14:00:05 #startmeeting tc 14:00:06 Meeting started Thu Oct 10 14:00:05 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is asettle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:07 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:09 The meeting name has been set to 'tc' 14:00:18 #topic roll call 14:00:21 o/ 14:00:23 o/ 14:00:25 \o 14:00:26 o/ 14:00:26 Merged openstack/governance master: New charm and interface for placement split https://review.opendev.org/686253 14:00:30 o/ 14:00:36 tc-members - get your https://giphy.com/ ready 14:00:44 o/ 14:00:47 Allowing for 3 minutes grace for all to arrive. 14:00:51 o/ 14:00:55 Well, probs 2. We got shit to get through. 14:00:55 o/ 14:00:56 o/ 14:01:15 tc-members - agenda incoming 14:01:19 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee 14:01:25 For all those that don't have it open already 14:02:08 Right 14:02:10 Let's kick it 14:02:18 Firstly, before we dive into the ageanda, going to address the elephant 14:02:19 Me rn: https://giphy.com/gifs/animation-reaction-halloween-d0QrBg3r8qL0Q 14:02:33 SUSE is no longer actively developing their OpenStack cloud offering 14:02:46 :-( 14:02:51 evrardjp, and myself are SUSE employees, but we stand by the community and will continue to work in this capacity 14:03:07 asettle: evrardjp Thank you! 14:03:10 We will both continue to be employed by SUSE, but in new roles. More confirmation of what that means at a later date. 14:03:12 hope it will not send any people away from community:( 14:03:25 * evrardjp lurks in the back 14:03:47 SUSE employees are clearly still welcome in the community, and SUSE is still encouraging of their employees to stand by their open source values 14:04:06 We will see more and more what this looks like for the community once the dust settles. 14:04:09 Any questions before we move on? 14:04:15 Yes, I'm hoping that support for existing customers will mean that at least some staff that is OpenStack (and community) focused will be kept on that task 14:04:27 correct njohnston 14:04:38 No questions, just best wishes and good luck! 14:04:39 We still have an OpenStack team 14:04:43 Absolutely. No new development, but no abandonment either. 14:04:49 njohnston: ++ 14:04:55 njohnston: and thank you 14:05:20 https://giphy.com/gifs/animation-reaction-halloween-d0QrBg3r8qL0Q 14:05:26 * diablo_rojo cant remeber if either of you were going to be in Shanghai 14:05:31 Okay, let's dive in to business as usual. 14:05:35 asettle: won't but evrardjp will be afaik 14:05:37 evrardjp, and did they freeze the openstack team size? 14:05:39 I will be 14:05:40 I definitely am not. Anymore long haul travel and I'll shoot myself. 14:05:57 evrardjp, okay got it :) 14:06:11 ricolin, yes. It's been reduced to a small number from EMEA and the US 14:06:26 asettle, I can understand the feeling, but I thankfully haven't gotten it before. 14:06:35 o/ 14:06:44 zaneb, way to walk in late mate jeez 14:06:45 ;) 14:06:46 OKAY 14:06:52 #topic Follow up on past action items 14:07:02 ricolin - Follow up with SIG chairs about guidelines 14:07:08 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SIGs-guideline 14:07:27 Still need to target ttx's comment to separate optional and necessary part. Plan to do it the following days. 14:07:53 and possible one of topic for meta-sig in PTG I assume 14:08:10 #action ttx to provide feedback for ricolin regarding SIG chairs guidelines 14:08:24 Okay, thanks ricolin 14:08:25 more feedback are welcome:) 14:08:37 ricolin, TC feedback? 14:08:50 yeah include all TCs for sure 14:09:06 Thanks ricolin - tc-members please review the above doc if you haven't already 14:09:11 Sounds good. Will take a look. 14:09:12 Moving swiftly onwards. 14:09:17 ack 14:09:25 ttx - contact interested parties in a new 'large scale' sig (help with mnaser, jroll reaching out to verizon media) 14:09:25 thanks jungleboyj njohnston 14:09:34 :-) 14:09:44 i think that's largely been quiet, verizon mentioned it was a "not now" at teh time 14:09:52 And we have a forum for large scale SIG 14:09:53 and there is a scheduled (i think) forum session around this 14:09:54 ^ 14:10:01 #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/shanghai-2019/summit-schedule/events/24405/facilitating-running-openstack-at-scale-join-the-large-scale-sig 14:10:16 yep 14:10:24 mnaser, backlog item then or shall we bring this up again next month? 