| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 00:03 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 00:08 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 00:18 | |
| *** hongbin has quit IRC | 00:33 | |
| *** dklyle has quit IRC | 00:54 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 01:01 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:03 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:03 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:08 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:15 | |
| *** liujiong has joined #openstack-tc | 01:23 | |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 01:47 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 01:48 | |
| *** ianychoi has quit IRC | 02:03 | |
| *** gcb has joined #openstack-tc | 02:27 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 02:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:31 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 04:26 | |
| *** rosmaita has quit IRC | 04:39 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 06:27 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 06:32 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 07:00 | |
| *** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc | 08:53 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 08:57 | |
| cdent | tc-members time for an early assemble | 09:01 |
|---|---|---|
| cmurphy | morning o/ | 09:04 |
| * johnthetubaguy is still applying caffeine | 09:05 | |
| ttx | ohai | 09:07 |
| ttx | Couple of topics from me | 09:07 |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 09:07 | |
| cdent | if flaper87 shows up we have euro-quorum? | 09:07 |
| ttx | I was wondering what to do with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498798/ | 09:08 |
| cdent | abandon | 09:08 |
| ttx | I was wondering if it meant that the telemetry crew is opting out of the goal | 09:09 |
| flaper87 | o/ | 09:09 |
| ttx | based on discussion @ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/498796/ | 09:09 |
| cmurphy | i think if they also delete their in-tree tempest plugins then they could be said to have met the goal | 09:10 |
| ttx | and how much we should care | 09:10 |
| cmurphy | i think they didn't see value in maintaining it at all iirc | 09:10 |
| cdent | speaking as a former telemetry person who has maintained some interaction, most of the remaining cores have little to no interest in tempest | 09:10 |
| ttx | OK, I'll abandon and let chkumar|404 follow up | 09:11 |
| cmurphy | that commit message looks very familiar o.0 | 09:11 |
| flaper87 | I honestly have not caught up with that discussion | 09:11 |
| ttx | Which brings me to my other topic, Rocky goals | 09:11 |
| ttx | We should start encouraging goals to be submitted and champions to be found | 09:12 |
| cdent | (I guess I ought to set aside some time for gabbi-tempest) | 09:12 |
| ttx | although it would be great to have a status update from Lamce and Chandan on how successful the current round is going | 09:12 |
| cmurphy | speaking for lance i think the policy goal is going well | 09:13 |
| flaper87 | ttx: ++ | 09:13 |
| ttx | lbragstad, chkumar: feel free to chime in on the channel | 09:13 |
| flaper87 | my guess is that the policy goal is going well based on the reviews I've done | 09:13 |
| flaper87 | Do we have a prefered way to gather feedback about goals? | 09:14 |
| flaper87 | I know we can infer some of it | 09:14 |
| flaper87 | I guess we could ask on the ML | 09:14 |
| cmurphy | the updates to the completed artifacts seem like a good progress indication | 09:14 |
| ttx | I'm not a big fan of the current feedback/doc mechanism, I feel like it's a bit noisy and fails to show up progress | 09:14 |
| ttx | I prefer the burndown charts that lbragstad has been maintaining | 09:15 |
| ttx | i.e. a bunch of status pages rather than countless governance reviews | 09:15 |
| flaper87 | ttx: indeed | 09:15 |
| ttx | those per-team update in the goals/ governance directory has a lot of overhead/bureaucracy baked into it | 09:16 |
| cdent | people have started doing burndown stuff for lots of things that we might want to formalize it. i provided some space for the nova-notification burndown, but it would be good for it to be a real thing: http://burndown.peermore.com/nova-notification/ | 09:16 |
| johnthetubaguy | certainly it seems more a driver effort, than lots of projects pitching in like we thought it would be | 09:16 |
