15:00:20 <gmann> #startmeeting tc
15:00:20 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Thu Sep 15 15:00:20 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:20 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:20 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
15:00:27 <knikolla> o/
15:00:28 <gmann> #Roll call
15:00:30 <gmann> o/
15:00:34 <gmann> #topic Roll call
15:00:36 <gmann> o/
15:00:39 <slaweq> o/
15:00:43 <jungleboyj> o/
15:00:47 <knikolla> o/
15:00:48 <dansmith> o/
15:01:21 <gmann> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee
15:01:26 <gmann> today agenda ^^
15:02:35 <rosmaita> o/
15:02:44 <gmann> #topic Follow up on past action items
15:03:03 <gmann> gmann to add community-wide goal productivity and how to make work fast in PTG etherpas
15:03:06 <gmann> that is done
15:03:12 <gmann> gmann to add and invite SIG I18 chair/members to TC+ Leader interaction session
15:03:22 <gmann> I added the note but I will ping SIG chair during PTG
15:03:31 <gmann> gmann to book operator hours slot and ask PTL to choose them
15:03:40 <gmann> this is also done, we will discuss it in PTG topic
15:03:46 <gmann> gmann to check with PTG organizer about 17-19 UTC slot booking
15:03:50 <gmann> ditto
15:03:59 <gmann> #topic Gate health check
15:04:04 <gmann> any news on gate?
15:04:41 <dansmith> I have no data, because I've been doing nothing fun lately :(
15:04:47 <rosmaita> anecdotally, i have not done many rechecks recently ... though maybe i should not say that out loud
15:04:56 <slaweq> in Neutron we still have some issues with oslo.db 12.1.0
15:05:19 <slaweq> but other than that seems like things are fine
15:05:25 <slaweq> and rechecks are also good IMO
15:05:46 <dansmith> sweet
15:05:55 <gmann> nice, thanks
15:06:29 <jungleboyj> Good news.
15:06:42 <gmann> Bare 'recheck' state
15:06:45 <gmann> slaweq: please go ahead
15:07:06 <slaweq> it seems good still, not many rechecks in general in last week
15:07:29 <slaweq> and many more active projects are I think more or less following guidance and have less bare rechecks recently
15:07:48 <slaweq> there are still few smaller projects which I need to reach out to but I didn't had time :/
15:07:51 <jungleboyj> Will be interesting to see how things go as we get into the RC time frame.
15:08:01 <slaweq> jungleboyj++
15:09:11 <gmann> slaweq: thanks
15:09:35 <gmann> #topic 2023.1 cycle PTG Planning
15:09:36 <gmann> TC + Leaders interaction sessions
15:10:00 <gmann> slot is booked for this on Monday 15-17 UTC #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-leaders-interaction-2023-1
15:10:14 <gmann> TC PTG
15:10:27 <gmann> etherpad #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-2023-1-ptg
15:10:36 <gmann> please add the topic you would like to discuss
15:11:02 <gmann> About TC slots
15:11:34 <gmann> as discussed in last meeting, we want to book slot for Thursday Friday 15-19 UTC
15:11:56 <gmann> I booked 15-17UTC slots on both day
15:12:07 <gmann> and for 17-19 UTC, I pinged and sent email to PTG organizer Erin and diablo_rojo_phone
15:12:10 <gmann> but no response yet
15:12:31 <gmann> I will send another reminder and will update here whatever will be the decision,
15:13:44 <gmann> we can discuss about alternate slots based on the discussion
15:13:50 <gmann> for now let's wait
15:13:57 <rosmaita> sounds good
15:14:20 <gmann> Schedule 'operator hours'
15:14:24 <gmann> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-September/030301.html
15:14:35 <dansmith> glance said this morning they would be scheduling theirs
15:14:40 <dansmith> I think nova is done
15:14:41 <rosmaita> everyone i talk to is excited about these
15:14:50 <gmann> yeah nova, cinder, horizon done
15:14:58 <gmann> great
15:15:04 <knikolla> :)
15:15:15 <slaweq> I will ask lajoskatona about Neutron on our next team meeting
15:15:20 <gmann> please encourage and communicate this to other PTL also in case they missed the email
15:15:28 <gmann> slaweq: +1 thanks
15:15:58 <knikolla> i'll ping the keystone ptl, once we appoint one.
