Thursday, 2018-06-21

*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc00:23
*** kumarmn has quit IRC00:28
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc00:31
tbarronvkmc isn't here but she would love an opportunity to blame flaper87 ^^^00:32
* tbarron crawls back into his hole00:33
*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:02
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc01:05
*** ricolin_ has joined #openstack-tc01:11
openstackgerritGoutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/governance master: Fix width of team badges svg
*** kumarmn has quit IRC01:36
fungigouthamr: looks like all 5 are visible in the draft rendering!
gouthamrfungi: yep :)01:38
gouthamrfungi: thanks for the pointer, the find did make my day :D01:38
fungithanks for the fix!01:39
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:06
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:10
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:37
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:42
*** spsurya has joined #openstack-tc02:51
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:53
*** kumarmn has quit IRC02:57
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc02:57
*** kumarmn has quit IRC03:27
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc03:58
*** kumarmn has quit IRC04:02
*** dansmith has quit IRC04:29
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc05:13
*** e0ne has quit IRC05:14
*** dansmith has joined #openstack-tc05:31
*** dansmith is now known as Guest8832005:32
*** alex_xu has quit IRC05:57
*** alex_xu has joined #openstack-tc06:03
*** aprice has quit IRC06:45
*** aprice has joined #openstack-tc06:48
*** aprice has quit IRC06:54
*** aprice has joined #openstack-tc06:58
*** srwilkers has quit IRC07:02
*** srwilkers has joined #openstack-tc07:17
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc07:40
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc07:56
ttxyes I blame flaper87.08:09
openstackgerritWitold Bedyk proposed openstack/governance master: Update WSGI goal status for Monasca
ttxfungi, dhellmann: Adam Harwell touched on the Castellan vs. Barbican choice at
*** e0ne has quit IRC09:01
*** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur09:41
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc09:55
*** spsurya has quit IRC09:58
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc10:00
*** e0ne has quit IRC10:10
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc10:12
*** e0ne has quit IRC10:16
flaper87ttx: ttx makes total sense to me11:27
flaper87tbarron: ^11:27
flaper87"Works in my brain (TM)"11:27
tbarronflaper87 :D11:27
smcginnisDid we come to a concensus on whether we should be updating past goals?
*** rosmaita has joined #openstack-tc11:55
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc11:58
smcginnisMorning dims.12:16
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc12:48
fungittx: thanks, i thought i replied12:50
fungioh, hah, my reply is still open in the editor12:50
fungii guess i passed out writing it last night12:50
ttxsticky emails, won't fly12:50
dhellmannsmcginnis : I thought the consensus was to update the status for existing deliverables but not add new ones12:56
smcginnisdhellmann: OK, that makes sense to me.12:56
dhellmannthat kolla patch from a while back was updated based on that interpretation and then approved; this one is adding another patch to a list so I think it's fine, too12:57
dhellmannttx, fungi: it sounds like octavia should rely on barbican and barbicanclient12:58
fungii agree12:58
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc12:58
fungieither that, or make the features that would need it optional12:58
dhellmannyes, or that12:59
fungibut given that octavia isn't covered in a trademark program at the moment, adding a dependency on another api service which also isn't covered in a trademark program shouldn't pose any major hurdles because we don't need to communicate that as future direction to the interop wg13:00
openstackgerritMerged openstack/governance master: Fix width of team badges svg
dhellmannthat's true13:01
openstackgerritSean McGinnis proposed openstack/governance master: Add note about tracking cycle goals post-cycle
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-tc13:21
cdentanybody noodling summit submissions?13:22
fungii'm lucky if i can plan out what i'm doing next week much less in november13:27
cdentyeah, same13:29
jaypipescdent: here's a proposed title for you: "I don't always talk about marketing, but when I do, I make sure to mention edge and blockchain."13:39
jaypipescdent: I'm sure it would go over well in Berlin.13:39