| flaper87 | I agree the charts are a good indicator. I'm wondering if we are getting enough feedback on the process though. How hard it is to push a goal, how much acceptance they are getting from teams | 09:16 |
| flaper87 | etc | 09:16 |
| johnthetubaguy | cdent: +1 would be good to make that easier for folks | 09:16 |
| ttx | Yes, I'm fine with champions picking their tracking tool | 09:16 |
| flaper87 | johnthetubaguy: exactly the kind of feedback I'd like to have from drivers | 09:16 |
| ttx | if we can standardize on something, even better | 09:17 |
| johnthetubaguy | ttx: I probably like the best | 09:17 |
| johnthetubaguy | flaper87: +1 | 09:17 |
| ttx | flaper87: I'll start a thread so that they can answer async | 09:17 |
| flaper87 | ttx: cool, thanks | 09:18 |
| johnthetubaguy | +1 good thinking | 09:18 |
| ttx | So for Rocky goals, I think we should keep the champion system: if you (or someone you know) sre not ready to do some project-management around the goal, it's a waste of time to propose it | 09:19 |
| johnthetubaguy | ++ | 09:20 |
| ttx | Is anyone interested in coordinating the search for R goals ? | 09:21 |
| flaper87 | yeah | 09:21 |
| flaper87 | that yeah was for your previous comment | 09:21 |
| flaper87 | not the question | 09:21 |
| ttx | heh | 09:21 |
| flaper87 | hahaha | 09:21 |
| flaper87 | do we have good goal candidates for R? | 09:21 |
| ttx | flaper87: not yet, so the first steps are asking for champion feedback on the Q goals and then start a thread asking for ideas | 09:21 |
| cmurphy | where is the goal backlog etherpad? | 09:22 |
| * ttx looks | 09:22 | |
| johnthetubaguy | where there any big themes from the Forum people are seeing, that might lead towards a goal? | 09:23 |
| ttx | me awesomesearchbar comes up empty | 09:23 |
| ttx | there was the health check stuff | 09:23 |
| ttx | might be a bit early though | 09:23 |
| cmurphy | more policy changes are in the pipeline but that is probably a cycle or two off | 09:24 |
| ttx | you probably want one implementation up before asking everyone to implement | 09:24 |
| johnthetubaguy | ah, that came up in Boston, now I have been looking at Monitoring some deployment again, I am +1 a heath check thing | 09:24 |
| cdent | when do we want to start thinking about switching the tox jobs so that it is functional-py27 and functional is py3? | 09:25 |
| cmurphy | here it is https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/community-goals | 09:25 |
| cmurphy | super unguessable url | 09:25 |
| cdent | we have got to come up with some way to keep better track of etherpads | 09:25 |
| ttx | cmurphy wins again | 09:26 |
| flaper87 | The healthcheck work sounds interesting. I wonder if alan is going to push it forward | 09:26 |
| ttx | cdent: I think it's called a wiki | 09:26 |
| * ttx hides | 09:26 | |
| flaper87 | I could reach out to Allan and check if he wants to drive that | 09:26 |
| cdent | ttx: totes, but it’s only a wiki if we use it | 09:26 |
| * flaper87 googles wiki | 09:26 | |
| ttx | privsep could make a good goal | 09:27 |
| ttx | mikal is pretty advanced in migrating nova, and neutron is almost done too | 09:27 |
| ttx | Whoever coordinated the R goals hunt could reach out to him and see if he feels like that could help | 09:28 |
| ttx | By default I'll do the R goals hunt, but wouldn't mind a volunteer :) | 09:28 |
| johnthetubaguy | on a related note, he made an interesting list of ways you should expect your OpenStack vendor to be involved upstream, which included that kind of thing :) | 09:29 |
| ttx | there was mordred thing that didn't make it last time, around version discovery | 09:29 |
| ttx | he might have done it separately though | 09:30 |
| ttx | In other news, the tech blog idea met a pretty cold reception yesterday. /me reads the new messages now | 09:31 |
| flaper87 | ttx: yeah, but, there seems to be a platform for it already | 09:34 |
| mordred | ttx: I didn't do it | 09:34 |
| flaper87 | I had no iea that /blog was meant for that | 09:35 |
| cdent | up all night, whoooo’s staying | 09:35 |
| flaper87 | cdent: lol | 09:35 |
| cdent | Yeah, seems like we could marshall /blog to be what’s desired, but I think the key thing is the stuff that dhellmann and harlowja were discussing: acquisitions editor | 09:35 |
| cdent | otherwise relevance is a real problem | 09:36 |
