| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 00:05 | |
| *** mwhahaha has joined #openstack-tc | 00:05 | |
| *** fdegir has joined #openstack-tc | 00:10 | |
| *** DuncanT has joined #openstack-tc | 00:10 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 00:39 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 01:11 | |
| *** liujiong has joined #openstack-tc | 01:44 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 01:56 | |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 02:15 | |
| *** liujiong has quit IRC | 03:02 | |
| *** liujiong has joined #openstack-tc | 03:06 | |
| *** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc | 03:08 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:13 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 03:24 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:24 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 03:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 03:29 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 03:53 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 04:20 | |
| openstackgerrit | Dai Dang Van proposed openstack/governance master: Update policy goal for watcher https://review.openstack.org/527299 | 04:22 |
|---|---|---|
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 04:23 | |
| *** robcresswell has quit IRC | 05:39 | |
| *** fungi has quit IRC | 05:45 | |
| *** fungi has joined #openstack-tc | 05:48 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 06:24 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 06:28 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur | 06:52 | |
| *** robcresswell has joined #openstack-tc | 07:39 | |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Our CI system Zuul is currently not accessible. Wait with approving changes and rechecks until it's back online. Currently waiting for an admin to investigate. | 08:49 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 08:55 | |
| cdent | tc-members and everyone interested: it's office hours time | 09:00 |
| flaper87 | o/ | 09:01 |
| cdent | flaper87: are you responsible for this terrible cold I have? | 09:01 |
| flaper87 | I'm around in case there are topics to discuss. I don't have anything to bring up. | 09:01 |
| flaper87 | cdent if you caught it surfing, then yes | 09:02 |
| cdent | no, it's meant no surfing this week :( | 09:03 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: Zuul is back online, looks like a temporary network problem. | 09:09 | |
| cdent | Looks like the only review that is stuck or contentious is still the interop tests one: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/521602/ | 09:09 |
| flaper87 | yeah, I caught up with the discussion yday but I haven't replied yet | 09:13 |
| *** jpich has joined #openstack-tc | 09:13 | |
| flaper87 | it is indeed contentious and full of trade-offs | 09:14 |
| ttx | o/ | 09:31 |
| ttx | sorry for lateness, had dentist appointment | 09:32 |
| ttx | cdent, flaper87: I can summarize the 4 k8s/openstack discussions we had if you are interested | 09:34 |
| flaper87 | ttx: yes | 09:34 |
| flaper87 | please | 09:35 |
| ttx | So the first one was on open dev tooling | 09:35 |
| ttx | K8s community is struggling a lot with GitHub, apparently a lot of the discussions in their dev "invitation-only" day on tuesday were around that | 09:35 |
| ttx | Most declared bankruptcy on using GitHub issues | 09:36 |
| ttx | there were lots of parallels with OpenStack there | 09:37 |
| ttx | They were tempted to explore feature branches more | 09:37 |
| ttx | We told them to be careful/conservative around those | 09:37 |
| ttx | They are considering moving to gitlab, actually | 09:38 |
| ttx | although Gerrit is still around since Google people love it | 09:38 |
| ttx | Things that they manage to do with their tools that would be nice for us to be able to do: core review delegation | 09:39 |
| flaper87 | oh mmh, self-hosted gitlab? | 09:39 |
| ttx | flaper87: unclear | 09:39 |
| flaper87 | what's core review delegation? | 09:39 |
| flaper87 | sounds like something I have proposed in the past | 09:39 |
| ttx | A core reviewer delegating his core review rights on a specific patch to a non-core reviewer | 09:39 |
| ttx | yes we did discuss it | 09:40 |
| ttx | It looks like tagging issues with SIG names is also pretty efficient | 09:40 |
| flaper87 | yeah,I think I brought that up again at the forum in SYD but not many ppl seemed to buy-in | 09:41 |
| flaper87 | perhaps it is worth discussing it again | 09:41 |
| ttx | anyway, no miracle solution there -- just a feeling that they were having a lot of the issues we were having | 09:41 |
| flaper87 | yeah | 09:41 |
| flaper87 | hopefully our feedback was useful to them | 09:41 |
| ttx | The second discussion was on open innovation dynamics | 09:41 |
| ttx | That one was eye-opening to me | 09:42 |
| ttx | They are struggling a lot with strategic contributions | 09:42 |
