20:01:05 <ttx> #startmeeting tc
20:01:06 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jun 21 20:01:05 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:01:07 <mtreinish> o/
20:01:07 * Rockyg munches on a nectarine in the back
20:01:07 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:01:10 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
20:01:14 <flaper87> edleafe: still trapped in your car ?
20:01:17 <flaper87> :D
20:01:18 <ttx> Hi everyone... Our agenda for today is:
20:01:24 <ttx> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee
20:01:28 <edleafe> flaper87: Nope, not today :)
20:01:34 <ttx> A few easy ones to start
20:01:38 <ttx> #topic Add current house rules for reference
20:01:41 <ttx> #link https://review.openstack.org/330442
20:01:50 <ttx> Last meeting I signed up to document the current rules we follow to fast-track some specific changes
20:01:50 * thingee is about to step out of a taxi and run to the nearest desk ... might be MIA for a second
20:02:03 <ttx> This is obviously a living document so feel free to propose subsequent changes
20:02:13 <ttx> Has enough approvals to pass now, so will approve unless someone yells
20:02:39 <dims> ++ ttx
20:02:45 <ttx> approved
20:02:52 <ttx> #topic Update team tags for some projects
20:03:00 <ttx> #link https://review.openstack.org/329327
20:03:20 <ttx> This is your regular team diversity tag update, courtesy of flaper87 this time
20:03:23 <flaper87> I just ran the validation script and ttx helped out to double check
20:03:28 <ttx> Also has enough approvals to pass, so will approve now unless someone screams
20:03:33 <flaper87> w00h000
20:03:50 <ttx> I won't count that as a scream
20:04:05 <russellb> you should clarify the type of scream next time, i suppose
20:04:09 <flaper87> it's pure joy coming out of my lungs
20:04:11 <flaper87> russellb: ++
20:04:12 <russellb> a scream of opposition
20:04:16 <dims> haha
20:04:23 <mordred> russellb: can we write up a definition of screams and a categorization system for them?
20:04:27 <ttx> approved
20:04:30 <dims> and tag them!
20:04:31 <ttx> #topic Remove Packaging-Deb project team
20:04:34 <russellb> mordred: sounds like the only way to move forward
20:04:36 <ttx> #link https://review.openstack.org/329430
20:04:40 <jroll> mordred: you might call it a scream catalog
20:04:43 <mordred> jroll: ++
20:04:46 <flaper87> scream:opposed-to-patch
20:04:48 <ttx> So... I proposed this because Packaging-Deb is the only official project team without any visible activity
20:04:56 <ttx> and we now require project teams to show some activity before we accept them
20:05:08 <notmorgan> dropping to unofficial status seems reasonable
20:05:12 <ttx> I understand that the team will need some infra support, and that being official facilitates prioritizing that up
20:05:12 <notmorgan> until they have activity
20:05:16 <mordred> I'm not in favor of removing this as the project team in question is currently in the middle of good-faith effort to implement the needed things
20:05:25 <russellb> i also see no harm in keeping it if they're trying to mobilize
20:05:26 <ttx> But I'm not (yet) convinced that infra support is a prerequisite before the team can start working on the OpenStack side
20:05:35 <notmorgan> it would be super easy to re-add but i'll defer if someone says they are making the effort
20:05:36 <mordred> which is the result of the discussions that were had on this very topic at the summit
20:05:41 <ttx> mordred: any reason why the git repositories are not migrated from git.debian.org ?
20:05:51 <ttx> I see there is a Mirantis server building packages from pushes to git.debian.org, I suspect it could read from git.openstack.org instead
20:05:54 * notmorgan assumes they are w/ the commit message and mordred's comment
20:06:05 <AJaeger> mordred: any discussion on mailing lists? Any IRC meetings for the project?
20:06:06 <mordred> because migrating them without the testing support would be a downgrade, and we're currently working on adding the things we've specced out to make that make sense
20:06:26 <mordred> AJaeger: zigo and fungi have been working in the infra channel, also pabelanger and I have been involved
20:06:40 <ttx> mordred: why would it be a downgrade ? I'm pretty sure the Mirantis CI can read from git.openstack.org just the same
20:06:41 <dhellmann> it sounds like there's work here, it's just not easily visible because of where it's happening?
20:06:50 <mordred> dhellmann: yah
20:07:02 <mordred> it's work being done by the project team in question it's just happening in infra land at the moment
20:07:08 <dims> we can ping zigo to see what's needed i guess
20:07:08 <flaper87> If there's work going on, I'm good with deferring the removal for a bit longer
20:07:09 <notmorgan> wfm then
20:07:14 <zigo> I'm here.
20:07:14 <ttx> dheI'd argue it happens outside of openstack, in git.debian.org
20:07:17 <mtreinish> mordred: sure, but do we want something as an openstack project that doesn't have an artifacts in openstack git?
20:07:33 <mordred> so - debian packaging is a bit of a beast
20:07:43 <dims> ooh there's detailed notes from zigo in the review
20:07:47 <mordred> and getting infra able to have artifacts for it at all is non-trivial
20:08:00 <ttx> mordred: I don't see that as a prerequisite though
20:08:03 <mordred> the work required is understood and under way
20:08:10 <flaper87> what problems would it cause to the packaging-deb team if we approve this patch ?
20:08:17 <fungi> right, i don't necessarily disagree with removal from the governance list (tc oversight doesn't really provide direct benefit to the work going on now, nor would it be hard to re-add later), but there is work being done
20:08:28 <zigo> ttx: So, we would just use gerrit, but packages wouldn't be published? How do you expect to even try to install the produced packaged then?
20:08:31 <flaper87> Just want to lay out what the downsides of this patch for the debian team are
20:08:41 <ttx> zigo: how is that different from the current situation ?
20:08:51 <fungi> i think packages could also be published without it being in the governance list
20:09:07 <zigo> ttx: I've explained it on the review. Currently, each git push produce a package, and then we can run a full all-in-one install of OpenStack and run tempest.