| flaper87 | cdent: indeed! I just replied to Jimmy's email saying that | 09:36 |
| cdent | \o/ | 09:37 |
| ttx | flaper87: well, historically that was our only blog, so anything went in | 09:40 |
| ttx | Responding to the thread now | 09:40 |
| ttx | "Everything in & around OpenStack in written words" is the blog subline. Not exactly what harlowja described :) | 09:42 |
| ttx | that said there is definitely potential to reuse the platform, since it's there and the only thing posted there those days is the dev digest | 09:43 |
| cdent | If that subline is true, there’s not a lot happening in & around openstack | 09:47 |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 09:48 | |
| ttx | I'm not even sure Twitter was invented when that subline was written | 09:49 |
| ttx | wow, there are some gems in the blog | 09:51 |
| ttx | like the OpenStack jingle | 09:51 |
| flaper87 | ttx: link? | 09:51 |
| flaper87 | :D | 09:51 |
| ttx | let me listen to it once first | 09:51 |
| ttx | wow it's even worse than I expected | 09:52 |
| ttx | https://www.openstack.org/blog/2011/07/openstack-the-best-sounding-cloud/ | 09:52 |
| johnthetubaguy | heh | 09:53 |
| johnthetubaguy | cdent: I see what you mean, oops | 09:53 |
| * ttx updates tracker now | 09:56 | |
| cdent | johnthetubaguy: ? | 09:56 |
| ttx | cdent: re subline | 09:56 |
| johnthetubaguy | cdent: yeah, subline | 09:59 |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 10:09 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Remove releasenotes/requirements.txt https://review.openstack.org/521398 | 10:09 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Remove stable:follows-policy from Kolla https://review.openstack.org/519685 | 10:14 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Update Blazar's document references https://review.openstack.org/521719 | 10:15 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add networking-generic-switch under ironic https://review.openstack.org/521894 | 10:16 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Fix the format file name https://review.openstack.org/523008 | 10:16 |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-tc | 10:22 | |
| openstackgerrit | Thierry Carrez proposed openstack/governance master: Update URL for TC tracker on the wiki https://review.openstack.org/523381 | 10:25 |
| *** gcb has quit IRC | 10:28 | |
| ttx | Looks like EmilienM volunteered to be TC sponsor on dhellmann's "Goal champion" top-5 list item, so he might be interested in driving the Rocky goals search. I'll hold until I hear from him | 10:38 |
| cdent | ttx: I thought we’ve said in the past that it is okay for a goal to be multi-cycle? I reckon the storyboard thing will never get off the ground until there’s a full and official push to make it so. | 10:46 |
| * cdent coffees | 10:46 | |
| ttx | cdent: did we ? I don't remember | 10:47 |
| ttx | but then it's really a S cycle goal that is annuonced one year in advance :) | 10:48 |
| cmurphy | if a goal is expected to take multiple cycles my instinct is to say break it into smaller goals | 10:48 |
| ttx | cmurphy: yeah, that was the idea, the issue is that this one is not really easy to split/ You can't have a goal that 50% of the projects are migrated | 10:49 |
| cmurphy | with this one i think it would help to have a couple more large projects take the leap first | 10:50 |
| cdent | yes, but will they if we don’t say it is a goal, first? | 10:50 |
| ttx | we could say "all projects in group foo" | 10:50 |
| cmurphy | why not? | 10:50 |
| cdent | there’s risk being an early adopter if it’s not clear there is commitment | 10:51 |
| ttx | I expect some of the largest projects to only consider migrating once everyone else is migrated | 10:51 |
| ttx | (nova) | 10:51 |
| cdent | the extent to which nova bugs are inter-related with other projects (outside openstack) is likely to be a challenge | 10:51 |
| ttx | So at this stage I would focus on getting projects like Cinder and Ironic migrated | 10:51 |
| ttx | so that there is incentive to align | 10:51 |
| ttx | Also I bet that we'll discover issues once largish projects are migrated | 10:52 |
| ttx | which we'll want to fix before asking "everyone else" to migrate | 10:52 |
| cmurphy | i think i could volunteer keystone, if there is a solution for that inter-project problem | 10:52 |
| ttx | cmurphy: the solution is called hyperlinks I think | 10:53 |
| cmurphy | keystone also makes heavy use of private bugs though | 10:53 |