| ttx | much more than we do/did | 09:42 |
| ttx | which is not apparent from the hype and the press | 09:43 |
| ttx | In our case we are struggling a bit now, but during ramp-up phase we had people covering everything | 09:43 |
| ttx | They are struggling *during* ramp-up | 09:44 |
| ttx | Anyway, we brainstormed and came up with two ideas | 09:44 |
| ttx | Caleb Miles and myself will co-author a blogpost around the importance of strategic contributions in those kinds of projects | 09:45 |
| ttx | And we'll push the respective corporate sponsors of our respective foundations to report "how they contribute to the project" | 09:46 |
| ttx | which is a positive way to encourage them to do the rigth things | 09:46 |
| ttx | beyond silly numbers | 09:46 |
| ttx | HOW/WHAT rather han how many | 09:47 |
| flaper87 | or how much | 09:47 |
| cdent | that's a good idea | 09:47 |
| ttx | right. We have employee X who owns startegic task Y. Or We organize event Z which benefits the whole local community | 09:48 |
| cdent | something a bit more narrative, instead of numbers | 09:48 |
| ttx | cdent: exactly | 09:48 |
| flaper87 | ++ | 09:48 |
| ttx | I can't take credit, idea is Caleb's | 09:48 |
| ttx | (who btw attended every discussion, and is awesome) | 09:48 |
| ttx | anyway, we'll try to roll that out on this year report. Might be tricky given limited time | 09:49 |
| ttx | Another insight of that discussion was the feature creep situation, which they are struggling with | 09:49 |
| cdent | I suspect that even a limited report, hinting at bigger reports to come, would be useful | 09:49 |
| ttx | obviously rang a bell | 09:49 |
| cdent | (big bell) | 09:50 |
| flaper87 | BONG | 09:50 |
| ttx | We arrived at the conclusion that most of it is systemic to the way we do things, but you can still try to put safeguards in place early on | 09:50 |
| ttx | Like affirm scope aggressively, and say what you WON'T do | 09:51 |
| flaper87 | s/early on/any time/ | 09:51 |
| flaper87 | early is better but... | 09:51 |
| cdent | having clear "not that" boundaries would be great for everyone, especially in the adjacent community discussions: "we don't do that, group X over there does" | 09:52 |
| ttx | I thought they would have a better time with feature creep than we did due to K8s being more advanced when it was open | 09:52 |
| flaper87 | Do we have any other actionable items for ourselves other than the blog post you'll be writing? | 09:53 |
| ttx | but they are struggling from their startup ecosystem and general NIH syndrome due to hyped community | 09:53 |
| ttx | I'm still wrapping my head around it | 09:53 |
| ttx | Discussion 3 was around governance | 09:53 |
| ttx | We arrived at the conclusion that a lot of the misundertanding/critics there was coming from the fact that our systems don't align | 09:54 |
| ttx | Like the CNCF TOC having a completely different role than openstack TC | 09:54 |
| flaper87 | oh, mmh, intersting | 09:55 |
| ttx | They say we get in the way of project governance, we say they are apponted corporate shills | 09:55 |
| ttx | appointed | 09:55 |
| ttx | But their TOC is just selecting independent projects | 09:55 |
| ttx | not even trying to paint an overarching story | 09:55 |
| cdent | we seem confused about that internally sometimes too :) | 09:56 |
| ttx | The equivalent of the TC is the K8s steering committee | 09:56 |
| flaper87 | yeah. Although, it's interesting how a similar group of people have a complete different purpose in both communities | 09:56 |
| ttx | an elected body to make final calls and paint the overarching story at the K*s level | 09:57 |
| flaper87 | right | 09:57 |
| ttx | they just don't have an equivalent at CNCF-level, by design | 09:57 |
| ttx | Their SIGs look more like our project teams, although the code ownership is a parallel structure | 09:57 |
| ttx | i.e. the only way to break review disagreement is actually to go to steering committee | 09:58 |
| ttx | The most eye-opening for me is: | 09:58 |
| ttx | we build a dual safety-valve system with PTL and TC, they have a single safety-valve system with steering committee | 09:58 |
| ttx | Their SOGs can have a series of leads, they don't really elect them | 09:59 |
| flaper87 | so, projects don't have a "technical lead" | 09:59 |
| ttx | SIGs | 09:59 |
| ttx | We concluded that there were good and bad sides to that | 09:59 |
| ttx | On the good side, their SIG leads can share the leading work | 10:00 |
| ttx | On the bad side, there is no good moment to step down | 10:00 |
| ttx | so, different styles of burnout but burnout all the same | 10:00 |
| ttx | Although that got me thinking a bit | 10:01 |
| ttx | Like do we really need PTL elections | 10:01 |
| ttx | Mind you, they ask themselves the same questions, from the other perspective :) | 10:02 |
| ttx | "would we be better with regular SIG lead elections" | 10:02 |
