08:00:39 <mnasiadka> #startmeeting tc
08:00:39 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue Oct 21 08:00:39 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mnasiadka. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
08:00:39 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
08:00:39 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
08:01:04 <mnasiadka> Welcome to the weekly meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee. A reminder that this meeting is held under the OpenInfra Code of Conduct available at https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct.
08:01:11 <mnasiadka> Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee
08:01:20 <mnasiadka> #topic Roll Call
08:01:21 <mnasiadka> O/
08:01:39 <frickler> \o yay, mornings ;)
08:01:45 <gtema> o/, but for next 10 min only partly due to the conflict
08:01:56 <tonyb> o/
08:02:15 <tonyb> Yay a time when I'd naturally be awake
08:03:06 <mnasiadka> courtesy-ping: noonedeadpunk bauzas
08:03:13 <mnasiadka> (Although they might be traveling back from the Summit)
08:07:33 <tonyb> next?
08:09:47 <frickler> +1, waiting until :05 should be enough generally
08:10:09 <mnasiadka> Yeah, sorry
08:10:12 <mnasiadka> #topic Last Week's AIs
08:11:07 <mnasiadka> Mark Vitrage and Venus project-teams inactive
08:11:15 <mnasiadka> These changes have now merged; we need to be aware that, if activity doesn't resume, these project teams and deliverables can be retired prior to M-2 in the 2026.2 release
08:11:21 <mnasiadka> #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/emerging-technology-and-inactive-projects.html#current-inactive-projects
08:13:10 <mnasiadka> Assist Monasca's one-off release (elodilles)
08:13:17 <mnasiadka> Elod explained how a release can be requested; except, I (gouthamr) think the TC assumed the process to be more straight-forward for "inactive" project teams to request one-off releases
08:13:27 <mnasiadka> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/953671
08:14:20 <frickler> I haven't seen anyone who would actually do a release. I also don't think it would be releasable in its current state
08:14:57 <frickler> as commented on that change, I am much in favor of proceeding with the retirement now, this has been dragging on for years
08:15:17 <gtema> +100
08:15:49 <mnasiadka> Yes, I think three of us on the meeting are happy with proceeding with retirement, it’s been there for too long
08:16:15 <frickler> so we need to find two more tc-members to make that a majority vote :)
08:17:02 <mnasiadka> tonyb: though had some comments that he knows organisations wanting to pick this up
08:17:14 <mnasiadka> But that hasn’t happened
08:17:14 <tonyb> Well I'm RC-1 on retirement because I'm aware of at least one member that wants to work on it
08:17:37 <mnasiadka> Ok, so are we persisting limbo state for another cycle then?
08:17:42 <frickler> but "want to" doesn't suffice. also there's no apparent reason they could not do it outside of openstack
08:19:14 <tonyb> I understand that, I'm okay with due process ending up with the project being retired, but my preference would be to keep it inactive for another cycle
08:19:42 <tonyb> of course I'm only 1 vote and expect to be in the minority
08:19:52 <frickler> tonyb: I'm assuming you are referring to someone else than those who already commented on the gov review? who still wants to stay anonymous for now? that's very weak reasoning IMO
08:20:11 <tonyb> ... unless it needs to be unanimous
08:20:15 <mnasiadka> Monasca is inactive since 2024.1
08:20:47 <mnasiadka> I don’t think it’s an easy job to get it back on track, and if that work hasn’t started yet - they will most likely not make it on time until 2026.1 release
08:21:02 <mnasiadka> But I think enough said - we need more votes on the retirement patch
08:21:27 <tonyb> frickler: It's not that they want to stay anonymous, it's that they currently unavailable
08:22:03 <gtema> this statement doesn't make it more reliable to be honest
08:22:04 <frickler> just to note that the patch is V-1 because the actual content removal patches need to be merged first, no reason to not vote on it already
08:22:57 <gtema> be all are well aware of people and companies not willing something to die and promise to spend resources and this never happening because of running business
08:24:49 <mnasiadka> Ok, let’s go forward
08:24:56 <mnasiadka> Bump skyline self-nomination discussion thread to get PTL/core feedback (gouthamr)
08:25:02 <mnasiadka> This was done, and the PTL welcomed reetsrivastav but the skyline-core group on gerrit wasn't modified
08:25:08 <mnasiadka> #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/HVE5SEIXSGA4NTJYHAJQQX4N3GNXN6D5/
08:25:17 <mnasiadka> #link https://review.opendev.org/admin/groups/1fe65032c39f1d459327b010730627a904d7b793,members
08:25:37 <mnasiadka> Do we need to do anything about this?