| ttx | oh yes that's really a blocker | 10:53 |
| * ttx tries to form an opinion on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521602/ | 10:53 | |
| cdent | Is there a pre-goal (or help wanted) to the “everyone on storyboard” goal of “make storyboard actually do the stuff requried”? | 10:54 |
| cdent | ttx: I reckon how 521602 resolves will say a lot about whether there is a hierarchy of projects or not | 10:55 |
| ttx | I asked on the storyboard goal review for an update on the the provate bug stuff | 10:58 |
| ttx | private | 10:58 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 11:01 | |
| *** liujiong has quit IRC | 11:07 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 13:02 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 13:03 | |
| *** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc | 13:12 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 13:28 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 13:32 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 13:33 | |
| fungi | yeah, last i looked the missing pieces of private bug workflow were the ability to predefine and subscribe groups of users rather than just individuals, and the ability to have groups or individuals auto-subscribed to bugs for specific projects | 13:38 |
| fungi | _technically_ private bugs are implemented and working now, but the above makes them not especially useful for our needs yet | 13:39 |
| fungi | but once a reporter realizes they should open a story privately, they're the only subscriber. then they need to realize they should subscribe people and figure out the names of the users they want subscribed and add them to the story | 13:41 |
| fungi | otherwise, it looks pretty solid | 13:41 |
| ttx | ah, ok. So usable, even if a bit unwieldy | 13:42 |
| fungi | right, we _could_ work around it with some combination of documentation and client-side tools | 13:42 |
| fungi | though solving it in the service would of course still be preferable | 13:43 |
| EmilienM | ttx: I'm happy to be involved in goals again | 14:00 |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 14:34 | |
| lbragstad | ttx: i plan to do a recap summarizing the progress for the policy goal for queens 2 | 14:41 |
| ttx | EmilienM: so the first step would be to decide if we pursue with the idea of champions. I think from our perspective it's a success, but wanted to hear from lbragstad and chkumar first-hand experience | 14:43 |
| ttx | Then we need to statr a thread looking for goal proposals and accompanying champions | 14:43 |
| EmilienM | ttx: yes, imho, we need one champion per goal | 14:43 |
| EmilienM | yes, it's on my list to take a look at that this week | 14:44 |
| ttx | I'll let you raise that thread then. Thanks for leading this | 14:44 |
| lbragstad | looking at the projects who've made progress on the goal, i would consider championing goals a positive and worthwhile effort | 14:44 |
| ttx | lbragstad: I've no doubt it's positive, I was just wondering how painful that experience was for the champions. Would you describe it as a positive experience ? | 14:46 |
| ttx | I think a public thread about it may create vocations | 14:46 |
| cdent | EmilienM, ttx: I think we should make sure we distinguish between champions and heroes | 14:46 |
| ttx | cdent: heroes wear capes ? | 14:47 |
| lbragstad | all said and done - i think it was positive, a bit overwhelming at times... but I think that was given other responsibilities | 14:47 |
| cdent | volunteering to champion shouldn’t be equal to volunterring to doing all the work | 14:47 |
| ttx | cdent: oh yes totally. It's just about volunteering to beat the drum and keep track | 14:47 |
| EmilienM | like project manager | 14:48 |
| lbragstad | i certainly wouldn't be opposed to championing another goal, or co-championing it so long as communication is on point | 14:48 |
| EmilienM | we had this discussion, I remember now | 14:48 |
| cdent | but so far our two famous champions have been doing a lot of the work too? | 14:48 |
| lbragstad | ^ that's why I think distributing the work might be worth a try :) | 14:49 |
| ttx | lbragstad: what about the current goal reporting (as reviews in governance repo) ? Would you rather just maintain some wikipage / website to track status ? | 14:49 |
| lbragstad | at the same time, a couple people really helped me out a lot during the process... | 14:49 |