| cdent | I thikn the PTL elections provide a visible boundary opportunity | 10:03 |
| ttx | which shows that those are complex issues, and that discussing them was a great idea :) | 10:03 |
| flaper87 | there will be an election of some sort, regardless. Someone will volunteer, etc | 10:03 |
| ttx | Discussion 4 was the least attended (but then also the most specialized one) -- release management | 10:03 |
| ttx | We were a bit tired by that point, but covered things like stable branches, communication around features / release notes... | 10:04 |
| ttx | They are struggling to get good information from devs, we shared reno and other tools we use | 10:05 |
| ttx | I probably forgot important topics. dhellmann took a lot of notes, he probably has more to share | 10:05 |
| ttx | but that's what resonated with me | 10:06 |
| cdent | By "good information" do you mean "what's in this release"? | 10:06 |
| ttx | cdent: not only. Separating what's information for developers (commit message) from what's information for users (release notes)_and what's product/marketing info (release highlights) | 10:08 |
| * cdent nods | 10:08 | |
| ttx | Currently they are relying on commit messages for most | 10:08 |
| ttx | we use 3 different systems | 10:08 |
| ttx | commit messages / reno / release highlights | 10:08 |
| ttx | which I think help you switch style | 10:09 |
| ttx | although we still need to see how the latest will go | 10:09 |
| ttx | So yeah, overall we all agreed it was beneficial to hold those discussions and that we should do it again | 10:10 |
| ttx | hopefully not hanging as much by the thread next time | 10:10 |
| flaper87 | sorry had to jump on a call | 10:11 |
| ttx | Thanks to dims and others who helped beating the drum of interest and getting k8s people there | 10:11 |
| flaper87 | w000h000 | 10:12 |
| flaper87 | so, next time it's kubecon EU | 10:12 |
| ttx | on that first lunch I had no idea who would end up coming :) | 10:12 |
| flaper87 | hahahaha, it sounds like it turned out to be useful | 10:12 |
| ttx | or OpenStack Summit Vancouver | 10:12 |
| flaper87 | kubecon comes first, though. But it would be good to do it in both confs, I guess | 10:13 |
| ttx | kubecon eu is first | 10:13 |
| ttx | CFP is open. I might try to submit panel(s) to have those on the schedule | 10:16 |
| flaper87 | ttx: need help? I'm planning to submit talks to kubecon too | 10:17 |
| ttx | I'll let you know. I'd rather be a panelist than a moderator for those, and ideally the mod would be someone with ties to both communities. | 10:18 |
| ttx | or someone seen as neutral | 10:18 |
| flaper87 | yeah, I don't feel like moderating to be honest | 10:19 |
| cdent | At what point does the "have fewer meetings to be more inclusive" extend to "rely less on confrences"? (I'm not disputing their value, especially in establishing relationships, but their prominence/importance can be excluding) | 10:22 |
| flaper87 | cdent: they can be excluding if discussions and/or decisions depend on them. | 10:23 |
| flaper87 | cdent: for example, it would be great if the conversation that started at kubecon NA would continue without needing a conference | 10:23 |
| flaper87 | but I would argue that not doing PTG/Forum would be extremly damaging for the community and the project, despite the fact that they both are not "attendable" by everyone | 10:24 |
| cdent | yeah, I think there's a distinction between conference and PTG | 10:27 |
| cdent | I often think things like the PTG should happen more often | 10:28 |
| *** liujiong has quit IRC | 10:29 | |
| cdent | and that platinum and gold members should commit far more to paying for people to attend | 10:29 |
| *** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc | 13:04 | |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 13:25 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 13:29 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/project-team-guide master: Removing the cross-project team https://review.openstack.org/506311 | 13:30 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Update shade team metainfo https://review.openstack.org/523519 | 13:36 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Rename shade team to OpenStackSDK https://review.openstack.org/523520 | 13:42 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Move os-client-config to OpenStackSDK from OpenStackClient team https://review.openstack.org/524249 | 13:42 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Update policy goal for mistral https://review.openstack.org/524782 | 13:59 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add mistral-tempest-plugin to mistral project https://review.openstack.org/524868 | 13:59 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Add congress-tempest-plugin to congress project https://review.openstack.org/525066 | 13:59 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: Update tempest plugin split goal for Tacker team https://review.openstack.org/525489 | 14:00 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 14:03 | |