20:09:12 <zigo> We don't have this in OpenStack infra.
20:09:15 <mordred> I would actually not be in favor of openstack publishing packages without it in the governance list
20:09:35 <zigo> We can only build openstack-pkg-tools, and because that one isn't published in a Debian repository, other packages can't use it as a build-dependency, and therefore cannot build.
20:09:36 <ttx> zigo: My point is, today you're using git.debian.org and using Mirantis CI to build packages. Tomorrow you could use git.openstack.org and Mirantis CI to build packages, at least temporarily
20:09:38 <notmorgan> mordred: i'm 100% behind that stance
20:09:38 <mordred> I think that is not in keeping with how the other projects work - and distro packages by nature are things people will start to rely on no matter what we say
20:09:45 <fungi> the reason we originally pushed to have this be "official" was that we were still in the days of the stackforge/ git namespace and infra didn't want to see a hundred repos need to be renamed to the openstack/ namespace once it applied to be an official project-team
20:09:56 <thingee> mordred: not sure if I necessary agree with that. distributions can produce their own packages without our involvement
20:10:00 <zigo> ttx: How would I trigger the build?!?
20:10:02 <russellb> people are doing stuff, do we want to encourage those people to keep doing more stuff close to openstack?  i think yes, so let's just leave it be.
20:10:04 <thingee> although it would be nice to part of the community
20:10:14 <mordred> thingee: I was responding to fungi saying that _We_ could publish packages for it without it being official
20:10:17 <ttx> zigo: how do you trigger the build currently ?
20:10:17 <dhellmann> zigo : how do you do it now?
20:10:18 <notmorgan> thingee: i don't want *us* to publish packagses uniless they are official
20:10:18 <thingee> you can't stop distributions doing their own thing
20:10:27 <zigo> dhellmann: I have a git recieve hook.
20:10:28 <mordred> notmorgan: ++
20:10:35 <thingee> notmorgan: so, debian publishes them ...
20:10:38 <thingee> what am I missing?
20:10:40 <notmorgan> thingee: thats all. not that it has to be official for someone to publish packages.
20:10:40 <zigo> I'm all for having a better solution and move to gerrit *NOW* if someone has an idea.
20:10:54 <thingee> well if you're not in the governance... sounds like you're not official
20:10:57 <mordred> so - before we re-engineer the solution in this meeting
20:10:59 <notmorgan> zigo: i think it's fine to defer the removal for now.
20:11:04 <thingee> notmorgan: ^
20:11:22 <thingee> you're just like a lot of things. part of the ecosystem
20:11:24 <ttx> Look, I totally agree with the endgame. I just don't get why you can't migarte teh git repositories now. Nobody answers that question
20:11:25 <dhellmann> mordred : yeah, I was just trying to understand why moving would break things
20:11:29 <flaper87> As I said, if there's work going on, I think we could just defer the removal for a couple of months
20:11:42 <notmorgan> thingee: if we have a project publishing packages under the auspices of openstack, i'd rather it be an official project than not.
20:11:43 <mordred> ttx: I'm purposely not answering that question because at the moment there is a plan to get things migrated
20:11:45 <thingee> dhellmann: +1 ... I don't think this has been answered yet
20:11:46 <dims> +1 to defer removal for now. but would like to hear a plan that works soon-ish
20:12:04 <flaper87> I don't think the removal would impact the work going on but keeping it for a couple of more months won't hurt for sure
20:12:09 <annegentle> (here, sorry I'm late)
20:12:10 <thingee> notmorgan: totally, but you can't stop the world from publishing their packages
20:12:18 <mordred> thingee: that's not what any of this is about
20:12:18 <notmorgan> thingee: if it's just storing the data in git, sure, but this is more of a using infra to publish to an official repo.
20:12:22 <fungi> it feels like a catch-22 if we're avoiding publishing packages unless the project is an official part of openstack, but avoiding making it official because work to build the current packages is happening outside openstack infra
20:12:22 <thingee> notmorgan: so simply, you're official if you're in this governance list
20:12:27 <thingee> if you're not, you're not official.
20:12:27 <ttx> it feels like the work could happen on openstack side with no loss with just a s/debian/openstack/ on the Mirantis CI side
20:12:42 <zigo> ttx: That's what I've been trying to do. I'm sorry if I'm not good enough at it using the current OpenStack infra, but I think everyone from infra can vouch for the fact I've been trying for the last 12 months
20:12:42 <mordred> thingee: nothing is about stopping the world from publishing packages ... the question about package publication is about whether or not Infra publishes a package repo
20:12:48 <notmorgan> mordred: ++
20:13:07 <flaper87> mordred: thingee notmorgan can we go back to discussing the patch and not who can publish packages?
20:13:08 <mordred> I do not believe that infra should publish openstack packages without the associated project being official
20:13:09 <thingee> well based on ecosystem rules, infra could still be part of things.
20:13:13 <flaper87> I don't think this work is there yet
20:13:17 <thingee> mordred: +1
20:13:23 <dhellmann> mordred : +1
20:13:33 <zigo> The thing about publishing packages is *NOT* about having them accessible for the general public.
20:13:38 <ttx> mordred: we publish plenty of tarballs for projects not official
20:13:42 <zigo> It's about having them available as build-dependencies to build other packages.
20:13:45 <mordred> ttx: but we do not publish docs for them
20:13:52 <mordred> and yes - what zigo just said
20:14:04 <fungi> i agree that people will come to rely on whatever we publish, no matter what we say about it being unofficial, but people come to rely on tarballs and git repos of unofficial projects we publish today as well
20:14:11 <mordred> we need a package repo available so that we can cross-test inter-dependencies of the packages with the rest of the things that are also in master
20:14:17 <thingee> ttx: sounds like we may need to revisit things of infra's involvement then if there is some consensus around publish things and infra involvement
20:14:20 <ttx> hmm, ok, I can buy that. I still don't understand why you can't migrate the git repositories today though.