| ttx | I feel like it creates a lot of work for little gain | 14:49 |
| lbragstad | yeah - the completion artifacts felt cumbersome for goal tracking | 14:49 |
| * ttx is tempted to trash it in favor of some regular reports | 14:50 | |
| lbragstad | (is this project using specs, a bug, the goal document itself, or something else to outline the work?) | 14:50 |
| lbragstad | the more i had to dig for how a project answered that the more i felt the planning artifact should have just been the goal | 14:50 |
| lbragstad | technically - it should have had all the necessary information for someone to read it and start applying it to the project | 14:51 |
| ttx | EmilienM: I think it's a change to consider for the R goals -- track completion status separately from the governance goal doc | 14:52 |
| lbragstad | i didn't mind keeping completion artifacts in gerrit because i could just propose the review to the governance repo and make it dependent on the last change that implemented the goal in the project | 14:52 |
| ttx | it creates unnecessary hoops in the process imho, better have a quick report from the champion every milestone or so | 14:52 |
| lbragstad | but i'm totally open to other ways of doing it, too | 14:53 |
| EmilienM | you mean, tracking the goal results outside of openstack/governance ? | 14:53 |
| EmilienM | I'm fine with it | 14:53 |
| EmilienM | the way it was done with governance was iterative and peer reviewed | 14:54 |
| EmilienM | if we use $tool to do it, it will be iterative as well but not well reviewed | 14:54 |
| EmilienM | but we can try | 14:55 |
| ttx | EmilienM: I feel like we don't necessarily follow the goal enough to review those | 14:55 |
| ttx | and it creates a lot of churn on the governance repo | 14:55 |
| ttx | Could be replaced by 3 "goal updates" paragraphs that the champion would fill after each milestone | 14:56 |
| cmurphy | well we caught that https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521445/ wasn't complete by forcing it to go through review | 14:56 |
| cmurphy | not that that would happen a lot | 14:57 |
| ttx | cmurphy: I bet the champion would have caught it too | 14:57 |
| lbragstad | several folks caught some updates i was making to projects that didn't make sense with the policy goal, those were caught in review | 14:58 |
| ttx | if they were in the review chain | 14:58 |
| lbragstad | that was early on, when I was attempting to prune out all non-relevant projects from the goal | 14:58 |
| ttx | i also feel like the TC has nothing to do with this, since it's not governance. Other interested people should help tracking goals, not just TC members | 14:59 |
| lbragstad | ++ | 14:59 |
| cmurphy | true | 14:59 |
| TheJulia | That does seem logical, but I would only really wonder if champions really have necessary bandwidth | 15:00 |
| ttx | If Gerrit is the right way to track goals, we could set up a separate repo. But I'm not convinced Gerrit is the best way, and would rather let champions use the tool of their preference | 15:00 |
| lbragstad | TheJulia: that kinda sounds like cdent's concern | 15:01 |
| smcginnis | Can Storyboard help in any way here with tracking? | 15:01 |
| *** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc | 15:02 | |
| lbragstad | dhellmann: and i spoke with Emmet Hickory during the PTG about using storyboard | 15:02 |
| ttx | The only thing the TC needs to be involved with is selecting the set of goals for a given cyclle, know is whether goals are progressing, and if TC members should weigh in to restate the importance of the goal | 15:02 |
| ttx | know if* | 15:03 |
| ttx | then individuals can help keep track of the goal status to help the champion, but they don't need to be a TC member to do that | 15:03 |
| TheJulia | I guess that is if individuals are aware they can assist, step up, and feel empowered to help that feedback loop. | 15:08 |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 15:10 | |
| TheJulia | The other question, that may help overall success is graphical representation of goal status, since humans tend to parse a picture far faster than text. | 15:11 |
| persia | My concern about using storyboard for this sort of thing is that until all the projects migrate, it becomes difficult to manage tasks for unmigrated projects in Storyboard. Once migration has completed, I think it makes sense. | 15:12 |
| persia | TheJulia: Have you seen the graphs lbragstad previously prepared? | 15:12 |