* jaypipes goes back into his cave.13:40
cdentjaypipes: That's a start, but I think what we really want is to talk about some vaporware that we'll be sure to opensource real soon now that uses the blockchain to securely store and describe our deployment intents for our 10,000 edge nodes13:40
* cdent waits for the VC funding to roll in13:41
jaypipescdent: s/securely store and describe our deployment intents/solve the existential tomato provenance crisis/13:41
* jaypipes sends cdent a giant wad of $latest_coin_IPO_scam13:42
jaypipescdent: you are now officially seeded.13:42
*** spsurya has joined #openstack-tc13:44
fungii still need to get around to making my suckercoin idea a reality13:57
*** zhipeng has joined #openstack-tc13:58
fungithe great philosopher pt barnum said "there's a sucker born every minute" so instead of mining bits my coins will be mined from suckers. i figure that has much better scalability14:15
dhellmannoh, I thought you were going to say a new coin would be created every minute14:15
ttxICO-driven collaborative development. Submit a review, mine a coin14:21
smcginnisBring on the one character code comment spelling fixes. :D14:22
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc14:37
*** kumarmn has quit IRC14:40
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc14:48
*** annabelleB has quit IRC14:56
fungiit'll be like the old days when your typo fix got you free conference admission14:57
fungi#startmeeting tc15:00
openstackMeeting started Thu Jun 21 15:00:21 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is fungi. Information about MeetBot at
cdenttc-members let's assemble15:00
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: tc)"15:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'tc'15:00
fungi#topic Office Hour15:00
*** openstack changes topic to "Office Hour (Meeting topic: tc)"15:00
fungi#chair ttx cdent15:00
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent fungi ttx15:00
fungi#chair smcginnis15:00
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent fungi smcginnis ttx15:00
cdent#chair mnaser15:01
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx15:01
cdent#chair dhellmann15:01
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent dhellmann fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx15:02
smcginnisMaybe we need a standard single #chair line we can paste for the whole TC. :D15:02
cdentthis is more fun somehow15:02
cdentbecause of all the pinging15:02
dhellmannwe could make it a chain. each person who is chaired has to chair the next in line15:02
dhellmannit's like saying hello :-)15:02
cdentzaneb: you around? Is adjutant a topic we need to hash today?15:02
fungigo for it15:02
dhellmannoh, that's me15:02
dhellmann#chair cmurphy15:03
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent cmurphy dhellmann fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx15:03
fungiwe're up to 7 out of 13, not bad15:03
dhellmannhow are folks doing with their liaison outreach? has anyone had trouble reaching a team's PTL?15:04
smcginnisI have not gotten there yet. :/15:04
* cmurphy hasn't started yet15:04
mnaseri need to follow up on mine but i'm starting to feel a weird possible conflict of interest on projects im directly involved in15:04
smcginnisShould be able to do that today. Or at least get started on it.15:04
fungianybody who wants to weigh in on the castellan base service addition thread revival from yesterday, please do15:04
mnaserfeeling like i might be biased in my opinion in a way15:04
smcginnismnaser: On the other hand, you have a really good feel for the state of the project.15:05
mnasermy plan is to hash it out with who i'm paired with to say "this is what i see, if you see it different, please let me know"15:05
ttxDid two, went well and was appreciated i think15:05
dhellmannmnaser : that's a good insight, and it's part of why I wanted 2 people on each project.15:05
ttxdhellmann: any opinion on my traffic lights icons ?15:05
johnsomAre there more questions about Octavia's support of both Barbican and Castellan?15:05
dhellmannttx: I like those. I mean to ask if you were thinking of putting them in the table, or just in the summaries?15:05
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:06
ttxI was thinking just in summaries, as a business summary15:06
ttxI don't want it to turn into yet another badge15:06
dhellmannyeah, good point15:06
ttxand I feel like a table at the top would... facilitate that15:06
*** guvnah has joined #openstack-tc15:07
mnaser#chair dims15:07
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent cmurphy dhellmann dims fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx15:07