15:16:07 <gmann> knikolla: thanks
15:17:12 <gmann> anything else on PTG things?
15:17:48 <gmann> #topic 2023.1 cycle Technical Election & Leaderless projects
15:18:23 <gmann> spotz: knikolla any update you would like to highlight
15:18:24 <gmann> or jungleboyj
15:18:50 <gmann> I think voting are open until 19 Sept?
15:19:08 <knikolla> yes voting is ongoing for TC and Ironic
15:19:14 <knikolla> until Monday
15:19:41 <jungleboyj> ++
15:20:02 <knikolla> Polling is going smoothly, I haven't looked at the voting stats. One thing that we should have done better was send the notice for people to opt-in to CIVS emails much sooner.
15:20:20 <jungleboyj> ++
15:20:49 <arne_wiebalck> how does the number of eligible voters compare to previous elections?
15:20:59 <knikolla> We hadn't run an election in over a year, so between the officials there was little experience actually running one. ianychoi[m] did a great job uploading the rolls and kicking things off.
15:21:05 <jungleboyj> It sounds, however, like if people where eligible they will see the poll pending when they opt-in
15:21:31 <knikolla> I don't have that data yet. I can report back on the next meeting about it.
15:21:35 <jungleboyj> knikolla:  Yes.  Thank you ianchoi[m] !
15:21:58 <gmann> +1, ianychoi[m] is always helpful in every election.
15:22:27 <gmann> arne_wiebalck: I think actual votes might be less due to CIVS opt-in things
15:22:29 <knikolla> 54 people have voted so far out of 395 eligible voters on the TC election.
15:22:44 <dansmith> lol
15:22:46 <gmann> many might have missed to opt-in and missed the poll email
15:23:03 <slaweq> maybe we should send some reminder about it?
15:23:11 <knikolla> and for ironic 10 out of 34.
15:23:12 <gmann> knikolla: 395 eligible but do we know how many opt-in the CIVS email things?
15:23:12 <rosmaita> slaweq: ++
15:23:25 <gmann> +1 on reminder
15:23:34 <rosmaita> i think in the reminder, we can stress that if you opt-in, you can vote immediately
15:23:46 <gmann> yeah
15:23:57 <rosmaita> i had the impression from the earlier emails that if you didn't opt-in before the poll started, you were out of luck
15:24:01 <jungleboyj> rosmaita:  Good idea.
15:24:05 <gmann> but if they have not opt-in then are we going to send poll email again? or they just missed it
15:24:08 <arne_wiebalck> rosmaita: this was my understanding as well
15:24:28 <gmann> rosmaita: we can resend the email. I did for TC election
15:24:31 <jungleboyj> gmann: I don't think they then get the poll e-mail.
15:24:33 <rosmaita> gmann: i think what happens is that when you opt-in it shows up as one of the polls you can take
15:24:34 <fungi> i think we just never tested whether you get a ballot immediately after opting in or need to be re-added to the rolls
15:24:40 <gmann> but TC voter were less and resneding were doable
15:24:57 <gmann> fungi: I did in TC election and it worked
15:25:07 <fungi> awesome! that's helpful
15:25:28 <gmann> we need to add email again that is why I asked if that is doable in this election or not
15:25:33 <fungi> this is the first time we've held a poll for a tc election since civs introduced their opt-in policy, so it's been a bit of an unknown
15:25:49 <gmann> for TC internal election for something was just for 9 member
15:26:08 <gmann> yeah, many or I will say most of community are unkown of it
15:26:40 <rosmaita> fungi: ok, that explains it ... i had no memory of ever having to do this for previous elections
15:26:54 <fungi> they put it into place ~1.5 years ago, i think
15:26:56 <gmann> knikolla:jungleboyj I think sending reminder on ML is good option and then see how many had opt-in.
15:26:59 <dansmith> but you don't have to opt in every time right?
15:27:04 <dansmith> just once per address ever
15:27:16 <gmann> and if anyone ask to resend poll after opt-in then you can see if that is doable
15:27:18 <rosmaita> dansmith: i believe that's correct
15:27:18 <fungi> dansmith: i think you remain opted in for that address indefinitely, at least that's how it's seemed
15:27:20 <knikolla> i'll see if I can dig in information about how many people voted in prior TC elections percentage-wise.