| cdent | robcresswell, mugsie this https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ptl-meeting kind of faded out. Is there anything we should consider doing to keep the needs it represents visible? It seemed like the idea of a meeting that obliged PTLs to do more (at least in a synchronous fashion) was not going to float, but the problem remains. | 14:11 |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/governance master: remove docs:follows-policy tag https://review.openstack.org/524217 | 14:11 |
| fungi | on tagging proposed changes with sig names, next gerrit upgrade will get us "hashtags" we can use to decorate them with whatever arbitrary strings we like | 14:15 |
| ttx | fungi: nice! | 14:18 |
| fungi | we could have stretched to get a sufficiently high gerrit version in our last upgrade, but it needed newer java, hence newer ubuntu, so either an in-place distro upgrade (which we usually avoid) or a new instance with a new ip address (which annoys third-party ci operators in corporate networks with draconian firewall admins) | 14:21 |
| fungi | and also that gerrit release was very much bleeding edge at the time | 14:21 |
| fungi | now it's had time to simmer a little | 14:21 |
| dhellmann | during the tooling discussion, we talked about various bots that they and other groups like python-dev use to manage github notifications | 14:22 |
| dhellmann | I also thought it was interesting that they tried "assigning" pull requests to reviewers based on owners files | 14:23 |
| dhellmann | I think they said they stopped doing that, since it wasn't really leading to more reviews | 14:23 |
| dhellmann | they also mentioned that it can be difficult to run some of their test jobs locally and contributors are starting to rely on the automated CI for those, much like what has happened in our community | 14:24 |
| dhellmann | I thought it was interesting that for some of their integration test jobs, some projects only test against released kubernetes | 14:25 |
| dhellmann | that means they have some stability in the jobs, until the next kubernetes release | 14:25 |
| dhellmann | (which happens roughly quarterly) | 14:25 |
| dhellmann | we talked about testing kubernetes patches on top of openstack using zuul, and there was some interest but I can't say anyone in the room was excited enough to commit to doing the work right there | 14:26 |
| dhellmann | it also wasn't rejected out of hand, though | 14:26 |
| dhellmann | from the governance lunch, one of the early things that caught my attention was their "ladder" for new projects | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | they have more formal inception, incubation, etc. stages | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | even kubernetes is still technically incubated | 14:27 |
| dhellmann | I think anyone can propose a project for inception, but for incubation there have to be at least 2 companies contributing to it | 14:28 |
| dhellmann | we compared that to our diverse affiliation tags | 14:28 |
| dhellmann | it achieves somewhat the same thing, but more formally translates into a measure of maturity | 14:28 |
| dhellmann | (their model does) | 14:28 |
| dhellmann | the split between SIGs and code ownership was confusing to me. It seems a SIG is responsible for designing and making decisions, but the code is potentially owned by other people? | 14:29 |
| cdent | that sees ripe for the same pwg problems we've seen in this part of the world? | 14:30 |
| dhellmann | that came up directly in the discussion of the openstack-sig later in the week when angus pointed out that he had written a bunch of the code that the new sig was now driving, but he wasn't actually involved in creating the sig | 14:30 |
| dhellmann | in addition to the project ladder, they apparently have a more formal contributor ladder for helping to onboard people | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | I haven't looked for the actual documents for that, but maybe that's something the first-contact sig could look into | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | I know some of our teams have some guidelines, but I don't think they all do | 14:31 |
| dhellmann | during their ToC public meeting (they also have a private meeting) one thing I made a note of is that they actively seek out new projects to "fill gaps" | 14:33 |
| dhellmann | they didn't give any real details about what sorts of gaps they were trying to fill, though | 14:33 |
| cdent | the interesting part of that to me is that that implies they are actively keeping track of gaps (within the ToC) | 14:33 |
| dhellmann | yeah, that was less clear. it was said as a "this is one of the things the toc does" bullet item and there was very little detail | 14:34 |
| dhellmann | it would be interesting to see what form that really takes | 14:34 |