*** zhipeng has quit IRC15:07
mnaseryeah i feel health being a tag would be problematic for the growth of the project and general morale15:07
ttxdhellmann: I was wondering what would be the color of Requirements after your check15:07
ttxneeding urgent action (red) or just a warning (orange) ?15:07
mnaserit's already hard enough going through a rough time in a project, even worse for morale if you have a red "this team is a problem"15:08
ttxTo be fair, I don't see red as a satin, could be that we need to add it to the help list15:08
dhellmannttx: very dark orange? :-)15:08
smcginnisBurnt umber15:08
mnaseri love that we work in the open but sometimes i feel if that health tracker page was private to tc, it might avoid teams feeling like they are "the problem"15:08
ttxBasically if the team requires further work from eth TC, I'd put red15:08
mnaser(recalling nova team discussion)15:08
ttxlike if you create a storyboard entry about it, then red15:09
ttxorange is like... we need to pay some attention15:09
mnaser*only* if the team asks for it too imho (im assuming thats what you mean)15:09
dhellmannmnaser : yeah, I've been trying to focus on identifying areas where we can help, rather than looking at it as anything (or anyone) failing15:09
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:09
dhellmannttx: that seems like a good way to draw the distinction15:09
ttxmnaser: yeah, we had a discussion about it with cdent... Hard to balance15:09
fungii worry that the traffic lights, like many things we do, will be seen as implying something more and some teams will either object to getting a red/yellow light or pressure to get a green purely for reasons of perception15:09
ttxfungi: I'm happy retiring them once they start being a bit too... public15:10
ttxIt's just a convenient shortcut15:10
fungibut yeah, it's too early to know for sure how any of them will take it15:11
* ttx adds a "concern"15:11
mnaserthe OSA team overall is going through a really hard time right now15:11
mnaserPTL changed employer, isnt as involved with openstack as he can, many of current cores are not directly employed to do OSA work, it's just a small part of what they do so contributions+reviews are down15:12
mnaserbut there is a huge user base and more and more people wanting/needing to use it15:12
* mnaser feels this is a very common issue with deployment projects15:12
dhellmannthat feels like exactly the sort of thing we need to know about, for exactly the reason that there are so many users15:12
mnaseri've been doing a lot of work trying to unbreak gates and improve testing but struggles have been just getting enough reviews to merge code, it comes in bursts or so, as cores have free time here and tehre15:13
mnasermeeting participation is significantly down too, so yeah, it's a bit rough on that side of things.  but i hope i'm not just taking all the attention on one project :)15:15
cdentI would expect most of that is common to a lot of projects, especially deployment-related ones, as you say, but also plenty of others. telemetry is a bit like that15:15
dhellmannyes, I suspect that's going to be something we see for several teaems15:16
dhellmannthe requirements team is in the same state15:16
mnaserit seems to me that the projects that help the underlying infrastructure to support the ecosystem struggle usually15:17
dhellmannmurano, to some degree as well15:17
mnaserrequirements, deployment projects15:17
fungiit's not just a problem for deployment projects in openstack either. the configuration management and orchestration landscape is constantly changing, and there have been and will be some that die a slow death of attrition (not saying that's happening to ansible right now)15:17
mnaserfungi: right, but ansible is (in my opinion) the 'hotness' and it's struggling15:18
fungibut as much as we need to help shore up projects which are struggling to get contributors, i think there will be times when we also have to let things die15:18
dhellmannthat observation came up in one of the upgrade sessions at the forum, too, when we were talking about the split between using home-grown tools and community-provided tools15:18
fungimnaser: i agree, ansible lacking a groundswell of support in openstack seems anomalous15:18
mnaseri totally agree, we have to let go of somethings at some point15:18
mnaserdhellmann: what i am seeing (from a 'commercial' pov) is a lot of users who built on home grown tools wanting to migrate on community provided tools15:19
mnaserwhich is super super cool and hopefully brings more contributions15:19
smcginnismnaser: I've seen that as well.15:19
dhellmannyes, that will work out well, if it includes the collaboration aspect of open source and doesn't focus so much on the "someone else is doing it for me for free" aspect15:20