15:27:25 <gmann> dalees: yes, only one time
15:27:27 <dansmith> I tried to opt-in this last time because I couldn't remember, and it told me I was already opted in
15:27:31 <jungleboyj> fungi: ++
15:27:32 <dansmith> yeah
15:27:36 <gmann> dansmith:  yes. one time
15:27:44 <jungleboyj> Yes, when I tried to opt-in it told me I already had for that e-mail.
15:27:52 <gmann> yeah
15:28:14 <jungleboyj> I can resend the reminder e-mail I sent earlier.
15:28:35 <gmann> thansk
15:28:42 <gmann> anything else on election?
15:29:13 <gmann> from PTL nomination, 9 project were without nomination. good news is that we found leaders for all 9 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/2023.1-leaderless
15:29:43 <knikolla> wallaby TC election had 181 votes out of 619
15:30:54 <gmann> knikolla: yeah, that is usually trend. more then ~120 this time can be good number I think
15:30:54 <rosmaita> so we're running about half that participation right now
15:30:54 <knikolla> so proportionally, about half, yes
15:31:45 <gmann> few of project like Zun, Swift who have same PTL for many cycle and we have to appoint PTL for them (Zun for many cycle). I think we should talk to them to move to DPL model. what you say?
15:31:53 <fungi> also, in case anyone has questions about the number of eligible voters being lower this time, i looked into it and it seems like we have fewer and fewer contributors joining the foundation as individual members, or their memberships are lapsing because of not voting consistently in board of directors elections, or they're not keeping their e-mail addresses updated in their foundation
15:31:55 <fungi> profiles whenever they change them in gerrit
15:32:05 <gmann> that will avoid election cost for those such project
15:32:14 <rosmaita> fungi: i was just going to ask that, thanks
15:32:15 <gmann> and they can move back to PTL model anytime like keystone did
15:33:02 <fungi> rosmaita: yeah, it was something like 918 contributors with valid contributions to qualify as voters, but only around 40% had matching foundation individual memberships
15:33:05 <gmann> or one way is to ask all these 9 projects to mode to DPL model of they want or can check in their team
15:33:09 <rosmaita> gmann: i don't know, DPL seems more problematic ... easier to strong-arm someone to be PTL
15:33:19 <gmann> and see how many move to DPL model
15:33:42 <jungleboyj> E-mail on opting in sent.
15:33:55 <knikolla> thanks jungleboyj
15:33:56 <slaweq> jungleboyj++ thx
15:34:10 <gmann> rosmaita: agree but many of these projects miss PTL nomination in every election and we have appoint same PTL in every cycle
15:34:14 <gmann> jungleboyj: thanks
15:34:38 <gmann> that is unnecessary overhead for election official as well as on TC
15:34:49 <slaweq> gmann I think that we can terll those projects that they can consider such switch in before next cycle but I don't think we should do that for all of them
15:35:06 <rosmaita> well, i am thinking that there is more TC monitoring involved when a project goes to DPL
15:35:14 <knikolla> i think in situations were the team doesn't express a desire to move to a DPL model, it's because their contributors don't have enough time to take on the responsibilities and a DPL model might exacerbate that by not having someone accountable.
15:35:20 <gmann> slaweq: not for all of them. who all want to switch
15:35:24 <rosmaita> knikolla: ++
15:35:27 <knikolla> In keystone we basically stopped running the weekly meeting
15:35:36 <knikolla> Nobody felt accountable to do it.
15:35:46 <slaweq> gmann: we can talk with teams abolut such possibility
15:35:57 <gmann> knikolla: ohk, that is interesting data and feedback
15:36:11 <rosmaita> slaweq: ++ good topic for the PTL/TC interaction meeting
15:36:17 <gmann> ok let's talk to few of them like Zun
15:36:44 <slaweq> during last summit in Berlin I was on the session about keystone and how it was "revived"
15:36:46 <gmann> I will check and see if few of them like Zun or other are interested
15:36:53 <jungleboyj> rosmaita: ++
15:37:05 <gmann> keystone is good example to consider DPL model
15:37:17 <slaweq> and one interesting thing which they told me is that we should monitor how much of the contribution to the project comes from single company/person
15:37:33 <gmann> rosmaita: +1, feel free to add in etherpad #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-leaders-interaction-2023-1
15:37:38 <knikolla> slaweq: yeah, by RH injecting 3 new people to it.