| dhellmann | someone in that meeting suggested having more end-user involvement in the CNCF as a whole, so I think they're running into some of the same vendor-focus issues we've had in the past | 14:35 |
| dhellmann | and envoy was mentioned as an example of a project that was created by an end-user group rather than a vendor | 14:36 |
| dhellmann | during the release session, Caleb mentioned that they support 3 versions of kubernetes at one time and support upgrade from N-2 to N as part of their policy | 14:36 |
| dhellmann | with quarterly releases, I imagine it's a little easier to do that and still drop support for deprecated things relatively quickly | 14:37 |
| dhellmann | if my math is right, it seems like they're not supporting a given release for a full year | 14:37 |
| mugsie | and with so many features in "alpha" or "beta" there is less of a support / compatibility burden, right? | 14:38 |
| dhellmann | I did get the impression from some of the presentations that they are not plagued with vendors trying to differentiate through installation tools | 14:38 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : they did announce 1.0 stable status for several APIs last week, so that's likely to be changing | 14:38 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: is installers not the only differencation that k8s vendors have right now? | 14:39 |
| dhellmann | the discussions were interesting, and I agree these meetings are probably good first meetings and I hope we are able to schedule some others | 14:39 |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: We're currently seeing an elevated rate of timeouts in jobs and the zuulv3.openstack.org dashboard is intermittently unresponsive, please stand by while we troubleshoot the issues. | 14:40 | |
| mugsie | I know it was our main one when I was working on CaaS | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | mugsie : my impression was they were trying to standardize somewhat, but I may have misunderstood something | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | maybe there is only one "community" installer? | 14:40 |
| mugsie | yeah - there is a single community installer | 14:40 |
| dhellmann | that's probably what I was hearing about then | 14:41 |
| mugsie | but e.g. Suse had a Salt based one, RH has OpenShift(?), etc | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | because, yeah, I'm sure openshift's installer doesn't work the same way as a vanilla kubernetes installer | 14:41 |
| dhellmann | they're also working on API-driven compliance testing, much like what we have | 14:41 |
| mugsie | there was some good slides I saw about k8s distros vs a community distro on twitter | 14:42 |
| dhellmann | if you can find that link, I'd be interesting in looking at it | 14:42 |
| dhellmann | I think they said it might be a week or more before the videos go up | 14:43 |
| *** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc | 14:43 | |
| dhellmann | Sarah Novotny's closing keynote from friday was really quite good | 14:44 |
| mugsie | dhellmann: https://schd.ws/hosted_files/kccncna17/ac/KubeCon_2017_-_Kernels_and_Distros.pdf | 14:48 |
| *** marst has joined #openstack-tc | 14:50 | |
| ttx | re: CNCF project ladder, I think two organizations need to be vouching for it, not really contribute to it | 14:51 |
| ttx | (for it to enter incubation) | 14:51 |
| ttx | Most of their inclubated projects (with the notable exception of Kubernetes) woudl actually be considered single-vemdor with our metrics | 14:52 |
| *** mriedem has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| mugsie | ttx: would k8s reach our definition of diverse? | 14:59 |
| ttx | mugsie: no | 14:59 |
| smcginnis | +1 to both continuing those cross-community discussions at kubecon-eu and for trying to get a panel discussion. | 15:00 |
| smcginnis | ttx: Maybe dims would be a good moderator for that? | 15:00 |
| ttx | https://devstats.k8s.io/dashboard/db/companies-stats?orgId=1 -- getting better though | 15:00 |
| ttx | Google+Redhat still above 50% for most metrics | 15:01 |
| ttx | Also worth noting they are past peak activity | 15:01 |
| smcginnis | I would expect that to climb again though. | 15:06 |
| ttx | yes -- was just wondering why it dropped since Sept | 15:07 |
| smcginnis | Maybe lead up to release and kubecon? Ours usually ramps up then, but maybe they are better about locking things up earlier. | 15:07 |
| ttx | hmm probably a Google internal thing | 15:08 |
| smcginnis | But as more vendors jump in, I would bet that spikes again. | 15:08 |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 15:09 | |
| openstackgerrit | Jeremy Stanley proposed openstack/governance master: Add an openstack/self-healing-sig repository https://review.openstack.org/525328 | 15:22 |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 15:57 | |
