13:00:54 #startmeeting training-guides 13:00:55 Meeting started Tue Nov 29 13:00:54 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is matjazp_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:00:56 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 13:00:58 hey all 13:00:58 The meeting name has been set to 'training_guides' 13:01:02 roll call 13:01:07 matjazp_, hello! 13:01:30 hi ianychoi 13:02:04 How are you going? November is almost being finished.. 13:02:47 #link Agenda at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/training-guides-meeting-agenda 13:03:16 ianychoi: busy.. preparing for the December madness, I guess ;) 13:03:56 Yep.. December seems to be short.. And I have lots of things to do in December.. 13:04:55 looks like there's just the two of us.. ildiko is in a conference call (notified via ML) 13:05:04 #topic Review of action items from the previous meeting 13:05:17 see meeting minutes at http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/training_guides/2016/training_guides.2016-11-15-13.01.html 13:05:28 Aha.. I see 13:05:44 I did cleanup for Launchpad and also sandbox repository 13:05:55 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-dev-sandbox 13:06:05 #info Upstream training article in Superuser magazine: http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/openstack-upstream-training-revamp/ 13:06:06 #link http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-dev/sandbox/tree/ 13:06:20 great! 13:06:45 Yep I have read this article so great! 13:06:46 #info ianychoi cleaned Launchpad and sandbox repo 13:07:33 that's it for past action items 13:07:35 moving on 13:07:37 #topic Upstream training 13:07:38 Yep 13:08:03 looking at agenda 13:08:12 you have a proposal? 13:08:19 Yep.. I wrote an idea 13:08:58 I think it would be great if upstream training participants will have exact Stackalytics userinfo through actual upstream training 13:09:25 you mean like a copy just for the training? 13:09:35 fake stackalytics? 13:10:07 No. Current Stackalytics has both Stackalytics development sources and userinfo data 13:10:12 or do you propose that they commit their data into the real Stackalytics as an exercise? 13:10:52 I am suggesting to add userinfo on real Stacklytics but to do that separation of userinfo from current openstack/stackalytics repository is needed 13:10:54 oh, now I get it.. split current Stackalytics into two repos? 13:11:01 Yep :) 13:11:31 And then.. I think having core rights for upstream training leader(s) would be acceptable 13:11:33 that's is not the scope of the training guides... we should discuss this with stacklaytics team? 13:12:22 I already discussed with Stackalytics team and ildikov is the right person for this topic. That's why I have brought this proposal with upstream training plan. 13:13:13 why is this important? surely participants can wait a few days to get their patches merged into the repo... stackalytics is not real time service anyway... as I understand, it works in batches, right? 13:13:26 stackalytics team is for the split? 13:14:05 For Stackalytics, OpenStack Foundation has a plan to migrate from stackalytics.com into stackalytics.openstack.org. 13:14:20 yes, I know 13:14:35 but the team that manages it will stay the same, or not? 13:14:41 I think one of strengths in upstream training is that right and fast feedback during actual training 13:15:10 matjazp_, good question. I do not know much.. for details 13:15:47 What I currently know is that I met Ilya Shakat, a key Stackalytics developer on Barcelona Summit 13:15:55 And.. Ilya Shakat said that he spoke with Ildiko Vansca [ildikov] on the perspective to give Foundation more governance on the Stackalytics tool. 13:16:00 I think that an exercise at the training where they commit a patch with their data into stackalytics is a good one 13:16:47 So... currently, I wanted to discuss 1) is this kind of exercise good or not? and 2) how to accomplish this 13:16:55 but eho is or isn't in the core team for it is a separate question 13:17:13 eho=who 13:17:59 matjazp_, I agree. But at least having one core member in actual upstream training will be needed 13:18:13 why? 13:18:38 results are not fed into stackalytics in real time, right? 13:18:45 In my opinion, participants may have errors for their patches 13:18:50 so it makes no sense to speed up the patch merging 13:19:41 yes, they can make mistakes, so anyone at the training can review their patch 13:20:02 why is it important to merge their patches as soon as possible? 