19:12:33 #startmeeting 19:12:34 Meeting started Thu May 12 19:12:33 2011 UTC. The chair is jbryce. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:12:35 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:12:50 #topic Action items from last week 19:13:42 I had 2 items from last week. Publish the project designations and getting community asset managers to publish processes for use 19:14:09 2 minutes 19:14:41 The project designations will be up today, and I'll hit the mailing list with them. I was hoping to have them published before the meeting, but my travel back from Interop was screwed up by Dallas weather. 19:15:17 I had one item with ttx, not gotten to it yet since ttx is at UDS and I've been busy with burrow things and taking care of a sick wife. should have it for next week. 19:15:42 Still working with the community asset managers to get a full list of who has access to what. I'm hoping to have progress on it by early next week. 19:15:51 o/ 19:16:17 i was answering from mah phone 19:16:50 you need to get irc on your phone :) 19:16:55 apparently 19:17:35 vishy: how'd the ptl meeting go? 19:18:27 ok 19:18:32 we made some progress 19:18:33 :) 19:19:26 progress is good 19:19:47 any particular next step for it? just continue discussions? 19:19:54 if it is *forward* progress... 19:20:33 jbryce: i posted an email to the mailing list 19:20:38 (openstack) 19:20:49 with the action items that we took 19:20:55 ok. i'm a couple days behind. 19:21:29 will read that 19:22:39 #topic communication channels 19:22:43 we had one thing left over from last week's marathon meeting that we didn't get to 19:22:56 johnpur: do you want discuss this one? 19:23:24 ahhh, remind me what the topic is? 19:23:34 http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/PPB 19:23:42 Define communication channels (IRC channels, StackExchange, LP Answers, Forums). Is it time to start specializing; targeting to dev, devops/sysadmins, users? (johnpur) 19:23:50 OK 19:24:11 last week we gave the go ahead for user support forums 19:24:52 i just pinged the url and nothing has been set up 19:25:44 the open questions are a) do we want to consider moving away from LP Answers to a Q&A style for dev/devops issues? 19:25:56 who would own this, etc.? 19:26:21 a) Yes! 19:26:40 the last issue was the setting up of additional irc channels... we setup #openstack-dev... it has almost 0 traffic to date 19:26:41 I have answered the same questions in Q&A a whole bunch of times 19:27:19 starting from the top 19:28:02 for the forums site, do we want to nudge jordan/chad to get going after they made such an issue on the ml, or just let it lie? 19:28:29 i'll shoot jordan an email just to see what's going on 19:28:44 i don't want it to be confusing for people in the community who are expecting something to happen 19:28:51 agree 19:29:04 #action jbryce to ping jordan on openstack forums 19:29:10 second 19:29:28 johnpur: i think he was going to make a poll to decide on software 19:29:45 anyone besides vishy want to weigh in on Answers vs Q&A? 19:30:12 seems like there was pretty broad agreement on a stack style q&a setup 19:30:47 if we go to a Q&A i am an advocate of using an open source project, to emphasize our commitment to being open 19:30:49 mp strong opinions either way here, but certainly not opposed. my main concern is who would own/moderate it 19:31:21 eday: ditto 19:31:38 i think i can find someone to do the setup/sysadmin... we need to discuss moderation 19:32:05 perhaps a call to the community? 19:33:01 will there be additional moderation beyond what already happens in launchpad answers? 19:33:48 idk, is there a need to clean spam, off-topic, etc.? 19:34:53 would this be a good task for a technical community manager to own? 19:35:02 probably some, but i'd imagine it would be pretty similar to how the answers process is working currently. 19:35:03 sounds like it 19:35:09 i am looking to find one now 19:35:45 ok, for now leave this on my plate... but we agree that we want to move off of Answers? 19:36:12 johnpur: i'd send an email to the list just to make sure everyone (thierry, josh, rick) can all way in as well 19:36:13 the great point of QA sites is that most of the moderation is done by users 19:36:46 jbryce: can you set an action to get feedback from the other ppb members? 19:37:11 #action johnpur to verify QnA approach as replacement for Launchpad Answers 19:37:45 lastly, the question of additional IRC channels 19:38:20 i'm wondering if we need to contract, not expand? 19:38:32 *-dev isn't being used 19:38:44 johnpur: I'd say lets see how dev works out for a bit 19:39:17 eday: ok by me 19:39:59 done on this topic 19:40:03 ok 19:40:07 thanks 19:40:15 #topic other discussion 19:40:24 anyone have anything else they wanted to cover? 19:40:30 yes 19:40:46 question regarding non-core projects 19:41:23 ok 19:41:36 should we have a specified meeting where the non-core projects can discuss progress, issues, etc. like we do in the release meeting for core? 19:42:16 are you thinking weekly in terms of frequency? 19:42:18 i am a little concerned that there is no visibility to naas, lunr, redwarf, keystone, burrow, etc. 19:42:31 just throwing it out there 19:42:37 right...i think the idea makes sense 19:43:09 but since they aren't officially openstack projects, should we be the ones to establish that process for them? 19:43:31 or is this to see where they are to see when they will be ready to become part of the official project? 19:43:33 notmyname: good point. how should we handle? 19:43:55 I think we should encourage more frequent mailing list updates or something (somehting I've been meaning to do for burrow) 19:44:22 since the DS there has been little to no discussion on IRC or the ML on these projects 19:44:24 since we know they are interested in being part of openstack (although we should have them apply--what happend to that?), they should keep us all up to date on how things are going 19:44:40 not an oversight thing, just a "how's it going" thing 19:46:01 so, is this outside the purview of the PPB? 19:46:38 IMO, yes. but we are interested in general status 19:47:21 like eday said we can encourage them to provide more information 19:47:30 i think we've almost got the steps published on how to apply to incubate 19:47:42 and then we could have an official regular update time for incubated projects 19:47:43 notmyname: the danger is that some of these are tightly coupled (such as naas) and key to the objectives of the overall project (federation). 19:47:45 more open they are along the process, easier it will be to approve them later one, that ca be the PPB's position 19:48:06 I like what eday says 19:48:35 we don't want to approve things that are thrown over the wall, we want demonstration that projects are community driven 19:49:04 * notmyname will now let eday speak for him because he agrees with everything eday is saying 19:49:17 :) 19:49:18 ++ 19:49:27 OK, for the more strategic projects i think we should be more actively involved to ensure alignment with the overall project goals. Outside the scope of the PPB, but within the scope of being senior leaders and PTL's. 19:50:57 I know anotherjesse agrees with this as he is mentoring the keystone project :) 19:51:16 keystone is reaching out the the PTLs 19:51:34 since we need them to adopt keystone as an auth mechnism 19:53:13 anotherjesse: exactly. we need to ensure that projects such as naas understand how to engage the community and other projects. 19:54:35 and *why* they should 19:56:34 i think it makes sense, but should just be informal until the incubation process gets rolling 19:57:55 so do we have other things to talk about? 19:58:09 jbryce: ok. we don't want to wait too long to get the ball rolling, i would suggest that the diablo midpoint should be a drop dead date 19:58:45 johnpur: that is fine with me 19:58:54 anyone have anything else? 20:00:25 all right 20:00:34 talk to you guys later 20:00:38 #endmeeting