| TheJulia | persia: Agree with that statement 100% | 15:13 |
| lbragstad | persia: yeah - that's exactly what we were talking about with Emmett | 15:13 |
| TheJulia | persia: I am unsure if I have seen the graphs you are referring to | 15:13 |
| lbragstad | TheJulia: if you're curious https://www.lbragstad.com/policy-burndown/ | 15:13 |
| lbragstad | ^ i stole some code from dhellmann and sdague to get that to work | 15:14 |
| lbragstad | it does not show projects that have completed the goal though - only ones in progress and ones that are left | 15:14 |
| TheJulia | I guess that does kind of represent all of the data needed if you record the starting point and track along | 15:15 |
| persia | lbragstad: For clarity: do you mean it doesn't list the completed projects in text? I thought the graphical representation also included projects that had completed goals. | 15:15 |
| lbragstad | persia: no - it only tracks what's in progress and what's left, | 15:16 |
| lbragstad | completion is tracked in the governance repo with the Completion Artifact | 15:16 |
| persia | Oh, heh. Somehow my brain assumes the high point on the left is all the projects. I suppose some may have completed goals before tracking begins :) | 15:16 |
| TheJulia | Seems like the delta over time is what might be more important to track, because that might also help identify creep, of course that may not matter | 15:16 |
| lbragstad | persia: yeah - the major drops in the graph are when i removed projects from tracking if they didn't have any work to do | 15:17 |
| sdague | TheJulia: yeh, I banged that out when having to go through the giant backlog of api-ref doc fixes | 15:18 |
| sdague | for the nova project | 15:18 |
| dhellmann | o/ | 15:38 |
| dhellmann | persia , lbragstad : yes, the discussion of using storyboard for tracking goals was part of why I wanted to push on the migration. | 15:42 |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 15:43 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 15:46 | |
| pabelanger | +1 | 15:49 |
| fungi | smcginnis: _if_ the completion tasks were in storyboard too, then yeah you could set up an automatic board where those tasks would move between new, review and merged lanes as their corresponding changes were worked through | 15:51 |
| fungi | but as persia says, not so convenient while projects are still in multiple task tracking systems | 15:51 |
| smcginnis | fungi: Maybe more reason to make moving to storyboard a goal. For future ease of goal tracking. | 15:55 |
| lbragstad | fungi: yes - exactly | 15:56 |
| fungi | lbragstad: where you say "persia: yeah - that's exactly what we were talking about with Emmett" do you mean another emmett who isn't persia? ;) | 15:56 |
| lbragstad | if it's all in one place, it makes tracking all those bits way easier | 15:56 |
| * lbragstad ... | 15:57 | |
| lbragstad | persia: i apologize, i completely forgot your nick to name mapping | 15:57 |
| lbragstad | fungi: thanks fungi | 15:57 |
| * lbragstad should probably have another cup of coffee | 15:58 | |
| fungi | me too | 15:58 |
| openstackgerrit | Lance Bragstad proposed openstack/governance master: Update policy artifacts for telemetry/panko https://review.openstack.org/523452 | 16:03 |
| smcginnis | lbragstad: I was wondering about that. ;) | 16:11 |
| TheJulia | smcginnis: I was just going to play along and see if it came back up :) | 16:37 |
| smcginnis | :) | 16:38 |
| * dims catching up on backlog | 16:40 | |
| *** robcresswell has joined #openstack-tc | 16:42 | |
| smcginnis | cdent: Great recap email, as usual. | 16:44 |
| robcresswell | cdent: Sorry I wasn't about for that discussion on the ptl-meeting last week, just reading logs | 16:44 |
| robcresswell | Yeah, thats what led me here :) | 16:44 |
| cdent | thanks smcginnis, robcresswell | 16:44 |
| dims | cdent : +1 to "There wasn't time to actually discuss this as previous topics ran _way_ over, but at a superficial glance it appeared to involve a complete misunderstanding of not just how open source works in OpenStack, but how open source works in general." | 16:44 |
| cdent | robcresswell: I don’t reckon I properly represented your needs/concerns so please feel free to followup | 16:45 |
| cdent | dims: yeah, I mean, it was so egregious that to try to step lightly around it is just… | 16:45 |
| robcresswell | dims cdent: Which talk / section *was* that? | 16:47 |