13:20:13 Yep.. just reviewing their patches would be also sufficient 13:20:39 so who is or isn't in the core team is not connected to the actual training ecent, right? 13:20:44 ecent=event 13:21:16 I just thought that accomplishing one thing during upstream training will give more satisfaction. You're right 13:21:48 exercise is good, though 13:21:59 can I make you an action intem? 13:22:23 Hmm.. one possible action item is to discuss with ildikov :) 13:22:35 to listen to Foundation's perspective on Stackalytics 13:23:24 ok, then just bring this up on the ML, and we can discuss this there 13:23:51 ok :) 13:23:52 so you won't develop an exercise for nothing, if we decide against 13:24:08 Aha development as an exercise.. okay 13:24:27 I will take care if you agree with it 13:24:27 #action ianychoi sends a proposal to develop an exercise for inserting participants info into a Stackalytics on the ML 13:24:43 is this ok with you? 13:24:50 matjazp_, yep thanks 13:24:54 we can discuss it there 13:25:11 since we have twice monthly IRC meetings 13:25:44 Yep next meeting would be also nice 13:26:36 #info actively looking for ppl to join the project, see http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2016-November/009382.html 13:28:13 review queue is empty 13:28:29 anything else here? 13:28:39 Nope for review que 13:28:42 queue 13:30:10 hmm.. was the branching model in review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/403315/ really missing? or is it something old that was not deleted from slide-index and now we reinserted it again in the main landing page? 13:31:00 what bothers me is that it's file name is not in the new format, so maybe it is an old content 13:31:10 AFAIK.. there were opinion(s) that branching model would not be best fit into current upstream training 13:31:54 I could not track all of things but... it would be correct.. just from my rememberance 13:32:47 In my opinion, revising content on branch model would be good for Boston upstream training 13:32:59 anyway, we do have some duplication in content that we need to fix, see bugs queuehttps://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-training-guides/+bug/1642691 13:32:59 Launchpad bug 1642691 in OpenStack Training Guides "Upstream training slides have duplications" [Undecided,Confirmed] 13:33:52 What would 'Duplication' means..? 13:33:58 if it's an old content, we can move it to the archive later 13:34:24 more than one slide about the same content, as I understand it 13:35:22 we still have a mixture of the old and new content, with some overlapping 13:35:42 I agree with this: some part duplicates 13:36:40 ok, so this bug will take care if the branching model is an old content 13:36:43 moving on? 13:36:50 okay 13:36:53 #topic training guides 13:37:01 nothing new here 13:37:22 still very slow progress 13:37:40 #info http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/training-guides/tree/README.rst updated training-guides description 13:38:14 yes, but that is for both projects 13:38:20 yep :) 13:38:53 ok, moving on to the AOB? 13:39:19 +1 13:39:21 #topic any other business 13:39:34 anything left to discuss? 13:40:54 Thanks for caring with updating specialty team: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2016-November/009352.html 13:41:28 oh, no problems.. will do the same this week 13:42:10 :) Now I am planning for my participation on PTG. 13:42:21 Do you want to discuss more on training-guides during PTG? 13:42:47 I think Ildiko will open a topic for encouraging upstream training participation I think.. 13:42:52 I don't think I can be there... clashes with my schedule at the Uni 13:43:15 That's unfortunate.. 13:43:38 Aha and, I have another question 13:44:01 In your country, will it be the Christmas holiday from Dec 24 to Jan 1? 13:44:13 yes 13:44:26 In my country (Korea), Dec 27 is not a holiday.. (Oh my ... T.T) 13:44:35 Then Dec 27 meeting will be canceled :) 13:45:13 I think so, but we can discuss this at the next meeting 13:45:43 Okay 13:45:45 I'll write this down so we can remember 13:45:50 +1 13:46:32 #action decide about IRC meeting on Dec 27 13:46:53 so we don't forget to discuss this on the next meeting 13:47:05 anything else? I'm good. 13:47:08 Good 13:47:16 No more items from me 13:47:24 ok, let's wrap this up 13:47:29 thanks for your time! 13:47:41 Thaks matjazp_ ! 13:47:43 see you in two weeks! 13:47:45 bye 13:48:03 bye! 13:48:06 #endmeeting