20:14:35 <dhellmann> mordred, zigo : I think the thing that bothers me here is that we have an official project using a bunch of private resources still, and that makes it impossible for someone not involved to see what's going on at all. Which, while I don't think anything untoward is going on, doesn't set a good precedent.
20:14:49 <notmorgan> ttx: no hooks - he could if he watched the gerrit stream instead of the direct git hooks
20:14:59 <fungi> it sounds like the mirantis ci doing continuous package builds would need some reworking to switch from some sort of web callback to consuming gerrit events
20:15:00 <mordred> dhellmann: I TOTLALY agree and I would not do this this way if I had it to do over
20:15:03 <ttx> notmorgan: Ah. I see
20:15:06 <notmorgan> ttx: it is doable, but may be throw-away effort in the long term
20:15:13 <mordred> dhellmann: but right now, I do not think it helps anything to temporarily remove the project from governance
20:15:14 <ttx> notmorgan: ok, thanks you
20:15:21 <notmorgan> ttx: since zuul/etc will handle that for him :)
20:15:30 <zigo> dhellmann: So, mostly, you're saying we don't have enough visibility, right?
20:15:43 <ttx> mordred: ok, morgan gave mae a good reason for deferring
20:15:47 <dhellmann> mordred : I mostly agree. Still, it would be nice to see some sort of public activity. Where is the coordination of this work happening?
20:15:51 <thingee> so my comment in the review of not immediately voting for things is because mordred has a history in the community of coming through with things. what is the timeline of things actually migrating?
20:15:52 <notmorgan> dhellmann: would a status update on the ML cover it?
20:15:58 <notmorgan> dhellmann: like... semi-regular?
20:15:59 <jroll> mordred: dhellmann: I think there's a question there, is the project team doing stuff using private resources, or is that mirantis doing those things and the project team is working toward moving all of that?
20:16:04 <jroll> I almost feel like it's the latter
20:16:04 <mordred> dhellmann: right now in #openstack-infra
20:16:20 <dhellmann> jroll : yeah, I think you're right.
20:16:35 <dims> jroll : it's just poor zigo doing all the work there :) (not mirantis!)
20:16:35 <notmorgan> vs strictly irc, i'm ok asking zigo to provide progress/updates to the ML every so often so we have clear visibility to point at vs "irc logs"?
20:16:36 <fungi> ultimately, i suspect a lot of this would be solved (or wouldn't have come up) if the governance change to add all those package repos had depended on a project-config change to create them first
20:17:01 <notmorgan> fungi: possibly
20:17:02 <dhellmann> fungi : yes, in future I think that's a good way to arrange things
20:17:06 <mordred> dhellmann: ++
20:17:08 <fungi> we have more policy/process/expectatins around that now, but didn't back when that governance change was merged
20:17:13 <fungi> er, expectations
20:17:31 <dhellmann> notmorgan : yeah, some mailing list updates would help make the project seem more alive for those of us not reading #openstack-infra all day
20:17:34 <notmorgan> zigo: would you mind sending a quick status update to the ML on this process every so often?
20:17:38 <notmorgan> zigo: it would help :)
20:17:43 <zigo> What you guys have to realize as well, is that what you call "mirantis CI" is just a git hook to build packages using Jenkins. So, we go in interrative ways with "git push" until it builds correctly on all target distros. That's *VERY* far from the Gerrit workflow, where things are checked, and then patch approved. I don't think we could just move from git.debian.org to gerrit without having the full blows and wissels
20:17:44 <zigo> because of that.
20:17:50 <johnthetubaguy_> yeah, that's a good point for next time, on the depends-on
20:17:54 <notmorgan> zigo: and hopefully isn't too much extra effort while the -infra stuff is being worked on.
20:18:01 <zigo> notmorgan: Ok, will do.
20:18:07 <notmorgan> zigo: fantastic. :)
20:18:09 <dhellmann> zigo : ok, well, it's pretty easy to make jenkins watch a git repo instead of using an in repo hook
20:18:28 <fungi> zigo: there is a gerrit-jenkins plugin you can use to trigger jobs from the gerrit event stream, probably extrement similar to what you already have, but we can discuss that elsewhere
20:18:29 <mordred> dhellmann: right - but then we're pushing untested commits into openstack repos
20:18:41 <fungi> er, extremely
20:18:45 <dhellmann> mordred : are they being tested in their current repos?
20:18:45 <mordred> because the current process is to push and test and push and test until it turns green
20:18:50 <mordred> dhellmann: only post merge
20:18:55 <dhellmann> I see
20:18:58 <ttx> mordred: zigo asks for an extension of the grace period until end of August, does taht sound reasonable ?
20:19:02 <mordred> ttx: yes
20:19:07 <flaper87> ttx: yes
20:19:07 <notmorgan> ttx: wfm
20:19:12 <mordred> ttx: I think we can have made the progress we need by then
20:19:13 <sdague> yes
20:19:14 <dims> yes
20:19:16 <ttx> I can live with that
20:19:20 <thingee> mordred: hi, still asking about the timeline for things to migrate?
20:19:21 <fungi> from an infra perspective, seems like a reasonable request to me
20:19:21 <johnthetubaguy_> +1 from me
20:19:21 <mordred> \o/
20:19:23 <dhellmann> ok, well, I don't think we need to actually change anything aside from having some public discussion on the ML about where things stand, so zigo or mordred please post that
20:19:25 <zigo> +1
20:19:45 <mordred> thingee: luckily, even though there are a lot of repos, the process is the same for all of them, so once we have it done for one, we have it done for all
20:20:05 <mordred> dhellmann: ++
20:20:05 <flaper87> mordred: last famous words
20:20:06 <ttx> #agreed grace period for Packaging-Deb extended to end of August
20:20:09 <mordred> flaper87: :)
20:20:33 <dims> mordred : carved some time in your new gig for this? :)
20:20:33 <ttx> #action zigo or mordred to update the list on status, if only to explain to contributors wanabees where to go to participate today
20:20:59 <ttx> because ultimately that's my concern
20:21:01 <mordred> dims: of course - debian packaging is very important to my new overlords :)
20:21:03 * amrith makes a note to take present for mordred to ann arbor next week
20:21:10 <dims> :)
20:21:12 <thingee> mordred: heh
20:21:12 <ttx> We say we have a team, but there is no clear way to join it
20:21:16 <zigo> BTW, would you feel better if we moved out of OFTC in #debian-openstack to something in freenode under #openstack-something?