14:10:42 i think we should follow up on this post summit aka next month 14:10:56 I think we should plan to invite large scale user to join that Forum too (who might be new in community). Like Line, Blizzard, etc. 14:11:19 Something we can do at short notice? 14:11:25 yes 14:11:33 is there going to be people from those orgs at shanghi? 14:11:40 that will be nice for large scale user I think? 14:11:40 ^ that's the thing to know 14:11:42 ^ that 14:11:48 lol 14:11:59 mugsie, yes 14:11:59 I get the feeling not many tech people from them are going 14:12:10 ricolin, is that an action item you can take on? Figure out who is going, and who we can invite? 14:12:16 yes 14:12:33 asettle, make it a action, and I will make sure it's taking cared 14:12:35 #action ricolin to figure out who from the large scale user groups are going to Shanghai and invite them to forum 14:12:37 Thank you ricolin 14:12:46 Anything further on this topic? 14:13:01 i think that's all 14:13:02 Fabulous. 14:13:08 Now, for the other most wonderful topic in the world 14:13:09 https://media.giphy.com/media/EckH9c8kzRLGg/giphy.gif 14:13:19 Release Naming - Results of the TC poll - Next action 14:13:26 Heh 14:13:28 oh boy 14:13:32 This is relatively vague, since it doesn't accompany an action item 14:13:34 Just another "let's do the thing" 14:13:38 He he. 14:13:40 Whereas I think most of us would like to put our heads in the sand. 14:13:50 o/ 14:13:55 o/ 14:14:00 You say naming and corvus appears, it's like a fun trick 14:14:11 sorry for late 14:14:13 Summary: we have naming for V - Z. Not after, correct? 14:14:14 ...V release..in Vancouver.. 14:14:20 It's okay gmann we'll probably just never forgive you but it's fine 14:14:21 sorry missed the question above, multiplexing 14:14:31 ttx, all good, we're onto the next item. 14:14:34 We've got a lot to get through. 14:14:35 V works out nicely. 14:14:44 So, great, we've got V-Z. What's our grand plans for after? 14:14:45 but yes I'm going to reach out to people for large scale SIG, based on registration data 14:14:52 So there are now two additional proposals, to name after movie quotes or to name based on cities over a given population threshold but not tied to the summit location. Both stipulate V is for Vancouver. 14:14:54 sorry i missed, what's the plan for v-z? 14:14:58 One thing I'm curious, do we need a PTG session for Release Naming? 14:15:05 We don;t have a plan for V-Z 14:15:06 ttx thank 14:15:07 I hope not 14:15:20 W,X,Y,Z are going to be a delight I'm sure. 14:15:28 ricolin, I really hope not. 14:15:30 We don't have a plan? Frick. Missed that. mugsie you performed a condorcet poll and there was a tie? We were unable to sort that out? 14:15:31 asettle: summary is... 14:15:39 I don' think it's appropriate to be accepting anymore suggestions at this stage. 14:15:46 asettle: ++ 14:15:48 None of the options proposed beat the "keep it the same" in the last round 14:15:49 basically no one dislikes the current system enough to change it 14:15:56 asettle, agreed, don't need more options 14:16:07 We have two new proposals, which might beat "keep things the same" 14:16:07 For once, the community is not actually picking ridiculous sides. 14:16:29 we don't have a plan that's different from the status quo 14:16:34 * mnaser would like to hear from corvus for starters given he brought this subject up 14:16:35 ttx, it's past that stage though. We fairly opened the floor for everyone to come up with new ideas, and that time has ended. Sorry to be the cut throat one here, but we have done that. That's over. We couldn't agree. 14:16:36 I mean we have a tie from poll let's re open a poll with only those two opions? 14:16:39 unless this is ~the tc~ meeting only 14:16:40 asettle: the issue is.. if nothing that is already proposed can beat "keep thinsg the same" it means we should keep things the same 14:16:55 i feel like there are a substantial number of folks on the tc who acknowledge the problems, and supportchanging the process, but we haven't come to a consensus on how. how can we move forward? 14:17:12 I see no reason why we can't continue to propose options 14:17:13 ricolin: how will that help? 14:17:15 was the condorcet poll structured in a way to do that, or do we need it structured a little differently? 