| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 00:06 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 00:13 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 00:36 | |
| *** liujiong has joined #openstack-tc | 01:03 | |
| *** hongbin has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** liujiong has quit IRC | 01:16 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:21 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:22 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:36 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:37 | |
| openstackgerrit | Eric Kao proposed openstack/governance master: Python 35 congress completion artifact https://review.openstack.org/526247 | 01:46 |
|---|---|---|
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:48 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 01:48 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 02:00 | |
| openstackgerrit | Dai Dang Van proposed openstack/governance master: Update policy goal for mistral https://review.openstack.org/524782 | 02:01 |
| openstackgerrit | zhurong proposed openstack/governance master: Mark the completion of tempest plugin split goal for murano team https://review.openstack.org/526250 | 02:11 |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 02:22 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:11 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 03:38 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 04:03 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 04:05 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 04:15 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc | 04:39 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 04:41 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 05:30 | |
| *** gcb has quit IRC | 06:08 | |
| *** gcb has joined #openstack-tc | 06:10 | |
| *** rosmaita has quit IRC | 06:39 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 06:42 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 06:47 | |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 08:58 | |
| *** andreaf has quit IRC | 09:42 | |
| *** andreaf has joined #openstack-tc | 09:42 | |
| *** alex_xu has quit IRC | 10:24 | |
| *** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc | 10:25 | |
| *** gcb has quit IRC | 10:29 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 10:32 | |
| *** alex_xu has quit IRC | 10:50 | |
| *** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc | 10:51 | |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-tc | 10:56 | |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 10:57 | |
| *** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc | 12:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 13:43 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 13:47 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 13:57 | |
| *** ttx has quit IRC | 14:42 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** mwhahaha has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** fungi has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** johnsom has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** thingee has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** TheJulia has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** robcresswell has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** fdegir has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** DuncanT has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** dirk has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** ChanServ has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** mfedosin has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** ianw has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** knikolla has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** tristanC has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** flwang has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** tdasilva has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** mugsie has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** persia has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** cmurphy has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** alex_xu has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** notmyname has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** amrith has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** EmilienM has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** tonyb has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** pabelanger has quit IRC | 14:48 | |