20:21:18 <mordred> ttx: agreed
20:21:27 <dims> ttx : yep. agree
20:21:31 <dhellmann> zigo : yes
20:21:34 <ttx> zigo: that would definitely help
20:21:36 <notmorgan> zigo: would be nice to be here on freenode.
20:21:36 <thingee> zigo: that would be a good start
20:21:37 <zigo> I can arrange that.
20:21:38 <ttx> will have to do it anyway
20:21:42 <zigo> What channel name do you propose?
20:21:49 <mordred> #openstack-debian ?
20:21:49 <zigo> #openstack-deb-pkg ?
20:21:49 <notmorgan> zigo: openstack-deb-packaging ?
20:21:50 <thingee> openstack-debian
20:21:57 <mordred> anyof those
20:21:58 <notmorgan> or what thingee said
20:22:00 <zigo> Ok.
20:22:00 <flaper87> zigo: ++
20:22:07 * fungi votes we just move the openstack channels from freenode to oftc instead
20:22:12 <mordred> ++
20:22:16 <ttx> also duplicating/moving the content in that alioth page to the wiki or some doc repo would help too
20:22:16 <dims> LOL fungi
20:22:17 <AJaeger> zigo: or at least have the channel you currently use documented in the governance repo
20:22:19 <notmorgan> fungi: hehe
20:22:19 <mtreinish> fungi: heh
20:22:23 <thingee> stole it from mordred 300ms later
20:22:28 <mordred> warning - we've hit a max at irc channel registrations and are still working on a solution to that
20:22:42 <dhellmann> zigo : please add the channel to the team description in the governance repo when you have it set up
20:22:47 <mordred> so, you konw, if the irc channel takes a bit to be fully integrated, it's also not zigo's fault :)
20:22:49 <AJaeger> mordred: only for gerritbot, not for registeration overall
20:22:49 <mtreinish> mordred: what's the max?
20:22:49 <zigo> fungi: I can arrange help from the OFTC IRC ops if we move there! :)
20:22:50 <notmorgan> mordred: a second bot!
20:22:56 <notmorgan> mordred: :P
20:22:57 <AJaeger> mtreinish: 120
20:23:05 <ttx> OK, I'll abandon the review
20:23:06 <mordred> notmorgan: yah. a second bot is, in fact, the answer
20:23:11 <notmorgan> mordred: sadly =/
20:23:16 <zigo> IIRC there's even already a channel for it.
20:23:16 <mordred> AJaeger: yah. that
20:23:17 <thingee> freenode was not ready for the big tent
20:23:18 <AJaeger> notmorgan: patches welcome ;)
20:23:20 <fungi> zigo: yep, so can i (and we've talked to them before) but moving all of the openstack community is no small task. we've considered it more than once
20:23:22 <zigo> That I already added...
20:23:52 * thingee misses the days of just openstack-dev
20:24:20 <russellb> clearly we should self host a hip new chat thing
20:24:23 <fungi> i recommend hanging out in the same channel on both oftc and freenode just because many in the debian community may expect to find you on oftc
20:24:33 <ttx> anything else on that topic ? Anyone disagreeing on extending the grace period ?
20:24:35 <notmorgan> russellb: i hear we should just use slack
20:24:43 <mordred> russellb: actually - turns out hipchat and slack both have user max limits
20:24:47 <flaper87> ttx: let's change topic :)
20:24:47 <mordred> that openstack is in excess of
20:24:50 * ttx empties a bucket of eels on notmorgan
20:24:51 <fungi> i actually reside in equivalents of many of our more popular channels on oftc in case we ever need to make an emergency move
20:24:53 <russellb> oh?
20:24:56 <russellb> how about rocket.chat
20:24:58 <mordred> russellb: yup
20:24:59 <russellb> anyway, moving on
20:25:02 <mordred> they max out around 2k users
20:25:10 <russellb> weak
20:25:12 <ttx> #topic Add 'type:horizon-plugin' tag
20:25:13 <mordred> yup
20:25:14 <flaper87> mordred: pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff.... peanuts
20:25:22 <ttx> focus, team, focus
20:25:26 <ttx> #link https://review.openstack.org/329479
20:25:29 <russellb> this seems like an easy +1
20:25:32 * dhellmann thinks of peanuts
20:25:32 <ttx> TL;DR: This is a new type: tag for deliverables so that we can describe which ones are Horizon plugins.
20:25:42 <dougwig> russellb: don't jinx it.
20:25:44 <flaper87> +1 to this one!