14:17:16 We have two already proposed 14:17:27 i heard there was some confusion 14:17:47 i think we're at like 2 polls? one with the old rosters and one with the new? 14:17:54 ttx, because it will create a snowball effect. If we continuously say "yeah come with your ideas" we're never going to make a decision. 14:18:04 People are going to have dreams and come up with ideas the next day, just when we thin kwe're going to get this sorted. 14:18:05 corvus: we had one poll to select the two best options, than one to compare those two with "keep things the same"... and none came out on top 14:18:07 We need to have a deadline. 14:18:23 zaneb, just assume we need to have a way to move forward instead of take all the options but no decision out 14:18:38 asettle: I disagree. As long as we keep things the same, we can propose changes 14:18:55 i agree with ttx 14:18:57 If we do allow for more ideas, we need a hard date that they need to be submitted by. 14:19:08 Just to be totally clear, we have V taken care of. Correct? 14:19:11 there are a number of problems with the current system, among them: alienating contributors, cultural issues with host countries, cost in resources and time to run the process, and potential disconnect with future summit schedule. 14:19:13 Just V, yep. 14:19:13 Current status is: we keep things the same, none of the proposed options beats "keep things the same" 14:19:21 is keeping the status quo really okay? i don't think it is. 14:19:28 I strongly think we need to alter the system 14:19:30 jungleboyj: not yet 14:19:32 I don't agree that we have V taken care of 14:19:38 so I'll continue to propose changes until one wins :) 14:19:41 i agree with ttx on that too, especially with the recent osf announcement regarding events. 14:19:45 Ok. Glad I asked. 14:19:48 I think we *should* take care of V using the existing process though 14:19:49 V is not taken care of at all 14:20:03 jungleboyj, some propose just go with Vancouver but nothing is decided 14:20:07 zaneb: +1 14:20:08 We have two proposed options that do take care of V, then V-Z, then A-Z 14:20:09 in a few weeks we're going to be in a "oops, we don't have 2 summits a year, what now?" 14:20:17 mnaser: exactly 14:20:36 so lets just get that over with now and fix the system starting now because waiting until Z is not right 14:20:45 The two options currently proposed indeed say "for V, let's say Vancouver" 14:20:55 but others might be proposed 14:21:14 Okay tc-members , I think we're going to need a significant slice of time to discuss next steps. I propose the following: An announcement that we are continuing to accept proposals as we are currently "staying the same". That the TC does not wish to continue with the same process, but we won't accept just "anythiNg", we want "better". 14:21:15 also having to wait until event locations are announced means we end up making a lot of compromises in other places to account for the fact that we don't yet have enough information to select a cycle name 14:21:28 asettle: personally I think we should vote on those, and if one ever gets 7 votes for, it should be accepted 14:21:42 just make sure your vote reflects that 14:21:44 ttx, would you like to take the action item of communicating this post-meeting? 14:21:47 I agree with ttx 14:22:08 Don;t vote +1 on one that you prefer "keep it the same" over it 14:22:13 the reason an election official ended up being the one to push on the u cycle name was that we needed to start setting up the schedule for related elections 14:22:14 I'm happy to summarize the situation 14:22:15 asettle: ttx We need to set a cut off date for making proposals then. 14:22:17 yes, I think that now we have narrowed down the field, the regular voting rules are sufficient to handle it 14:22:25 jungleboyj: why? 14:22:36 jungleboyj: we can change it again in the future 14:22:41 ^^^ 14:22:43 I'll just vote no 14:22:48 yeah its not like this is something set hard in stone 14:22:53 #action ttx to summarise current situation with release naming and steps TC would like to take further. 14:22:53 but I don;t see why we should decide for all times 14:23:09 Personally I disagree, but I think we can take this conversation to a ML so we have a wider audience. 14:23:15 ttx: sounds good, thanks :) 14:23:17 I'll definitely only vote for things that project for the next A-Z 14:23:20 We need to move on with this meeting. 