| *** thingee has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** fdegir has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** robcresswell has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** mwhahaha has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** fungi has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** johnsom has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** TheJulia has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** johnthetubaguy has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** dirk has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** ttx has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** knikolla has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** tristanC has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** flwang has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** ianw has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** EmilienM has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** mfedosin has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** tonyb has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** notmyname has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** amrith has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** mugsie has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** persia has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** pabelanger has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** cmurphy has joined #openstack-tc | 14:54 | |
| *** mtreinish has quit IRC | 14:55 | |
| ttx | o/ | 14:56 |
| cmurphy | \o | 14:57 |
| ttx | Office hour is coinciding with keynote time here at Kubecon so we'll not be very active in the coming hour | 14:57 |
| ttx | The cross-community discussions yesterday were pretty good | 14:57 |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 14:58 | |
| ttx | It's pretty clear they are running into the same types of issues as we did | 14:58 |
| ttx | and that a lot of those are actually systemic to the open way we do things | 14:58 |
| *** mtreinish has joined #openstack-tc | 14:59 | |
| ttx | amongst other things they are struggling with strategic contributions too | 14:59 |
| fungi | i am here for office hour if non-kubegoers want to discuss stuff | 14:59 |
| cdent | strategic contributions needs a better name I reckon: opportunistic marketing contributions | 15:00 |
| ttx | so I took the action of writing something up together with Caleb Miles on the Kubernetes side to reemphasize strategic contributions | 15:00 |
| cdent | or do you mean project-long-term-strategy contributions? | 15:00 |
| cmurphy | ttx: strategic contributions as in what our help-wanted list is supposed to address? | 15:00 |
| ttx | One suggestion Caleb made was to ask the large corporate sponsors of CNCF and OpenStack Foundation to publisg yearly a report on their contribution | 15:00 |
| fungi | as opposed to tactical contributions | 15:00 |
| cdent | I guess that explains the need for a better name :) | 15:00 |
| cmurphy | :P | 15:00 |
| ttx | strategic contributions as in things that benefit everyone rather than just one org | 15:01 |
| ttx | we need to set up the language elements there | 15:01 |
| cdent | yeah, I think a lot of non-in-the-game people will read that as “strategic for the contributor" | 15:01 |
| fungi | i.e., not just fixing bugs in your vendor-centric backend/driver or adding some feature to support your new product line | 15:01 |
| ttx | cdent: that's what you get with a generation that has not been playing wargames | 15:01 |
| fungi | would you like to play a game? | 15:02 |
| ttx | anyway, I thought that report was an interesting suggestion | 15:02 |
| ttx | since strategic contributions make you look better on that report than tactical contributions | 15:03 |
| ttx | could serve as an incentive | 15:03 |
| ttx | that report could be included for all Gold/Platinum in the Foundation yearly report | 15:03 |
| TheJulia | cdent: agreed, context with what is and to whom is strategic is critical imo | 15:03 |
| *** zaneb has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| dtroyer | o/ | 15:04 |
| cdent | ttx agree a yearly report of contributions could be useful | 15:04 |
| ttx | We agreed that to be sustainable a project needs at least 20% of strategic contributions | 15:04 |
| cdent | except it will be hard for some of the really long term stuff to shine through (e.g. placement, which is taking _years_) | 15:04 |
| ttx | Kubernetes is really struggling to fill those critical roles | 15:05 |
| cdent | tc-members ping, in case you hadn’t otherwise seen we are office hoursing | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | cdent: was there anything in the begining that scoped placement to be the effort that it has resulted? | 15:05 |
| smcginnis | hoursing - I like it. | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | s/resulted/resulted in/ | 15:05 |
| *** zaneb has joined #openstack-tc | 15:05 | |
| ttx | We are still surviving with strategic roles being filled by historic involvement circa 2013, but this is getting harder for us too | 15:05 |
| dtroyer | I like the idea of a report from the corporate board members… different than just throwing out stackalytics numbers | 15:05 |