mnaseri personally love the gerrit workflow but sometimes i really do wonder if that's a barrier to submitting code and pushing changes up.15:20
mnaserwe see a lot of bug reports in OSA that say "this is what i changed and it fixed it" but no patch15:20
fungitag with low-hanging-fruit15:20
mnaserright, but in the bigger picture, i really do wonder if our choice of tooling makes it harder for new contributors15:21
mnaserfor example, i've never submitted a linux kernel patch, because i am terrified and super confused on how to do the whole process... and i've done dev work for a while.15:21
cdentIt's definitely a worthwhile topic. Our workflow is a learning curve, and learning curves are not friendly to casual-ness15:22
mnaserand maybe we're no longer in a position where we can be picky and say 'you have to play by our rules to develop with us'15:22
mnaserit could work when we were the hot thing but as things slow down a little bit, it becomes much more of a hassle rather than anything15:23
dhellmanndo you have some specific alternatives in mind?15:23
dhellmannI'm reluctant to optimize the entire toolchain for casual contributors, but improving the casual contributor workflow does seem like something we should pursue15:23
mnaseri hate to say it, i don't like their workflow, i don't like that it's a business/commercial type of offering, but github seems to be a solid place that contains a large base of existing developers that might help gather new users15:24
fungipart of the "problem" there is that code review is also not friendly to casual-ness, regardless of the tooling15:24
dhellmannmnaser : is the problem "git" or "gerrit"?15:24
dhellmannfungi : yeah, that's true15:24
cmurphymnaser: the way you frame that makes it sound like our workflow was an arbitrary choice, and it's not15:24
fungii think the problem is having standards and holding code submissions to those standards15:24
mnaseri think gerrit.  it's too specific and tied into our own little ecosystem15:25
fungidepending on how you want to define "problem"15:25
mnasermaybe we should find a way to allow users to login via github and automatically import their keys to gerrit?15:25
smcginnisPlease no github PRs.15:25
mnaserat least it's just a login and git review ..15:25
* fungi objects to use of "little" and would similarly characterize github users as "small-minded"15:25
dhellmannmnaser : that sounds interesting. I also had the idea a while back to have the bot that closes github PRs turn them into gerrit requests instead.15:25
smcginnisdhellmann: Was just thinking that through.15:26
mnaserrather than go, setup a launchpad account (potentially that you never used before), login to gerrit, go manually add your keys, install git-review, commit, `git review`15:26
ttxUnrelated news: to establish a baseline mnaser and I did an org diversity analysis and posted it at
smcginnisThe trick would be creating gerrit accounts automatically for the github users.15:26
* jroll points out
mnaserMAYBE if you can login to gerrit via github directly, and have your keys automatically import, it would make things a lot simpler?15:26
jrollnotably "Keep in touch with external users synchronizing pull requests with reviews."15:26
clarkbgerrithub is terrible imo15:26
jrollI haven't used it, fwiw15:26
clarkbthey completely nuked jenkins a few years back15:26
ttxIn bold are the ones that should have their diversity tags changed, if we don't change anything15:26
clarkband jenkins had to get github to restore from backup15:26
mnaserlol ^15:27
fungithere's not much of a technical hurdle in turning github prs into gerrit changes. the disconnect is an entirely human one. the patch submitters aren't going to find or follow up on feedback (and i'd argue that even if we worked entirely on github the problem would be similar)15:27
*** kumarmn has quit IRC15:27
dtroyer[jumping in a bit late] having just helped a bunch of new folk get set up to contribute via Gerrit, I was reminded of how much of a process it is.  But it wasn't as much of a problem as I feared.  I think part of that was there were groups of co-located people who could help each other get it done15:27
ttxThey are roughly ordered in levels of diversity, the idea being to track evolution rather than binary tags15:27
mnaserwhat about: login via github to gerrit and ssh keys automatically get imported?  that's probably a whole bunch of extra work done15:27
fungiand then there's the legal hurdle. we can't force submissions on github to come from people who have agreed to the icla, nor can we sync them up to foundation accounts for tracking ccla addendums once we switch to enforcing the dco15:28