14:23:21 asettle: ++ 14:23:31 Thank you ttx 14:23:34 corvus: you might want to alter your proposals so that they cover "any foreseeable future" 14:23:37 I feel like we are going to just make it more complicated, but we can see what the community says. 14:23:40 ttx: will do 14:23:43 #topic New initiatives and/or report on previous initiatives 14:23:46 jungleboyj: ++ 14:23:50 Help gmann on the community goals following our new goal process. 14:23:58 It includes 1. Ussuri goal proposals update 2. Plan for V cycle goal discussion 3. One more TC member to Volunteer 14:24:14 1. Ussuri goal proposals update 14:24:27 we already started collecting the ideas for U cycle goal 14:24:29 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-u-series-goals 14:24:40 Fantastic 14:24:44 and we have 3 proposal till now which is good number 14:24:52 That is good. 14:25:12 we can wait for more or as next step we can ask author to start drafting the goal deyails as per our new process 14:25:14 Pleased to hear we're getting tracking there 14:25:15 details 14:25:17 traction* 14:25:47 and once we have details up then we do our regular review 14:26:00 I can probably help gmann 14:26:06 gmann, need anything from tc-members? 14:26:18 diablo_rojo: thanks. that is 3rd point and really appreciated 14:26:23 2. Plan for V cycle goal discussion 14:26:33 * diablo_rojo apologizes for jumping ahead 14:26:40 ;) 14:27:21 forum sessions for V cycle goal discussion is not selected. so we have two options either merge the V goal discussion with U cycle goal sessions or leave the V cycle goal discussions or kickoff on ML 14:27:58 we can moave kickoff it on ML and use PTG for it? 14:27:59 U cycle goal sessions is more of discussing the implementation details of u cycle goals 14:28:11 *moave/maybe 14:28:35 gmann, yeah, totally agree 14:28:38 ricolin: PTG would not be suitable as it need more audience than just TC. i am afraid many will be busy in their project PTG 14:29:24 gmann: ++ 14:29:33 gmann, PTG just sounds like the best second option IMO 14:29:37 NOTE- next summit of f2f conference will be in V release cycle not before that so we need this to start before V cycle start 14:30:13 gmann, perhaps it seems reasonable to merge? jroll and I were at the forum selection meeting and there was discussion of providing more time for a double slot 14:30:17 So it could be split in half? 14:30:35 gmann: how is that different from U ? 14:30:50 My concern is that V is far enough in the future that people are going to have a hard time concentrating on what the community needs will be at that point 14:30:57 Good point 14:30:59 are we allow to change forum name to said U+V? 14:31:07 I think we can have the V discussion asynchronously 14:31:20 V is just too abstract to select V cycle goals now 14:31:28 ok. 14:31:30 ttx: Sounds reasonable. 14:31:40 ricolin: I think that is a more sensible idea, say U plus brainstorming for V, with the note that V goals will be formalized on the ML as we get closer. 14:31:42 I mean, we can definitely look at the backlog 14:31:54 Yeah I think things are a little early for V at this point. 14:31:55 s/can/should/ :P 14:32:02 njohnston: ++ 14:32:03 but starting the selection process... probably not 14:32:22 i think if we've learned anything it's that goal selection process and discussion happening at forums is not the best thing to do 14:32:30 based on logistics, timing, etc. 14:32:43 Jump out a little. For V, I kind of hope we can have one for overall metering or arm support (there's a forum for arm), but assume we should create a popup team to investigate first. if anyone also interested with:) 14:33:10 i personally feel this fits much better than trying to stuff things into forums that happen way too early 14:33:13 ricolin: we have a process, we should use it 14:33:18 but this time it will be implementation details of new proposed sessions and selection we will leave for later 14:33:34 gmann - I think we're going to have to take this to the ML so we have a proper discussion on the best next steps seeing as we are not in agreement here. 14:33:35 mugsie, those two idea just come out of me:) 14:33:41 (maybe we should play around the idea of having scheduled online conferences or meetings or something to have those "forum" sessions during a cycle) 14:33:42 Could I put you down for an action item to compelte that, gmann ? 