| ttx | yes also opens up the possibility to use your own words | 15:06 |
| cdent | TheJulia: are you asking did we know going in that it was going to be such a haul? | 15:06 |
| TheJulia | cdent: basically, yes | 15:06 |
| ttx | I expect the wifi to die in that keynote room anytime now | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | I would hope it would get some of the focus for some companies away from stacklytics and more into thinking about what would be good to be known for. | 15:06 |
| fungi | what are the odds that the corporate contributors will look to the community or the foundation staff to put together that report for them? | 15:06 |
| TheJulia | fungi: high? | 15:06 |
| smcginnis | fungi: Hah, true. | 15:06 |
| ttx | Like Huawei could explain how they are working to structure the Chinese contrib community | 15:06 |
| ttx | which is also strategic | 15:07 |
| dtroyer | actually I can see it falling to the marketing people to do that… it'll read like a booth report | 15:07 |
| TheJulia | ttx: that is a very good point, it is not all code, some of it could just be human interactions/teaching/education | 15:07 |
| ttx | as in benefitting "not just you" | 15:07 |
| ttx | ok dropping now | 15:08 |
| EmilienM | question for TC members who are there, how is KubeCon going? | 15:08 |
| cdent | TheJulia: re placement: I think everyone knew it would be big, but I think the compression of nova review bandwidth was not predicted | 15:09 |
| TheJulia | I feel like it all comes down to long term tracking at that point, at least for code efforts, but maybe a report of everything but code would be better | 15:10 |
| pabelanger | EmilienM: yah, I really wanted to attend :( | 15:11 |
| cmurphy | i worry about the idea of strategic contributions being a marketing tactic or an image booster, we've already found that it doesn't work if companies don't see a measurable return on investment | 15:13 |
| cdent | cmurphy: there’s potential that being able to see one’s name in a report is sufficient return on investment to represent value? | 15:16 |
| EmilienM | mainly the question goes for ttx, dims, smcginnis I guess | 15:16 |
| *** ChanServ has joined #openstack-tc | 15:16 | |
| *** barjavel.freenode.net sets mode: +o ChanServ | 15:16 | |
| fungi | we've got a similar situation with infra quota donations, and it's been hit-or-miss. there are some companies who are run by people who genuinely want to help the effort and make the case to their board/investors all on their own. there are some who are swayed by the fact that we stick logos of donors in a few prominent places. then there are some who decide not to help that way because it just doesn't | 15:17 |
| fungi | seem beneficial to them | 15:17 |
| cmurphy | cdent: you think a mention in a report is > than stats in stackalytics? | 15:18 |
| cmurphy | i don't feel like it's a big difference | 15:18 |
| cdent | cmurphy: maybe? If the report is presented with sufficient gloss and is strictly about strategic, community-oriented stuff. | 15:19 |
| dtroyer | we should communicate that human-vetted/curated info is always better than stackalytics | 15:19 |
| cdent | I’m not very marketing oriented or savvy so I could be totally wrong. | 15:19 |
| dtroyer | provided of course that the humans are fairly sane | 15:19 |
| cmurphy | i just think braggability should not be the only motivator, we should push the idea that there is actual monitary value of contributing to making upstream openstack better because that will make downstream customers happier | 15:20 |
| cdent | dtroyer: I’d like to introduce you to the world around you. | 15:20 |
| dtroyer | is that what that is? | 15:20 |
| cdent | as you may see, now that the scales have dropped from your eyes, sanity is not common | 15:21 |
| *** hongbin has joined #openstack-tc | 15:23 | |
| cdent | cmurphy: I agree that bragging is problematic, but it is often easier to express than determining the bottom line effects of some of the long term changes. Placement makes another good case in point: it will enable a lot of NFV stuff, but it wasn’t the only way to accomplish that. | 15:26 |
| fungi | human-vetted/curated info is often better as long as it follows consistent methodology or you don't have a need for side-by-side comparisons | 15:26 |
| fungi | if each company provides a human-vetted report they'll all find a way to claim they're the "top contributor to openstack" | 15:27 |
| fungi | and that will present its own amusing/frustrating marketing challenges | 15:27 |
| TheJulia | That is a very true point :( | 15:27 |
| fungi | i mean, many of them already do that to some extent | 15:27 |
| fungi | and you can even see shades of that in the design of stackalytics favoring the contribution styles of the particular member company who built it | 15:28 |