| robcresswell | cdent: re: earlier ping, yeah, it seems that way. To be honest, my time on OpenStack has pretty much come to an end in the past couple of months, so I'm not around to drive it further :/ | 16:08 |
| robcresswell | It'd be nice if it was captured as a side note in any future docs, but I've little to add to it at the moment. | 16:08 |
| cdent | a) bummer for us but hopefully good for you, b) no worries on the driving the issues will remaining, driving at their own pace | 16:09 |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 16:28 | |
| fungi | priority follows pain | 16:47 |
| dims | smcginnis : i haven't thought about kubecon-eu yet | 16:52 |
| pabelanger | dhellmann: re: commit to doing work on zuul, personally, I think it would be better to show up with working zuul, running soe of their tests. There is a large overhead to admin / ops of zuul, this is the most exciting part of the github connection driver we have today. | 16:58 |
| dhellmann | pabelanger : yeah, I meant doing the work of integrating our zuul instance with their repos to run tests on their patches (and ours I guess) | 17:40 |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-tc | 17:40 | |
| pabelanger | dhellmann: I did talk with dims at summit about how we could maybe help bootstrap. We have some good discussions about adding some k8s bits into devstack, just haven't had time yet to work on it | 17:41 |
| dhellmann | pabelanger : yep | 17:45 |
| cdent | I wish there was more of me, because I'd love to be able to devote some time to learn up on zull | 17:46 |
| cdent | zuul | 17:46 |
| * smcginnis knows the feeling | 17:47 | |
| * dhellmann pictures zull as the "good" twin of zuul | 17:47 | |
| smcginnis | :) | 17:47 |
| cdent | I'd also like to learn up on the openstack thing too. | 17:50 |
| cdent | >3 years of working on it, still got no idea | 17:50 |
| *** jpich has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| fungi | yeah, i probably have a lot deeper insight into how openstack (the software) works than i think i do, but i really don't feel like i have much of a handle on any of it | 18:17 |
| fungi | spent so much of my time focused on automation above the api layer | 18:17 |
| fungi | rather than actually running openstack itself (the infra-cloud deployment and occasional troubleshooting of devstack-based ci jobs aside) | 18:18 |
| fungi | from the vmt side of things, i'm constantly having to remind myself to avoid jumping to conclusions about how things are implemented under the covers | 18:19 |
| fungi | or how production deployments are using certain features | 18:19 |
| fungi | because i rarely guess correctly in those cases | 18:20 |
| cdent | It's a weird feeling isn't it? | 18:21 |
| fungi | it's like i exist in the demilitarized zone between the operators, users and developers | 18:21 |
| cdent | I think there are _plenty_ of developers (like me in this case) who don't have much of a clue about what's going on beyond their particular speciality | 18:22 |
| cdent | And while I think that's normal, and mostly okay, it's ... disconcerting (for me) | 18:23 |
| fungi | i suppose it's far too much detail for any mortal to grasp | 18:24 |
| fungi | if only vish were here ;) | 18:24 |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-tc | 19:36 | |
| *** tonyb_ has quit IRC | 19:52 | |
| *** tonyb has joined #openstack-tc | 19:52 | |
| *** cdent has quit IRC | 20:02 | |
| -openstackstatus- NOTICE: The zuul scheduler has been restarted after lengthy troubleshooting for a memory consumption issue; earlier changes have been reenqueued but if you notice jobs not running for a new or approved change you may want to leave a recheck comment or a new approval vote | 20:16 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 20:34 | |
| *** alex_xu has quit IRC | 20:34 | |
| *** notmyname has quit IRC | 20:34 | |
| *** purplerbot has quit IRC | 20:35 | |
| *** amrith has quit IRC | 20:35 | |
| *** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc | 20:39 | |
| *** notmyname has joined #openstack-tc | 20:41 | |
| *** amrith has joined #openstack-tc | 20:43 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-tc | 20:43 | |
| openstackgerrit | Kendall Nelson proposed openstack/governance master: Add Storyboard Migration to Rocky https://review.openstack.org/513875 | 20:43 |
| *** kmalloc has quit IRC | 20:45 | |
| *** kmalloc has joined #openstack-tc | 20:45 | |
| *** kumarmn has quit IRC | 21:01 | |
| *** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc | 21:48 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 21:48 | |
| *** flwang has quit IRC | 22:06 | |
| *** flwang has joined #openstack-tc | 22:19 | |
| *** marst has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 23:22 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 23:23 | |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 23:29 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-tc | 23:34 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!