08:26:07 <tonyb> I guess frickler or I could add them to the group
08:26:18 <tonyb> (and then say so on the M/L)
08:26:38 <mnasiadka> Should we first ask the PTL to do so?
08:26:42 <mnasiadka> Maybe he doesn’t know
08:27:01 <frickler> I don't think someone should be added as reviewer who hasn't done any actual reviews
08:27:12 <frickler> at least that's my state from 2 weeks ago
08:27:36 <frickler> (as core reviewer)
08:27:49 <gtema> +1 on that
08:28:07 <frickler> so let them do reviews, work on CI issues, then reconsider the application in due time
08:28:09 <noonedeadpunk> o/ sorry, just opened laptop and quite drained from the way back
08:28:47 <frickler> no action needed on our side for now, IMO
08:29:10 <tonyb> frickler: I agree with you but the PTL said "Sure, just be careful", at least that's how I read it
08:30:39 <frickler> hmm, it is difficult to really judge this statement for me, from one non-native speaker to another
08:30:49 * bauzas waves super late
08:31:24 <mnasiadka> Ok, should we wait it out for some time? I agree that a core reviewer without any review history looks super weird
08:31:30 <bauzas> I wasn't knowing the new cadence started this week :)
08:31:37 <noonedeadpunk> I also not sure if person without any known review activity should be considered as a core
08:31:55 <noonedeadpunk> and contribution for 3 month is a flag as well
08:32:56 <frickler> IIRC cardoe also agreed with that point and had already mentioned it to the candidate. with no visible followup so far.
08:34:35 <frickler> so to me sadly this looks to be close to another instance of a lot of "I want to" without meat. vegan meat if you prefer.
08:35:03 <frickler> anyway, time for next topic I guess?
08:35:06 <gtema> lol
08:36:20 <mnasiadka> Yeah, I can’t see any action from this
08:36:26 <mnasiadka> Check, rebase, or recheck relevant changes for Gazpacho runtime updates (gmaan, others)
08:36:32 <mnasiadka> frickler: I think you had a look into that?
08:36:56 <frickler> there is one open patch for grenade that I'm aware of, let me find it
08:37:55 <frickler> ah, two actually, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/grenade/+/961914 is just struggling with CI instability it seems
08:39:00 <frickler> the other one is merged already, there was some discussion due to OSC changes that are a bit non-backwards compatible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/grenade/+/961913
08:39:39 <frickler> but unless I'm missing something, no open issues anymore
08:40:38 <frickler> next? ;)
08:41:20 <mnasiadka> #topic A check on gate health
08:41:29 <mnasiadka> Anybody wants to comment? All green?
08:41:37 <mnasiadka> (Apart the grenade instability)
08:42:36 <frickler> well the docker.io and quay.io issues yesterday show once again that more autonomy is good
08:42:45 <tonyb> We had a gerrit outage on the weekend, which would have impacted reviews but not CI as such
08:43:35 <mnasiadka> Yeah, quay.io issues basically broke majority of Kolla-Ansible CI - but to achieve more ,,autonomy’’ we would need to probably use some intermediate registry inside OpenDev
08:43:42 <frickler> tonyb: was there a reason for the outage found? or just "VM shutoff for unknown reasons"?
08:44:44 <frickler> mnasiadka: or opendev could reconsider running their own registry ... but no easy task I know and not directly a TC topic ... except if anyone wants to organize funding for that :D
08:45:18 <tonyb> frickler: Yeah the VMs were shutdown.  It was later in my Sunday and fungi dealt with it.