| cdent | I would think it would have to be the foundation that produces the report, curated by foundation humans | 15:28 |
| cmurphy | "Each Platinum Member's company strategy aligns with the OpenStack mission and is responsible for committing full-time resources toward the project." <-- does that mean contributor resources? are the sponsors held accountable for that? | 15:28 |
| dtroyer | cdent: ++ that's really the only way to do it | 15:29 |
| dtroyer | cmurphy: there was a long time that that was imagined to be developers, and no, they were not held to it that we (outside the foundation) saw | 15:29 |
| fungi | cdent: keep in mind which "foundation humans" are capable of putting together that report. they're basically a handful of long-time strategic contributors to our community who will get the choice of working on solving other problems, or writing reports about how companies contribute to the effort but probably not both | 15:29 |
| cdent | fungi: yeah, I know. I’m imagining some kind of mythical future where the foundation has staff to do those kinds of things | 15:30 |
| cdent | which is … mythical | 15:30 |
| fungi | the foundation could of course ask for funds to hire some one to work on that, and... guess where they'll look to hire them from | 15:30 |
| cdent | but it would be a way to avoid it being twisted | 15:30 |
| flaper87 | ttx: are you planning to send a summary of what was discussed? | 15:32 |
| fungi | so in the end, i'm pretty sure it'll come back to some long-time strategic contributor(s) to the community being asked to do that reporting | 15:32 |
| flaper87 | EmilienM: dhellmann is at kubecon too | 15:32 |
| fungi | because anyone else isn't going to have the sort of insights into what's relevant to know what to report | 15:32 |
| cdent | fungi: yeah. blargh. I wish folk would just be good. | 15:32 |
| fungi | right now, when the foundation wants marketing-worthy contribution insights, they rely on reporting from ttx, thingee, diablo_rojo, clarkb, me... | 15:34 |
| fungi | we tried contracting a third party to put together that sort of info and it really didn't work out no matter how much feedback we gave them on what they were missing/misunderstanding | 15:35 |
| cdent | Let’s have thingee do it all, as a song and dance number. | 15:35 |
| flaper87 | cdent: ++ | 15:36 |
| flaper87 | thingee: thanks for volunteering | 15:36 |
| fungi | tonight's performance features a record-breaking three table-flips | 15:36 |
| cdent | is that flip flip flip, or three tables, stacked, flipped | 15:36 |
| fungi | you'd have to ask the creative team. table-flip choreography is above my pay grade | 15:37 |
| thingee | flaper87: I mean, I get paid for it :) | 15:38 |
| flaper87 | thingee: ROFL! Good point, although you could always choose to do something that pleases you more than reports :D | 15:38 |
| thingee | hello tc, I wanted to reach out to see if someone wants to volunteer to write the governance page for the new contributor guide. Kendall Nelson has taken the tme to brainstorm on storyboard some ideas of content for the contributor guide https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/913 | 15:39 |
| cdent | my efforts to bring more input on the interop tests have thus far failed to produce: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521602/ | 15:40 |
| cdent | thingee: looking | 15:40 |
| cmurphy | cdent: the discussion on that one is hard to digest @.@ | 15:40 |
| cdent | cmurphy: indeed | 15:41 |
| cdent | I think that’s because it is being used as a proxy for some bigger issues | 15:41 |
| cmurphy | yes | 15:41 |
| EmilienM | flaper87: good to know, thx | 15:41 |
| cdent | lots of thing in storyboard that I expect to be able to click are not, for example task id numbers on: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001359 | 15:42 |
| cdent | thingee: I reckon I could probably do that | 15:43 |
| zaneb | cmurphy: I recall there were questions asked at a board meeting once about whether all of the platinum members were pulling their weight under that clause | 15:44 |
| zaneb | but the director who was the target of that enquiry had already walked out at the start of the joint board/TC meeting, as many of the directors seem wont to do | 15:45 |
| mugsie | cdent: I am thinking a "round up" email may be in order for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521602/ | 15:46 |
| mugsie | I will have a go at it later on today | 15:46 |
| cdent | mugsie: good idea | 15:46 |
| thingee | cdent: the part I was worried about was having too much information on the subject. I think we want to avoid that so it's not like we have two places with the same information. | 15:46 |
| cdent | thingee: yeah, so a brief overview with links seems right? | 15:47 |
| cmurphy | zaneb: :/ | 15:47 |
| * cdent wonders why zaneb is not running for the board | 15:47 | |