20:25:45 <ttx> was missing a couple +1s last time I looked
20:25:58 <flaper87> there are 7 now
20:26:03 <thingee> tag very much appreciated
20:26:06 <ttx> Looks like we have the number now
20:26:21 <ttx> Alright, approved
20:26:24 <mtreinish> ttx: should we propose similar tags for other plugin repos? (like devstack or tempest)
20:26:40 <ttx> mtreinish: we looked into that -- there aren't enough to justify it right now
20:27:03 <ttx> (from a release management perspective)
20:27:07 <flaper87> mmh, it's weird there aren't enough devstack plugins
20:27:12 <flaper87> I mean, surprising, mostly
20:27:14 <david-lyle> if you count the repos that are both service and plugin then there are
20:27:14 <ttx> shoudln't prevent anyone from proposing though
20:27:15 <dhellmann> mtreinish : eventually, when there are more examples of each
20:27:39 <dhellmann> david-lyle : from a release perspective, if it's in the same repo, we only care that it's a service
20:27:41 <david-lyle> the problem is one repo is now being used for 3 things
20:27:51 <mtreinish> ttx, dhellmann: well tempest has very few standalone plugins (most went in repo) but devstack should have a fair number of them
20:28:05 <david-lyle> dhellmann, for release true, for anyone else it's confusing
20:28:06 <ttx> david-lyle: I guess the tag describes deliverables that are standalone plugins
20:28:11 <dhellmann> david-lyle : we're looking for ways to organize the content of releases.openstack.org to make it easy to find the deliverable you're looking for
20:28:31 <dhellmann> mtreinish : are they in their own deliverables (not repos)?
20:28:43 <ttx> Also the horizon plugin names were pretty inconsistent, so that makes sure users can identify them all
20:28:56 <mtreinish> dhellmann: http://git.openstack.org/cgit everything that starts with devstack-plugin as a start
20:29:31 <mtreinish> there might be others there too (I'll do a ctrl+f for devstack)
20:29:31 <dhellmann> mtreinish : are those things that users want to download and use? or are they developer tools that aren't released?
20:29:50 <dhellmann> for releases.o.o we only care about things that are actually being released
20:30:03 <mtreinish> dhellmann: there was nothing in the horizon tag about releases (unless I missed that)
20:30:12 <ttx> This is a bit orthogonal to the topic, maybe we can discuss that in open discussion if there is time left ?
20:30:15 <dhellmann> this isn't about categorizing everything we have, it's about categorizing things that show up on the releases site
20:30:19 <dhellmann> ttx: ++
20:30:30 <ttx> we should have some time
20:30:33 <ttx> hopefully
20:30:34 <dims> mtreinish : interesting angle
20:30:43 <ttx> #topic Add 'level playing field' requirement
20:30:49 <ttx> #link https://review.openstack.org/329448
20:31:00 <ttx> So... I think that the value "OpenStack" provides, as an open source organization, is to create workspaces where open collaboration across multiple organizations can happen
20:31:12 <ttx> To recognize that, I'd like us to say that an official "OpenStack project" should be something anyone from any organization can join and contribute to as an equal
20:31:26 <ttx> And if a project team is proposed in the future with such a scope that developers from a specific organization (or a closed set of specific organizations) have a structural advantage, we should not make it an official OpenStack project
20:31:41 <ttx> It can be an unofficial project alright, but we should limit the "official OpenStack project" label to things that are level playing fields
20:31:41 <mordred> I agree that goal and sentiment
20:31:46 <thingee> +1
20:31:52 <notmorgan> +1
20:31:54 <flaper87> yup
20:31:57 <sdague> how does this apply to things like oslo.vmware or oswin ?
20:32:05 <russellb> it applies per project team
20:32:06 <ttx> now it's just a guideline, and we'll have to interpret it, but I think it's a statement we need to make
20:32:09 <maishsk> ttx:what sparked this? Anything specific?
20:32:14 <russellb> so, to Oslo
20:32:16 <russellb> not oslo.vmware
20:32:19 <ttx> maishsk: no
20:32:22 <johnthetubaguy_> +1 but sdague has a good question
20:32:31 <ttx> maishsk: it's more preventive
20:32:31 <dims> russellb : right, that was my observation on the review
20:32:33 <russellb> similar to it applying to Cinder overall, not Cinder drivers
20:32:34 <mordred> I like russellb's take on that question
20:32:37 <flaper87> I think ttx replied to that on the review
20:32:42 <ttx> sdague: I answered on the review
20:32:43 <mordred> cinder and oslo are the projects
20:32:47 <thingee> russellb: +1
20:32:51 <mtreinish> ttx: is there any relationship with the single vendor diversity tag?
20:32:57 <sdague> winstackers is a dedicated team
20:33:02 <dims> if oswin wants to be under big tent then they will run into trouble
20:33:09 <sdague> https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/7ef0cf16a761c947891504f15f5463adcf99cf07/reference/projects.yaml#L4183-L4208
20:33:14 <russellb> sdague: ah, yes, that may get hit by this
20:33:15 <russellb> sorry
20:33:15 <thingee> mtreinish: I think that's just a result of giving your organization an advantage in a project?
20:33:18 <ttx> oslo.vmware is part of Oslo which is a level playing field. We judge project teams, not specific deliverables
20:33:21 <thingee> poor diversity
20:33:31 <mordred> sdague: but are they all at microsoft and are microsoft people the only ones who really could conceivably join?
20:33:36 <mordred> that would be my litmus test I tihnk
20:33:38 <thingee> for some, not all
20:33:49 <ttx> winstackers, yes, we'll have to look into that one if someone can point to an unfair advantage
20:33:56 <sdague> http://stackalytics.com/?module=winstackers-group
20:33:57 <russellb> i'm really not that concerned though
20:34:04 <mtreinish> thingee: right, so does that mean having the tag mean it's not a level playing field?
20:34:13 <sdague> you need windows licenses to be effective with it
20:34:13 <russellb> it's clearly about windows integration, not creating a whole full project / API that only works on windows
20:34:17 <mordred> some single-vendor teams are just single-vendor because nobody else happens to care- not because there is a structural advantage to people at the company in question
20:34:18 <russellb> meh
20:34:25 <thingee> mtreinish: I don't think so. I meant to say it *could* be the  result of poor diversity
20:34:32 <ttx> sdague: I'm not sure anyone in winstackers benefits from a structural advantage though
20:34:33 <mtreinish> thingee: ah, ok
20:34:37 <sdague> anyway, it's an edge, and it's fine to have judgment on edges
20:34:45 <russellb> sdague: ++
20:34:45 <ttx> sdague: definitely an edge
20:34:46 <mordred> sdague: I think it would be hard to argue that windows licenses are a scarce commodity, much as I don't personally have any
20:34:56 <mordred> and yes - wonderful edge to discuss
20:34:59 <ttx> sdague: probably the only one in the current project list on the edge
20:35:22 <sdague> ok, it's close enough to nova, that I figured I'd raise it, as it's critical for hyperv support
20:35:27 <thingee> mtreinish: I think poor diversity could also happen when one company has an interest in something in openstack, but none competitors/others aren't interested at the same time.