14:33:49 complete* 14:33:59 sure 14:34:31 gmann, we can sync post meeting and get on the same page/you can tell me what you need help with :) 14:34:41 Thank you gmann 14:34:51 diablo_rojo: sure. I will sync up on that 14:34:56 #action gmann to email ML regarding U and V cycle forum collaboration (otherwise) 14:35:00 that's all from my side on goal 14:35:02 #action diablo_rojo to help gmann with forum selection 14:35:03 Thank you gmann 14:35:05 moving right along 14:35:12 mugsie - to sync with dhellmann or release-team to find the code for the proposal bot 14:35:15 UPdates? 14:35:42 I belive evrardjp jumped the gun, and did the thing :) 14:35:45 i believe i pasted the link to it in here a month ago in the last meeting 14:35:59 Fabulous, I'll scribble that one out. I was not in the last meeting :) 14:36:09 jroll - ttx Feedback from the forum selection committee 14:36:11 mugsie: For the cycle job updates? 14:36:15 Follow up on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-TC-brainstorming 14:36:15 ohai 14:36:16 yeah 14:36:20 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-TC-brainstorming 14:36:24 Final accepted list? 14:36:26 So I was not on the selection committee, but the results are in 14:36:34 Yah it was me and jroll - dunno why your name was there :P 14:36:43 I gave an update on the ML on this, and the etherpad has which were accepted as well 14:36:45 (shows as "accepted" in the etherpad) 14:36:49 Fabulous jroll :) 14:36:56 Any questions team before I move on from that one? 14:37:03 maybe the selection committee can explain the rationale for picking / not accepting sessions there :) 14:37:10 I think evrardjp suggested discussing what to do about the not accepted selections 14:37:18 sure, jroll ? 14:37:30 Like the PTl tip and tricks session... should we plan time to cover that in PTG? 14:37:45 yeah, so the committee agreed the PTL thing might be better for the PTG 14:37:56 as we'd have more current and prospective PTLs there 14:38:04 Yes, more targetted to the right audience. 14:38:09 fair.. maybe open the TC session with that on Friday? 14:38:21 so that PTLs can all go elsewhere after that? 14:38:24 ttx: ++ 14:38:34 "elsewhere" meaning in the same room at another table 14:38:42 seems reasonable 14:38:58 the other rejected submission was the V goals - we put that off to make room for more project team sessions, IIRC. 14:39:05 ack 14:39:50 Correct from my memory too. We tried our best to have a decent variation of items, and combine things that were combinable. IE: Cinder's sessions 14:40:08 By combining more similar topics, we could open the floor for other items that haven't come up before 14:40:26 +1 14:40:36 * mnaser maybe thinks we should spill this over to office hours 14:40:45 mnaser, completely agree. 14:40:51 Any more questions about the forum selection, afterwards please 14:40:54 Moving on 14:40:59 overall forum looks great to me #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/shanghai-2019/summit-schedule#track_groups=90 14:41:03 #topic addendums 14:41:10 thanks asettle jroll 14:41:13 Also in case you missed it... jroll and I archived all non-official repos from the GitHub "openstack" org 14:41:14 I don't know who added this, or what it's supposed to be for buhhhtttt 14:41:23 "define goal select process schedule" 14:41:27 This is different discussion to select goals. We need to make sure we can have a schedule for cycles to follow. So we know when exactly to ask for goal idea, ask for champion, start +1 cycle goal select process, and start +2 cycle select process. 14:41:36 Thank you ttx :) 14:41:46 asettle, we still have one for `mnaser: sync up with swift team on python3 migration` ? 14:41:53 Oh shit! 14:41:54 I'm so sorry mnaser 14:41:58 We'll continue curating that GitHub content, stay tuned 14:42:00 I mean before addendums:) 14:42:11 its fine, i think we mentioned last time that we're all good 14:42:14 * ttx addendumed 14:42:17 mnaser, nothing to add? 14:42:21 we can remove it at this point 14:42:26 Okay, thanks mnaser :) sorry for skipping! 14:42:32 Derpy brain 14:42:36 I blame birthday 14:42:43 there is a gif for that 14:42:46 Birthday brain! 