| zaneb | cdent: easy. because only 2 people paid by RH are allowed on the board, and one is markmc | 15:48 |
| cdent | so if we make a tactical removal of markmc you’d do it? | 15:48 |
| zaneb | russellb and mordred are both more qualified than me, without even getting into other great people like Richard Fontana | 15:49 |
| thingee | cdent: yeah sounds good. you can see the current guide https://docs.openstack.org/contributors for examples and the repo is http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/contributor-guide/ | 15:49 |
| zaneb | cdent: but since you ask, I am incredibly frustrated with how the board is run | 15:51 |
| cdent | thanks thingee, I’ve put it on my to do list for soon | 15:52 |
| cdent | zaneb: run or behaves? | 15:52 |
| cdent | (and yes, I do ask) | 15:52 |
| dhellmann | zaneb, cmurphy : yeah, I gave jaypipes credit for the idea when I brought it up yesterday. | 15:52 |
| zaneb | effective boards run on briefing papers, not powerpoint presentations on 40-person conference calls. this is an organisation literally dedicated to openness. where the h*** are they? | 15:52 |
| dhellmann | it was in the context of finding ways to give companies value, and while bragging rights seem small to us to some companies they're still big | 15:52 |
| dhellmann | asking companies to talk about their contributions will also give us a better idea of the sorts of things they value, so we can pitch future proposals in those terms | 15:53 |
| cdent | zaneb: yeah, totally agree. it’s very hard to keep abreast without being on the video conference. there’s not enough asynchrony in input and output | 15:54 |
| zaneb | +1000 | 15:54 |
| zaneb | cdent: runs. although I am also pretty furious that they asked their lawyers for legal advice on the whole CLA/DCO thing and got back policy advice on what developers care about that contradicted the advice of the TC. decent leadership would not put up with that imho | 15:56 |
| cdent | asynchrony is pretty much my campaign pitch (for tc and now board too) | 15:57 |
| fungi | cmurphy: zaneb: the question of platinum member contributions has come up ~annually in board meetings that i've noticed. most of the time it's seemed like it was raised by a platinum board member who feels their contributions are out of alignment and that the others aren't necessarily pulling their weight, the suggestion of doing periodic contribution reports comes up, gets debated a bit, and then not | 15:58 |
| fungi | much comes of it | 15:58 |
| cdent | fungi: having more down in writing (as in asynchronous output) might help with some of that | 15:58 |
| zaneb | fungi: or by a gold member who wants a platinum member's seat :) | 15:58 |
| fungi | zaneb: quite possibly, yes | 15:59 |
| fungi | i tend to dial into the not-in-person board meetings when i'm not too overbooked, and i agree it's a little hard to follow without seeing the webex slides (but i'm not about to run some proprietary cisco software on my workstation just for that) | 16:00 |
| fungi | as for the cla/dco thing, i feel like we're pretty close. we managed to get a compromise back from the board/counsel two years ago that we can switch from the icla to the dco as long as we make it possible for member companies to perform automated tracking of contributors to make sure they get listed on the correct cclas. we're mostly stuck on getting our remaining systems off launchpad/ubuntu openid so | 16:02 |
| fungi | they can be synced up with foundation accounts | 16:02 |
| zaneb | I've never dialed in, and it's a while since I've attended in person, but they seem to routinely fail to get more than a third of the way through the agenda, I assume because everything is a surprise that 35 out of 40 people are just learning about for the first time, and there's been no async discussion beforehand | 16:02 |
| zaneb | fungi: yeah, it got sorted out in the end, but there were some ridiculous shenanigans along the way | 16:03 |
| fungi | yeah, they supposedly get "board packets" some time in advance of the meetings, but since they're private and never released to the public and i'm not on the board, i've never seen one so have no idea how far in advance they are, what's in them or how off-base they end up being from the agenda | 16:03 |
| cdent | zaneb++ (on everything a surprise) | 16:04 |
| cmurphy | ++ that was how the sydney meeting felt | 16:04 |
| fungi | and i do get the distinct impression that few of the board members actually closely read whatever advance briefing they're provided | 16:04 |
| fungi | but that's likely the case for most people who attend any sort of meeting, unfortunately | 16:05 |
| fungi | i'll admit to often failing to look at pre-published agendas for meetings i attend, and also failing to provide sufficient advance curation of agendas for meetings i'm chairing | 16:05 |