20:35:28 <ttx> mtreinish: so that's an interesting question
20:35:29 <annegentle> I don't think this is a tag, it's a preventative measure to avoid a project governance application we wouldn't accept?
20:35:40 <dims> ttx : mordred : do we want to say "type:service"?
20:35:46 <sdague> given that nova doesn't have out of tree driver support, but some of the in tree drivers use support libraries for complex logic
20:35:48 <ttx> mtreinish: basically, most non-level playing fields are single-vendor as a result
20:35:59 <notmorgan> annegentle: more, clearly defining grounds of why the application wouldn't be accepted
20:36:09 <ttx> mtreinish: BUT to me it's a transient state, not an end goal
20:36:12 <notmorgan> annegentle: less about "preventing", some maybe, but others would need assement
20:36:21 <thingee> notmorgan: +1
20:36:25 <dims> oswin exists just to serve nova, cinder, etc
20:36:30 <annegentle> I talked ttx's ear off about this, that I personally find many many more social structures can prevent a level playing field, but if this is one measurable barrier to entry then I'm ok with documenting it.
20:36:58 <notmorgan> annegentle: i think winstackers is the shining example of needing assesment (and probably would be ok) but could be hit at face value.
20:37:03 <dims> and they requested oslo as a home to start with and we declined
20:37:07 <ttx> annegentle: yes, this one is about structural advantage to specific organizations due to the way the project team scope is set up
20:37:18 <ttx> but there are other forms of discrimination
20:37:23 <sdague> is the thinking that this is really what applied in the poppy situation?
20:37:34 <ttx> sdague: for some of us yes
20:37:39 <sdague> because unless you have a big CDN contract, the project isn't useful
20:37:57 <ttx> sdague: this is about contribution, not usage
20:38:02 <dhellmann> isn't this also in anticipation of the fallout from the neutron stadium dissolution?
20:38:18 <sdague> dhellmann: is it? I guess that was part of my question for examples
20:38:25 <ttx> sdague: nobody in the Poppy team had an unfair advantage against others
20:38:49 <ttx> sdague: so it was a level playing field
20:39:12 <dhellmann> sdague : maybe that's just me? I think having this sort of rule in place will be useful when all of those driver teams start thinking about what to do next
20:39:24 <david-lyle> my concern is that the wording is so vague and subjective that this provides no real benefit over the current subject and vague criteria which is the TC makes a judgement call
20:39:31 <ttx> dhellmann: IF the stadium dislocates and BigCorp wants to set up a project team to host the development of their driver which connects to pricy proprietary hardware... would fall into that new rules yes
20:39:42 <dhellmann> ttx: right
20:39:55 <sdague> I'm fine if this is about not having 20 official vendor specific projects for networking
20:39:59 <annegentle> ttx: you just answered the question I was typing :) welldone sir
20:40:03 <ttx> sdague: ++
20:40:04 <sdague> but, I'd be more fine if we just said that
20:40:11 <dhellmann> david-lyle : how would you make this more specific?
20:40:16 <thingee> david-lyle: I'd very much like each one to be carefully decided on a case-by-case basis by the tc.
20:40:19 <sdague> instead of the vague level playing field language
20:40:34 <ttx> sdague: I think saying that openstack projects present a fair open collaboration space is useful
20:40:37 <amrith> david-lyle, I don't believe it would be easy to make this more specific without calling out specific projects by name.
20:40:44 <dhellmann> this language doesn't seem vague to me, I don't understand why it seems that way to others.
20:40:46 <amrith> but I would love some alternate verbiage.
20:40:56 <thingee> dhellmann: I agree
20:40:59 <flaper87> dhellmann: ++
20:41:01 <amrith> the language strikes me as pretty clear, and a very solid basis to interpre on.
20:41:20 <ttx> yes, it is pretty clear wording. Thanks to amrith
20:41:31 <amrith> thx ttx
20:41:36 <notmorgan> the first iteration was much more vague
20:41:42 <mestery> dhellmann: Agree
20:42:00 <notmorgan> this is this is straight forward enough to cover basing decisions on it.
20:42:01 <sdague> does this apply to fuel? or tripleo, which are the product installers for single companies?
20:42:02 <notmorgan> imo
20:42:18 <notmorgan> sdague: fair question.
20:42:20 <mtreinish> sdague: that's a good question
20:42:23 <thingee> sdague: do I need special stuff to contribute to fuel?
20:42:24 <ttx> sdague: why would it ?
20:42:33 <dhellmann> sdague : it would apply to any project driven mainly by one company where that company pushed contributors from other companies out in some way
20:42:37 <sdague> "The project shall not benefit a single vendor, or
20:42:37 <sdague> a single vendors product offerings"
20:42:38 <russellb> in theory, from a technical standpoing, everything is there that you need
20:42:47 <ttx> russellb: exactly
20:43:04 <mestery> dhellmann: Not just pushed out, but provided barriers to even enter
20:43:05 <ttx> sdague: you can take it and start your own Mirantis. No secret sauce
20:43:08 <russellb> politics preventing cooperation more than technology
20:43:12 <flaper87> I don't think neither of them benefit a single product/offering.