| smcginnis | cdent: ++ Glad you didn't try to just allude to it and just called it for what it was. :) | 16:48 |
| cdent | robcresswell: it was at the board meeting on the sunday before summit, in a bit about dealing with needs of enterprises | 16:48 |
| robcresswell | ah | 16:49 |
| cdent | there’s a bit more about it in graham’s summary | 16:49 |
| mugsie | cdent: yeah, I had a serious WTH moment when I saw it :) | 16:49 |
| smcginnis | I've been asked roadmap questions before, but that was not the place I was expecting it to come up. | 16:50 |
| mugsie | yeah, there seems to be a disconnect there | 16:50 |
| robcresswell | ttx: To your comments about not using openstack-dev adequately, I agree, and am / have been part of the problem in that regard. Would still like to see how it could be improved overall. | 16:51 |
| mugsie | I am glad that we have started pushing out info about that meeting to the wider community | 16:51 |
| cdent | mugsie: yeah, it feels a bit odd that there’s not more of it | 16:53 |
| cdent | I think we need to hold the board to greater account | 16:53 |
| robcresswell | Also I definitely agree with it being a "cultural" issues within OpenStack, so perhaps my attempt to overburden PTLs further is misguided. Just trying to make suggestions. Not sure what the best solution is, but there's still some big disconnect between the projects. At times it feels almost like a rivalry. | 16:53 |
| cdent | (and they us) | 16:53 |
| mugsie | robcresswell: yeah, I get that | 16:53 |
| cdent | robcresswell: yeah, good observations | 16:53 |
| mugsie | I also feel there is a lot of pre history, that not all PTLs / people in the community would have been around for that drive that culture | 16:54 |
| mugsie | I was not involved until around Folsom / Grizzy for example, so I missed the PPB and its history, and never worked on an integrated project, so miss a lot of the background there | 16:56 |
| robcresswell | My overall feeling is that when I started PTLing Horizon I expected there to be some guidance from "higher up"; whether that was purely information from surveys, or whether it was people interacting regularly with customers, or whether it was a group of cloud architects from varying companies. There are many possibilities. But instead there's a kind of vacuum, which I found difficult, personally. That's | 16:57 |
| robcresswell | made worse by own relative inexperience in industry. | 16:57 |
| robcresswell | mugsie: Yeah, I started just before Paris. So... Juno-ish? | 16:58 |
| cdent | robcresswell: higher fidelity feedback? | 16:58 |
| pabelanger | cdent: 'somewhat bizarre presentation' indeed :) | 16:58 |
| mugsie | cdent: feedback would be a start, for some things. | 16:59 |
| mugsie | other than "yeah, feature $x would be cool, so would $y" | 16:59 |
| cdent | conversation | 17:00 |
| robcresswell | ha, yeah, but also feedback *between* projects. Someone at a higher level saying "telco's are really pushing for X so Nova have added it, and it would be really valuable to expose that API via Horizon as a priority" | 17:01 |
| robcresswell | My bias is a little plain here, but I think my point still stands. | 17:01 |
| robcresswell | Instead it tends to be that someone opens a bug that says "Cinder added Y 3 cycles ago so you should really be supporting it by now!" | 17:01 |
| mugsie | yeah | 17:02 |
| robcresswell | Exactly what you just put in the etherpad mugsie :) | 17:02 |
| smcginnis | robcresswell: Slightly off-topic, but I always thought we needed a UIImpact tag for commit messages like we had with DocImpact to automate things a bit. | 17:04 |
| smcginnis | robcresswell: At least a "Hey, you might want to think about adding this thing" kind of automation. | 17:04 |
| mugsie | yeah - I would be interested in finding out from the docs folks how well that worked for them | 17:05 |
| mugsie | I could see hundreds of bugs getting created, and hurting the noise:signal ratio | 17:05 |
| dtroyer | not creating bugs, but making something query-able | 17:06 |
| dtroyer | liek APIimpact (or whatever it is) | 17:06 |
| mugsie | yeah. I think the newer versions of gerrit with tagging will make that easier as well | 17:08 |
| cdent | yeah, apiimpact’s impact was never too clear | 17:09 |
| dtroyer | I found it usefuol in the beginning but I don't think its use caught on enough to self-sustain | 17:10 |