08:46:05 <mnasiadka> #topic A call for PTG Topics
08:46:10 <mnasiadka> Have there been any additions to make since the OpenInfra Summit?
08:46:19 <mnasiadka> gouthamr would like to request topics to seed the "Maintainers" discussion (a.k.a.: TC+Project Leaders discussion)
08:49:27 * tonyb doesn't really have any for that.
08:50:23 <tonyb> maybe "getting rid of *really old* libraries from OpenStack $projects we need you help", but that's probably more of a mailing-list/community goal/requirements thing than a TC thing
08:51:35 <frickler> we could ask maintainers to report instances of this for a start
08:52:12 <frickler> but agreed that this doesn't necessarily have to be a PTG discussion
08:52:52 <mnasiadka> There was a crypto libraries topic on the TC ,,shift’’ in the Open Source Pavillon - which gtema was mainly having - majority of them is unmaintained
08:53:19 <mnasiadka> gtema: did you happen to get that list, or will the author post it to the ML?
08:53:30 <noonedeadpunk> so I was thinking if we might wanna have some kind of oslo.crypto or smth
08:53:34 <gtema> it's not that the Keystone is the only thing affected but yes, I had a long chat with JP on that
08:53:53 <noonedeadpunk> that might address the question of openstack overall relying on too many external crypto libraries, which are partially unmaintained
08:53:58 <gtema> I will try to clarify. We definitely agreed to have a dedicated session in PTG (from Keystone pov)
08:54:06 <noonedeadpunk> and to remove that maintenance from keystone itself
08:54:16 <gtema> but I agree we should raise it wider. I will try to catch JP and discuss it with him
08:54:21 <mnasiadka> Maybe that’s a good topic to TC+Project Leaders discussion
08:54:26 <mnasiadka> s/to/for/
08:54:37 <mnasiadka> Ok then, next one
08:54:38 <gtema> yes, would be good fit
08:54:38 <mnasiadka> #topic OpenStack User Survey Results
08:54:45 <mnasiadka> #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/IIGG4IQBW3W6PTBT7ASKJKMQDAEGILSB/
08:54:56 <tonyb> gtema: Oh that'd be great.
08:55:17 <mnasiadka> Do we need to do anything that? Some data extraction?
08:55:17 <tonyb> please include me (timewise) moving away from pysaml would help!
08:56:06 <frickler> having that document not hosted on google would help me
08:56:09 <gtema> :)
08:56:24 <gtema> its hardly consumable honestly
08:56:52 <gtema> for me not due to the google fact, but the format
08:57:00 <tonyb> where would you like it?   I can move it for you.   I can email you a CSV?
08:57:36 <gtema> that's the point - the csv does not make it reasonable to consume
08:57:44 <frickler> I'd take that, yes, thx. maybe putting it up on www.openstack.org would also be a good idea
08:57:54 <noonedeadpunk> I think it's renderred on analyticks page?
08:58:03 <gtema> I can myself export-import into oo-calc, but its just so huge and not easy structured
08:58:25 <frickler> the format of the results is another issue, I'm sure constructive ideas will be welcomed
08:58:28 <gtema> as PTL I do not really know what to do with it
08:58:32 <mnasiadka> I assume that’s the format we get it from foundation
08:58:50 <mnasiadka> Maybe we need to work with Jimmy and others to make it more structured next time...
08:59:14 <mnasiadka> Any volunteer to pick up that discussion?
08:59:27 <noonedeadpunk> mean this: https://www.openstack.org/analytics
09:00:21 <frickler> noonedeadpunk: that's a good location to add a download for the spreadsheet I guess?
09:01:03 <noonedeadpunk> yeah, as it already has a download pdf button
09:01:24 <noonedeadpunk> so no reasdon not to make it a dropdown and have like CSV as well
09:01:56 <mnasiadka> Ok then, if anybody wants to pick this up - I assume just reply to the thread Jimmy started
09:02:13 <mnasiadka> Time is up - thanks for coming, see you next week in the other timeslot.
09:02:15 <mnasiadka> #endmeeting