| zaneb | fungi: are they provided any advance briefing? I don't see them on the foundation list. most things the board considers are not in an executive session and any briefings could be public, right? | 16:06 |
| cdent | fungi: clearly you need pre-meeting meetings | 16:06 |
| fungi | zaneb: there's a separate private list for the board which is used to distribute the private advance "board packet" briefings, from what i understand | 16:06 |
| mugsie | that would make more sense. I wonder if there is a way a redacted / partial version of that could be sent out more publically | 16:07 |
| fungi | and presumably the reason for those being private is so they can include embargoed marketing details or discussion of deliberation on gold/platinum member seats | 16:07 |
| fungi | yeah, i expect some manual redaction would be needed | 16:07 |
| zaneb | fungi: that makes sense, but I would like to see them split into public and private briefings | 16:07 |
| cdent | zaneb++ | 16:08 |
| zaneb | this is the *Open*Stack Foundation | 16:08 |
| mugsie | zaneb: I am not sure that always filters down to some directors | 16:08 |
| mugsie | or it just goes over some peoples heads | 16:09 |
| fungi | it is likely a tough distinction for some of them | 16:12 |
| cdent | fungi: what’s a and b in the distinction? | 16:13 |
| fungi | how much is necessary to keep private and what can safely be done in the public eye | 16:13 |
| fungi | they manage to sort it out fairly well during the meeting by having closed executive sessions separate from the rest of the proceedings | 16:14 |
| fungi | but getting them to use two mailing lists (a private one and a public one) hasn't worked out well for out-of-meeting splits between the two | 16:14 |
| fungi | i feel like our community-elected board members at large are far more in tune with this dynamic, but that's probably not too surprising | 16:15 |
| fungi | and we sometimes get lucky in that a member company will choose to put a long-time contributor employee in a seat | 16:19 |
| fungi | they also tend to "get it" | 16:20 |
| cdent | I wonder to what extent people who we are claiming don’t “get it” think we don’t get it, and what aspect of stuff it is that we are not getting | 16:21 |
| cdent | because, of course, nobody entirely gets it | 16:21 |
| fungi | oh, i'm sure there are a lot of board members who think nobody on the tc "gets business decisions" | 16:22 |
| fungi | it goes both ways, for sure | 16:22 |
| fungi | but i was mostly referring to the importance our community puts on doing everything in the open (and the dilemma of having to exclude people and do some things in private anyway) | 16:24 |
| dhellmann | someone should start a thread on the foundation member mailing list about this and ask (a) for candidates in the current board election to express their opinion and (b) the entire board to address the issue as it relates to our 4 opens | 16:24 |
| fungi | dhellmann with actionable suggestions! | 16:24 |
| lbragstad | dhellmann: ++ | 16:24 |
| dhellmann | because I have a high level of confidence in an estimate of close to 0 board members listening in this channel or reading the logs | 16:25 |
| fungi | i expect it's >0. we've had people on the board and tc at the same time in the past | 16:25 |
| dhellmann | I suspect that the board considers publishing the minutes after the meeting to be sufficient, but I think it's reasonable to argue that point | 16:25 |
| fungi | i quite appreciate when markmc does his unofficial roundup of the meetings | 16:26 |
| dhellmann | true, though the first few names I am thinking of off the top of my head are not present right now | 16:26 |
| fungi | fair | 16:26 |
| fungi | though i hope at least some bod at-large candidates are frequently engaging with the tc if not actually hanging out in here right this moment | 16:27 |
| dhellmann | I also hope that's the case | 16:28 |
| fungi | regardless, your point is a very good one. this is not the venue for proposing changes in behavior of the bod | 16:28 |
| fungi | and we have a canvassing/campaigning period for a reason | 16:28 |
| cdent | proposing no, but discussing, yes | 16:28 |
| dhellmann | I expect the majority of the board pays more attention to the board mailing list, so maybe that's a better place for the thread | 16:28 |
| fungi | likely so. though more than a few also seem to engage on the foundation ml from time to time too | 16:29 |
| dhellmann | cdent : sure. my point was just that we can complain to each other in the corner, or we can go talk to the people who we want to change. | 16:29 |
| cdent | dhellmann: yeah totes, or we can run | 16:29 |
| dhellmann | yes, that's another option | 16:29 |
| dhellmann | I've found most of the board members very reasonable to deal with, so I suspect this is a matter of perspective on what "open" really means. it shouldn't be necessary to be on the board (or tc) to address the board on this matter, since it affects all foundation members | 16:30 |