| robcresswell | mugsie: They moved the DocImpact stuff to just open a bug within your own repo after a while for exactly that reason iirc. It just opened hundreds of bugs in docs with no owners | 17:11 |
| mugsie | robcresswell: yeah, that was my recollection as well, but people like asettle may have a more complete viewpoint | 17:12 |
| robcresswell | smcginnis: Yeah, that kind of thing would be pretty handy. It's difficult from our POV to know what to prioritise for addition / improvement | 17:12 |
| smcginnis | I actually wish there was a better automation API for etherpads. Just having something that triggers on a tag like that and adds a line to an etherpad of "things to consider" would be enough for me. | 17:16 |
| mugsie | that would be interesting alright | 17:17 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 17:20 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 17:21 | |
| *** mguiney has joined #openstack-tc | 17:40 | |
| *** hogepodge has joined #openstack-tc | 17:42 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 17:50 | |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 18:57 | |
| fungi | the ops community sort of did something like that with some structured tag suggestions, but for etherpad reasons it needs to be driven from an explicit list of pad ids. one "feature" of etherpad is that you can create somewhat private pads simply by not publicizing its randomly-generated pad ids (this is also one of the expectations underlying its read-only alternative urls), so any mechanism to index | 19:01 |
| fungi | and search across all pads would defeat those intentional properties of the software | 19:01 |
| harlowja | 'Josh Harlow was press | 19:11 |
| harlowja | ganged, but it's not clear if the hook set.' | 19:11 |
| harlowja | lol | 19:11 |
| harlowja | thx cdent :-P | 19:11 |
| fungi | now ye be swabbin the deck | 19:22 |
| harlowja | with qtips | 19:25 |
| harlowja | lol | 19:25 |
| * harlowja loves the pain | 19:29 | |
| harlowja | lol | 19:29 |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/governance master: Update shade team metainfo https://review.openstack.org/523519 | 20:02 |
| openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/governance master: Rename shade team to OpenStackSDK https://review.openstack.org/523520 | 20:02 |
| mordred | fungi: I'm strongly considering retiring the #openstack-shade channel completely - do we do channel redirects or similar? | 20:03 |
| fungi | mordred: yup, i think we even have the process semi-documented | 20:03 |
| fungi | just a sec | 20:03 |
| mordred | woot! | 20:04 |
| fungi | mordred: https://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/irc.html#renaming-an-irc-channel is what you want | 20:04 |
| fungi | same basic process applies for merging one established channel into another established channel | 20:05 |
| fungi | i'm going to guess you want to relocate shade discussions to the sdks channel? | 20:05 |
| mordred | fungi: yah - it's bifurcated for no good reason right now | 20:09 |
| fungi | sounds good to me | 20:10 |
| *** fdegir has joined #openstack-tc | 20:31 | |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 21:04 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 21:21 | |
| *** openstackstatus has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-tc | 21:44 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 21:44 | |
| *** openstackstatus has joined #openstack-tc | 21:45 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus | 21:45 | |
| EmilienM | ttx: (rocky goals) email sent | 22:24 |
| openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Port wiki bugs pages (1 of ?) https://review.openstack.org/523551 | 22:38 |
| *** efried has joined #openstack-tc | 22:40 | |
| efried | \o | 22:40 |
| dhellmann | efried : I'm about to drop offline for the evening, but I'll put that ptg doc patch on my list for first thing in the morning | 22:51 |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 22:56 | |
| efried | dhellmann Thanks. | 23:00 |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 23:24 | |
| openstackgerrit | Eric Fried proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Port wiki bugs pages (2 of ?) https://review.openstack.org/523602 | 23:27 |
| efried | dhellmann ^ | 23:27 |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 23:33 | |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 23:56 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!