20:43:12 <dhellmann> mestery : yes, that
20:43:22 <dhellmann> russellb : right
20:43:28 * amrith tries to parse flaper87's double negative
20:43:28 <dhellmann> russellb : well, both
20:43:29 * dims listening intently
20:43:36 <sdague> barriers to entry come in lots of forms
20:43:44 <flaper87> amrith:  crap, I knew I shouldn't have done that! :P
20:43:46 <thingee> sdague: I would expect the TC would make this argument as ttx mentioned if it was brought up. just like any other project on a case-by-case basis
20:43:52 <annegentle> ttx: does this patch landing mean any changes to the current projects list? I think not but want to be sure.
20:44:00 <ttx> annegentle: not unless you propose one
20:44:02 <thingee> annegentle: yes current list
20:44:06 <flaper87> amrith: thanks for pointing out. I was like: "either or neither... o well"
20:44:21 <thingee> annegentle: but as ttx mentioned, it would have to be proposed and discussed
20:44:24 <annegentle> thingee: ttx ah. okay.
20:44:47 <ttx> This has enough votes to pass if I vote for it. Anyone objecting ? I bet we'll have a fair number of abstentions waiting for the first case-by-case happening
20:44:58 <annegentle> does this force any additional conversation about how individual projects are governing their own drivers?
20:44:59 <dims> sdague : one barrier that i have heard is that "mirantis has all the fuel engineers, so i am not able to hire folks to work on fuel related stuff"
20:45:19 <russellb> dims: that's pretty weak
20:45:22 <johnthetubaguy_> Well, I like merging what we have as a good starting point, and see how we go
20:45:31 <dhellmann> dims : that's only a barrier if those engineers refuse to work with anyone who doesn't work at mirantis
20:45:34 <thingee> annegentle: that would be completely up to them and their relationship with the vendor/drivers
20:45:43 <thingee> with their*
20:45:48 <annegentle> I still have a concern about interpreting the lack of driver example...
20:45:49 <dims> russellb : dhellmann : right, giving an example that i heard recently
20:45:57 <annegentle> I'm not abstaining, I'm still thinking...
20:45:59 <thingee> some projects have made it pretty clear they want nothing to do with their drivers, and to focus purely on the interface they provide.
20:46:22 <amrith> dims conversely if you wanted to contribute a fuel plugin, the fuel team is welcoming. so I submit to you that it is an open and level playing field
20:46:29 <russellb> i wish we had a bit more consistency around driver approach, not sure why the battles have to be so different across projects
20:46:30 <dims> amrith : agree
20:46:32 <russellb> but that's for another day ...
20:46:35 <annegentle> thingee: right. okay.
20:46:37 <dhellmann> russellb : ++
20:46:39 <thingee> russellb: +1
20:46:45 <ttx> OK, I'll approve it now
20:46:48 <flaper87> ttx: ++
20:46:49 <annegentle> russellb: it isn't easy to understand from outside-in
20:46:56 <annegentle> russellb: so, yeah +1
20:46:59 <ttx> unless someone else wants to formally register their vote
20:46:59 <russellb> for sure
20:47:18 <russellb> not easy to understand from the inside-in
20:47:33 <ttx> alrigth approved
20:47:40 <ttx> #topic Open discussion
20:47:47 <ttx> I have 3 topics
20:47:50 <russellb> no TC meeting next week?
20:47:52 <dims> So no meeting next week?
20:47:53 <ttx> We'll have most TC members in Ann Arbor next week for the leadership training, so we'll skip that meeting
20:47:54 <dims> :)
20:47:56 <dhellmann> for those interested, https://review.openstack.org/332465 will reflect the new type:horizon-plugin tag
20:47:59 <russellb> (jinx)
20:47:59 <ttx> Next meeting on July 5th
20:48:16 <ttx> We have (ahem) a small delay in the P/Q naming process
20:48:16 <notmorgan> ttx: i am going to probably skip jul 5th, fwiw.
20:48:22 <thingee> +1 skip
20:48:32 <notmorgan> and +1 to skip next week.
20:48:40 <ttx> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/332193/
20:48:49 <ttx> I'll approve that delay since at this point it looks like a typo
20:48:50 <sdague> july 5th is often a holiday in the US
20:48:54 <sdague> depending on org
20:49:03 <notmorgan> sdague: yeah and a lot of people may take the day off as well
20:49:07 <thingee> sdague: food coma recovering from bbq
20:49:10 <notmorgan> sdague: since it'll be a tuesday.
20:49:12 <sdague> notmorgan: sure, that too :)
20:49:18 <notmorgan> post a 3 day weekend
20:49:24 <flaper87> Let's skip next week and see if we should skip the week after over email as we've done in the past
20:49:25 <fungi> or reattaching digits blown off by small explosives
20:49:26 <ttx> sdague: ah. ok, please add yourself to the absentee list if you can't make it
20:49:32 <sdague> ttx: will do
20:49:35 <ttx> and I'll skip it if we can't have 8 people around
20:49:39 <jroll> fungi++
20:49:43 * gothicmindfood hands fungi a safety sparkler
20:49:53 <notmorgan> gothicmindfood: they make safety sparklets?
20:50:19 <gothicmindfood> notmorgan: they're safe as long as you don't stick them in your eye.
20:50:19 <ttx> mtreinish: we can continue the discussion on other potential type:plugin* tags if you want
20:50:21 <amrith> notmorgan ... https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=nl.anndroid.sterretje&hl=en
20:50:25 <thingee> gothicmindfood: those sparks give a pinch feeling. that's not safe :(
20:50:37 <notmorgan> gothicmindfood: what about eating them?
20:50:47 <mtreinish> ttx: sure, we can
20:50:51 <gothicmindfood> notmorgan: tastebuds are overrated
20:50:57 <mordred> gothicmindfood: what about making your friend eat them? is that safe?
20:51:05 <fungi> are tempest and devstack plugins likely to end up on releases.o.o? do they generally tag releases at all?
20:51:13 * jroll will not be celebrating july 4th with mordred and notmorgan
20:51:24 <annegentle> is the board meeting Tuesday of next week?
