamckenty> oh, and initial core team should be seeded
20:25:05 <joshuamckenty> from previous core team
20:25:29 <johnpur> agree with Josh
20:25:31 <joshuamckenty> maybe just a free pass for those core team members who want to sign on to the new project?
20:26:15 <jbryce> makes sense to me
20:26:51 <joshuamckenty> Anything else on this proposal?
20:26:53 <jbryce> #todo document proposed mechanism for splitting existing project into new projects
20:26:59 <joshuamckenty> Or should we +1 it?
20:27:34 <jbryce> i don't want to vote on it with the majority missing...
20:27:42 <jbryce> i'll send it out for a mailing list vote after the meeting
20:27:53 <joshuamckenty> ah, right
20:28:24 <jbryce> did all of you agree with ewan's thoughts on the standards body?
20:28:40 <jbryce> that it should basically be company specific with no official openstack community sanction?
20:28:45 <joshuamckenty> yeah, with the exception of the OCC
20:29:00 <anotherjesse> yeah, kinda like how we can talk about what we want to do for nasa, but we can't talk on behalf of nasa
20:29:07 <joshuamckenty> just because they have an awesome testbed of hardware that I think we should use as a community resource for CI
20:29:49 <anotherjesse> well, we could still do the same thing with OCC
20:30:01 <anotherjesse> but have a more involvement with multiple parties
20:30:09 <anotherjesse> whether it be rackspace or citrix or ...
20:30:33 <jbryce> i agree with anotherjesse
20:30:43 <joshuamckenty> as long as the CI environment ends up available with incubated projects, I'm happy with that
20:30:50 <jbryce> ok
20:31:03 <joshuamckenty> /s/with/for/
20:31:20 <anotherjesse> ;)
20:31:24 <jbryce> those were the two things i wanted to hit on
20:31:35 <jbryce> do you all have anything else you want to discuss?
20:31:58 <joshuamckenty> election process
20:32:05 <anotherjesse> jbryce: we might want to link to the project page from the official site
20:32:09 <anotherjesse> even if just the wiki page
20:32:15 <jbryce> definitely
20:32:19 <joshuamckenty> just want to make sure the announcement of the election results is smoother than last time
20:32:34 <joshuamckenty> it's going to be heavily covered by media, I don't want any more FUD
20:32:42 <dendrobates> and that the results are immediately available
20:32:51 <joshuamckenty> yeah, that was the part I was pointing out
20:32:59 <jbryce> yep
20:33:11 <jbryce> i'm pretty sure everyone is on board with that
20:33:32 <joshuamckenty> are you coordinating the election?
20:33:42 <jbryce> stephen spector is, but i've talked to him about it
20:33:49 <joshuamckenty> can you be available on IRC during that process, so there's a single POC for the PPB?
20:33:55 <dendrobates> ttx is telling SS how to do it correctly
20:34:15 * joshuamckenty doesn't understand ttx or SS
20:34:18 <joshuamckenty> oh, nm
20:34:26 <joshuamckenty> stephen spector and thierry
20:34:34 <jbryce> dendrobates: not sure they actually have that down yet
20:34:34 <dendrobates> :) sorry
20:34:51 <jbryce> civs needs email addresses and most launchpad people don't have their email addresses available
20:35:04 <jbryce> i know that's one thing they're still trying to work through
20:35:09 <joshuamckenty> jbryce: a last count on which seats are up for election?
20:35:13 <jbryce> that was the number one problem last time around too
20:35:36 <jbryce> 2 general seats (chuck's seat is up for election + 1 new seat) as well as 1 PTL seat each for nova, swift and glance
20:37:18 <jbryce> dendrobates: any ideas on how to get the right contact info for the elections?
20:37:39 <dendrobates> jbryce: we should talk to the launchpad team
20:37:55 <dendrobates> ubuntu uses the same site and manages somehow
20:38:09 <dendrobates> ttx can talk to them for you
20:38:25 <jbryce> ok
20:38:36 <joshuamckenty> k, I'm good
20:38:59 <jbryce> anything else from anyone?
20:38:59 * soren wanders in
20:39:04 <soren> Sorry I'm late. :(
20:39:05 <joshuamckenty> gotta bounce, thanks jbryce
20:39:45 <dendrobates> bye all
20:39:52 <jbryce> hi soren! we didn't vote on anything but we did discuss quite a bit
20:40:04 <soren> I'll read the scroll back.
20:40:13 <soren> Oh, well.
20:40:14 <soren> :(
20:40:16 <jbryce> bye rick
20:40:27 <jbryce> #endmeeting