15:37:55 <slaweq> as this can be one of the potential warning flags about project's health
15:37:57 <fungi> keystone was using dpl and switched back in april
15:38:02 <slaweq> so I have it on my todo to write some tool to check it but I didn't had time for it
15:38:07 <slaweq> but I will get to it
15:38:20 <gmann> slaweq: I feel company diversity is major issue in many projects
15:38:27 <gmann> slaweq: thanks +1
15:38:32 <fungi> er, s/april/february/
15:38:41 <rosmaita> slaweq: was that keystone revival summit session recorded?
15:38:51 <knikolla> rosmaita: yes, it's on youtube.
15:38:57 <rosmaita> cool
15:39:20 <fungi> so if the suggestion is for keystone to go from ptl back to dpl again, it would probably be a good idea to revisit why they stopped with the dpl model the first time
15:39:21 <gmann> please paste link if you have handy
15:39:35 <gmann> anything else on election or leaderless project?
15:39:59 <knikolla> fungi: i'm happy to talk about that now, if this is the right time and meeting
15:40:10 <slaweq> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujq8I8wPpng&list=PLKqaoAnDyfgqUDjoZhZnDKF5aJrLMnm9E&index=93
15:40:21 <gmann> we are not talking about keystone moving to DPL, discussion is for other project
15:40:23 <gmann> slaweq: thanks
15:40:47 <gmann> keystone found PTL model is more suitable than DPL
15:40:53 <fungi> gmann: thanks, i guess i misunderstood what you meant by "keystone is good example to consider DPL model"
15:40:59 <gmann> and that is good feedback for other projects moving to DPL
15:41:07 <gmann> fungi: ohk :)
15:41:21 <fungi> sounded like you were proposing to switch them to dpl again, sorry ;)
15:41:26 <knikolla> perhaps a better phrasing "keystone is a good example of experiences with dpl model"
15:41:30 <slaweq> gmann maybe we should also use https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/tools/project_stats_check.py and check health of those 9 projects?
15:41:33 <gmann> no, for other project missed nomination
15:41:43 <slaweq> and then reach out to those teams maybe
15:41:50 <gmann> but after seeing keystone feedback I agree that we should ask/force all those project to DPL
15:42:14 <knikolla> I'm hesitant of using the word force.
15:42:15 <gmann> slaweq: +1, I will put some data in etherpad and in next meeting or so we can discuss if any project can be in DPL
15:42:29 <slaweq> gmann thx
15:42:48 <gmann> anything else on this topic ?
15:43:34 <gmann> sorry for my typo
15:43:43 <gmann> *  I agree that we should NOT ask all those project to DPL
15:43:45 <fungi> the tc can't force people to volunteer, but it can remove projects if they fail to identify any leadership
15:43:54 <gmann> I missed the NOT
15:43:59 <dansmith> what? we can't?
15:44:03 <rosmaita> ok, now i feel better
15:44:06 <knikolla> ah :)
15:44:20 <gmann> :)
15:44:36 <jungleboyj> The power of one word in a sentence.
15:44:50 <jungleboyj> Or punctuation.  :-)
15:44:55 <slaweq> :)
15:44:56 <gmann> yeah and my most common mistake in english :)
15:45:05 <fungi> mine too!
15:45:12 <gmann> :)
15:45:27 <gmann> moving to next topic
15:45:28 <gmann> #topic Open Reviews
15:45:33 <gmann> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+is:open
15:45:37 <gmann> we have four open review
15:45:49 <gmann> this is ready, #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/856927
15:46:04 <gmann> this too #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/857493
15:46:39 <gmann> elodilles: this WIP for long time, do you want to reiterate it? #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/850005
15:47:02 <gmann> jungleboyj: ditto, 2021 user survey things #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/836888
15:47:23 <jungleboyj> Yes I need to.
15:47:31 <gmann> thanks
15:47:55 <gmann> that is all for today from agenda.  anything else to discuss?
15:48:42 <jungleboyj> Nothing from me.
15:48:51 <slaweq> nope
15:48:51 <gmann> ok. thanks all for joining
15:48:55 <gmann> #endmeeting