20:51:32 <mtreinish> fungi: some tempest plugins do, like the designate plugin does
20:51:32 <jroll> fungi: I'd suspect people will branch devstack plugins
20:51:32 <mordred> jroll: there'll be PIE though
20:51:33 <russellb> annegentle: yes
20:51:34 <dhellmann> fungi : I think not, but I'm not opposed to having the type tags if others want them for some reason.
20:51:34 <amrith> ttx, you had 3 things?
20:51:34 <ttx> mtreinish: I guess what made type:horizon-plugin compelling is that it answered a question users had about deliverables, since those need to be found to de deployed alongside services
20:51:43 <ttx> amrith: 3rd is ^
20:51:44 <gothicmindfood> annegentle: ruh roh - did we schedule training during a board meeting?
20:51:46 <mtreinish> fungi: devstack plugins get branched normally (if people remember to)
20:51:50 <mordred> gothicmindfood: yup
20:51:50 <jroll> mordred: I'll need to eat and run then :D
20:51:54 <russellb> only affects mordred
20:51:57 <mestery> Yeah
20:52:03 <ttx> gothicmindfood: might have been the other way around
20:52:13 <gothicmindfood> mordred: sandwiches > than board meetings
20:52:19 <mordred> gothicmindfood: +1000
20:52:21 <russellb> truth
20:52:24 <jroll> ++
20:52:28 <mordred> gothicmindfood: I HAVE EATEN ONE OF THOSE SANDWICHES
20:52:39 * gothicmindfood is looking forward to seeing leadership training attendees next week!
20:52:49 <dims> have fun you all at Ann Arbor. wish i could make it
20:52:50 <mtreinish> ttx: was it? I think people have questions about all the things. Not just those which are deployed
20:52:51 <ttx> mtreinish: tempest/devstack plugins are more dev-oriented so slightly less useful downstream. But I wouldn't object to them
20:52:54 * mordred is looking forward to seeing michigan in the summer
20:53:01 <flaper87> gothicmindfood: mordred I want one of those sandwiches
20:53:11 <mordred> flaper87: you will eat at least one
20:53:11 <flaper87> gothicmindfood: mordred at least one
20:53:14 <mtreinish> ttx: well I can propose something and we can bikeshed from there
20:53:32 <mtreinish> ttx: are there other types of plugins besides those 3?
20:53:49 <mtreinish> *others worth adding a tag for
20:53:51 <ttx> mtreinish: I proposed that tag because I wanted to be able to answer that question on releases.o.o. Like dhellmann said, those tempest/devstack plugins are not really released so that doesn't help there, hence why I skipped them
20:54:01 <dims> fuel plugins ! :)
20:54:07 <ttx> mtreinish: rally plugins maybe
20:54:34 <ttx> gothicmindfood: anything to add about next week ?
20:54:46 <mtreinish> dims: I've leave that tag to you :)
20:54:55 <dims> :)
20:54:55 <amrith> gothicmindfood, ttx ... others ... is there any plan for a dinner as a group?
20:54:56 <mtreinish> ttx: I can do a scan, and see how many things there are
20:54:59 <gothicmindfood> ttx: not much new - I scheduled dinner for all of us for Tuesday night at Zingerman's roadhouse
20:55:01 * jroll invites anyone hanging around past thursday to come hang out in his 'hood, there's surely campgrounds and hotels nearby
20:55:37 <annegentle> gothicmindfood: how hot/humid is it?
20:55:39 <gothicmindfood> also, mestery is unable to attend, last minute, so if there's someone who wants to book a last minute flight to come out and be our 20th, anyone can let me know!
20:55:51 <gothicmindfood> annegentle: I will arrive tomorrow, but apparently there was a huge lightning storm last night!
20:55:56 <jroll> annegentle: it's been 80s and fairly humid lately
20:55:57 <gothicmindfood> jroll: comments on the weather?
20:56:06 <fungi> annegentle: i'm not finding any recent board meeting reminders/invites posted to the foundation@ ml, but there's https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/28Jun2016BoardMeeting
20:56:06 <gothicmindfood> sounds about right.
20:56:07 <jroll> I'd certainly bring shorts
20:56:13 <ttx> also Air France just decided not to strike on Monday, so I might actually make it
20:56:15 <annegentle> jroll: ok, good to know. Actually similar to Austin right now oddly enough.
20:56:24 <annegentle> ttx: eesh.
20:56:32 <flaper87> ttx: good stuff
20:56:34 <jroll> annegentle: the difference is this is normal, not cold :P
20:56:37 <annegentle> fungi: I got a reminder this morning I want to say
20:56:39 <ttx> we have more strike days than non-strike days currently
20:56:43 <gothicmindfood> ttx: maybe they'll strike later in the week so you can hang with me in Ann Arbor longer! :)
20:56:46 <jroll> looks like rain next week: https://www.wunderground.com/q/zmw:48103.1.99999
20:56:58 <annegentle> OpenStack umbrella!
20:57:04 <jroll> :D
20:57:12 * flaper87 hates rain
20:57:14 <ttx> For those who missed it, I recommend SpamapS's thread on Architecture WG
20:57:14 <flaper87> oh well
20:57:18 * annegentle loves Michigan
20:57:29 <jroll> but yes, michigan is beautiful this time of year, if you can stay for the weekend I'd highly recommend it
20:57:35 <fungi> annegentle: oh, yep http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2016-June/002395.html (just realized i was looking at the foundation-board@ archives instead)
20:58:43 <amrith> thx ttx, have a good evening all ...
20:58:51 <ttx> Alright. If nothing else... we can close with 2 minutes early
20:58:59 <Rockyg> board meeting 6.28
20:59:02 <annegentle> nice!
20:59:13 <flaper87> have a good one, everyone
20:59:16 <ttx> Thanks everyone
20:59:20 <russellb> bye!
20:59:20 <ttx> #endmeeting