14:43:07 Okay, so, roll back to the "define goal select process schedule" 14:43:25 https://gph.is/1QpzoFx 14:43:37 ttx, me this morning 14:43:40 LOL 14:43:49 My idea just like what I put on 14:43:49 We need to make sure we can have a schedule for cycles to follow. So we know when exactly to ask for goal idea, ask for champion, start +1 cycle goal select process, and start +2 cycle select process. 14:43:53 I do not know who added but this seems good proposal to me, if we have proper schedule ready for goals it will be easy for TC to execute the new goal process and with current summit schedule. 14:43:59 OMG 14:44:01 ricolin, is this yours? 14:44:12 'define goal select process schedule' 14:44:15 Ye 14:44:21 Seems like a good idea to me. 14:44:28 I put that on but everyone can jump in:) 14:44:32 Certainly helps with running elections and gathering forum submissions 14:44:40 I agree. Anyone want to work together with ricolin to define this properly? 14:44:41 I agree, it sounds sensible. 14:44:49 IMO we should make this a real schedule so we can have more time to investigate into goals. 14:44:49 The schedule should not block any new goal idea to join but will give us a chance to make sure the goals we already have are on schedule. 14:44:50 as per history "GuanYu, lin " 14:44:50 Those examples of schedules might be good to look at for guidance. 14:45:03 gmann, that's me:) 14:45:08 tc-members - anyone to work with ricolin on this? :) 14:45:11 ricolin: ohk :) 14:45:13 I'll action you in 14:45:14 Sounds like a good idea. 14:45:20 i can help ricolin 14:45:20 ricolin, I could probably help given my experience with elections and whatnot 14:45:25 thanks gmann 14:45:28 #action gmann and ricolin to work on defining goal selection process schedule 14:45:29 THANKS FAM 14:45:32 diablo_rojo, tnaks! 14:45:37 *thanks! 14:45:46 Alright I saw this one in the chan yesterday I think 14:45:47 Maintain issue with Telemetery 14:45:51 Who put this one up? ricolin ? 14:45:55 all me:) 14:45:59 * diablo_rojo now makes promise to herself to stop volunteering for things 14:46:05 I mean 14:46:09 ttx got some report on the lack of maintain for telemetry project 14:46:17 Also there's a unsync issue between Aodh and Gnocchi 14:46:21 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-August/008541.html 14:46:33 Appreciated, thanks for the TL;DR 14:46:44 What can we do, ricolin ? 14:46:48 tbh its probably time to sunset telemetry 14:47:06 and start working with other communities on things that have become a much stronger standard of metrics collection (say: prometheus and co) 14:47:18 I invited zhurong to join but assume he didn't received my message 14:47:20 Have we got another thread going with this topic?/ 14:47:24 ML thread, that is 14:47:26 mnaser: That isn't a bad idea. 14:47:29 mnaser, agree 14:47:32 I wonder if we are at a point where we should start on a Telemetry v2. 14:47:41 Leverage the technologies that are out there. 14:47:45 why re-invent the wheel when there is a huge thriving ecosystem that's good at that 14:47:53 mnaser: ++ 14:47:56 every time we try to sunset it somebody pops out of the woodwork to say they'll keep it alive because they rely on it 14:48:07 Totally. mnaser - possible you could start the ML thread on this one? Get the ball rolling for community discussion? 14:48:13 mnaser: Yes, include prometheus, but we can still make use of gnocchi as a storage option (although I know some people that would opt for influxdb instead) 14:48:23 oh man 14:48:24 I spoke with one of the architects at Elastic the other day and they would love to have help from the community. 14:48:32 why do i get the fun ones "hey lets rm -rfv telemetry 14:48:36 mnaser, that "oh man" is "oh yes" right? ;) 14:48:37 HAHA 14:48:40 Cause you're fearless? 14:48:44 not just what tools we can use but to update current resource around community 14:48:49 there are people out there who use prometheous, telegraf etc with gnochi 14:49:00 mnaser, we can sync up and write it together? 14:49:01 like I think heat already have some broken template to fix 14:49:13 given gnocchi isnt even openstack, i wouldnt even "encourage" to use it 14:49:22 there are very good solutions out there, things like thanos/etc 14:49:28 njohnston: i think that suggestion relies on someone taking over gnocchi. aiui, that's now also basically unmaintained 14:49:37 asettle: i can write it now and send it and then mute the thread and hide all summit 14:49:37 :D 14:49:43 fungi: oh, that's a shame. I had not heard. 14:49:47