| cdent | I suspec that it is not just a matter of understanding what “open” means, it is also a matter of doing the work. We all think the TC should be as visible as possible, but that isn’t always the case. | 16:32 |
| dhellmann | cdent : that's a good point, too | 16:34 |
| dhellmann | and I don't mean to imply they don't understand "open" but that, as I said, they are likely to think that publishing the minutes after the discussion is sufficient | 16:34 |
| fungi | i've heard plenty of people say that until cdent started summarizing tc activity, they had no idea what we were working on most of the time | 16:35 |
| cdent | It’s unfortunate but true that doing transparency is frustratingly time consuming and the benefits and ROI are not immediately obvious | 16:35 |
| fungi | yeah, i can imagine there's plenty of "is anyone reading this anyway" syndrome at work | 16:35 |
| * persia is very confident that lots of people are reading those emails, based on the number of times they are mentioned in conversations | 16:36 | |
| dhellmann | fungi : yeah, I think we've relied on people to read meeting or channel logs too much in the past | 16:36 |
| cdent | dhellmann: yeah, minutes are a good thing, but if you’re reading them and it is news, it means you missed the chance to participate. | 16:37 |
| pabelanger | +1 to over communication, don't think that is a bad thing | 16:37 |
| fungi | persia: cdent's tc activity summaries, or the board meeting minutes? | 16:37 |
| dhellmann | even using gerrit reviews doesn't mean the conversations are easy to follow (see the earlier comments about the interop testing thing) | 16:37 |
| dhellmann | cdent : right | 16:37 |
| * dhellmann drops offline to go back to conferencing | 16:38 | |
| persia | fungi: cdent's activity summaries. I don't hear as much about the minutes, but have heard folk say "the board is ...", using language that seems to match the minutes. | 16:38 |
| fungi | i hear a lot more people say they get useful info out of cdent's and markmc's summaries than they got out of our official meeting minutes (when we had tc meetings) and the official bod minutes | 16:38 |
| cdent | I think the different is that minutes say what was decided and leave out the how and people really care about how | 16:42 |
| zaneb | fungi++ | 16:42 |
| fungi | cdent: i agree | 16:43 |
| fungi | it's hard to have an impartial/objective synopsis which reflects such nuance | 16:43 |
| * cdent nods | 16:44 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc | 17:08 | |
| cdent | harlowja: you start your acquisition editor role yet? | 17:08 |
| harlowja | errrrr, ummmm | 17:08 |
| harlowja | lol | 17:08 |
| * harlowja still debating whether i have the ability to even do that role currently :( | 17:09 | |
| cdent | :) | 17:10 |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 17:15 | |
| thingee | cdent: thanks for volunteering to write the governance chapter | 17:29 |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 17:29 | |
| cdent | thingee: is there a deadline, or is it more of a “soon” kind of thing? | 17:29 |
| thingee | cdent: I don't have a deadline set | 17:31 |
| cdent | ✔ | 17:31 |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 19:04 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| smcginnis | EmilienM: Going well. A few jabs here and there, but overall some good stuff. And a bit of a reunion with some members that have moved off to other things. | 20:02 |
| cdent | are they at least clever jabs? | 20:03 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 20:09 | |
| smcginnis | Not for the most part. :) | 20:19 |
| fungi | smcginnis: are they picking on us for letting "just anyone" into design discussions, giving free conference admission to speakers and having enough power strips everywhere? | 20:39 |
| pabelanger | fungi: I have to admit, the universal power strips have been a hit when summit is not NA | 20:49 |
| fungi | sounds like having _any_ power strips in breakout rooms would have been an improvement on this one | 20:50 |
| pabelanger | Oh, I think I am missing context :) | 20:50 |
| fungi | i was wondering if one of the jabs kubecon was taking at us was our ability to have a reasonable quantity of power strips preinstalled in rooms. i was probably being a little opaque there | 20:51 |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 21:12 | |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 21:43 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 21:48 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 21:48 | |
| *** ianychoi has quit IRC | 22:30 | |
| *** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc | 22:33 | |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 22:36 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 22:42 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-tc | 23:07 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!