dhellmanndtroyer : having a group going through the process together certainly helped me, back in the day15:28
mnaserfungi: yes, that is awful and super horrible ux unfortunately15:28
mnaseri had to on-board someone and i was confused for a while why 'git review' would keep rejecting commits15:28
mnaseruntil i ran it with -vvv and i got the icla warning15:28
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc15:28
dhellmannttx: thanks for preparing that info15:28
mnaserLF projects complain in the git review message about 'missing signed-off-by' .. maybe we can at least look into adding that to the error message that appears without having to make it show up when you do -vvv15:29
smcginnisHmm, stackalytics appears to be broken.15:29
clarkbmnaser: aiui you get a message if using current git review15:29
clarkbmnaser: it actually comes from gerrit15:29
fungimnaser: also, looking through your list of things to do to set up your gerrit account, i'm reminded of having to do precisely the same sorts of steps to be able to push things to github, and to bitbucket, and to other communities various communities' code submission systems (phabricator, et cetera)15:29
ttxsmcginnis: indeed, I wanted to refine the stats this morning to prepare for this and failed15:29
clarkb(we can test that and confirm)15:29
mnaserbrew install git; brew install git-review .. just yesterday, it was flat out 'refusing it'15:30
mnaserbut could be different versions15:30
* ttx need to jump off in 10 min15:30
clarkbmnaser: what version does brew install?15:30
dhellmannfungi , mnaser : getting everyone onto storyboard would let us drop launchpad, which would mean 1 less account to configure15:30
mnaserclarkb: git-review: stable 1.26.0 (bottled)15:30
smcginnismnaser: pip install git-review may be more up to date.15:30
clarkbmnaser: ok its possible gerrit update broke that passthrough of error messages15:30
mnaser#chair zaneb15:31
openstackCurrent chairs: cdent cmurphy dhellmann dims fungi mnaser smcginnis ttx zaneb15:31
mnaserclarkb: yeah maybe someone should look into that, it certainly confused me15:31
mnaserttx, smcginnis: maybe infra can try taking over hosting of stackalytics?15:31
cdentfungi your argument about things you have to do sign up to other places doesn't really work in my brain: If I'm doing open source dev of any kind I'm probably alrady signed up to those things15:31
mnaseri think it's still at mirantis and very much out of our control and things happen to it all the time?15:31
cdentgithub and openstack are not in the same category of thing15:32
dhellmannttx: are the comments like "50.25% top core review %" the reason for a team not having the diversity tag?15:32
clarkbcdent: but from a difficulty perspective they ar ethe same15:32
clarkbits not more difficult you just have to do it again15:32
ttxdhellmann: yes, or worst 'stat'15:32
fungicdent: sure, one is a proprietary cesspool and the other is a software community built on free principles15:32
clarkbthere is value in not having to do it again15:32
clarkbbut it isn't more difficult imo15:32
dhellmannttx: ok15:32
ttxdhellmann: trying to expose the subjectiveness of the exercise15:32
cdentfungi: I'm not disputing _that_. I agree with you on that, but we do need to think in terms of what casual contributors want, which is not the same as "us"15:32
ttxdhellmann: given the limited quality of input data :)15:33
mnaserfungi: while i 100% stand by the free principles idea, i just worry that it's *might* be affecting our growth15:33
ttxmnaser: depends what you call growth :)15:33
fungicdent: i spent years contributing to free software projects, and never had a github account until i needed one to submit fixes to some openstack dependencies. it was somewhere between annoying and nightmarish15:33
cdentfungi: you're special right, you realize that, yeah?15:33
mnaserttx: i guess attracting new contributors and making it easier for casual ones to push things up15:33
cdentI'm not defending github15:34
cdentBut nor am I willing to defend how openstack does things.15:34
fungialso i think unbounded growth is a big part of the problem. in biology it would be akin to a cancer15:34
cdentwe've dealt with the growth, now we need to avoid death15:34
fungii'm much in favor of shrinking15:34
mnaseri guess for me it feels like we're missing out on a big audience of developers that might want to contribute but feel like it's a lot of work to do something in openstack15:35
cdentall of my non-openstack tech-friends tell me that all the time15:35
fungii'm not sure why we're looking for an audience. that in itself sounds like failure15:35
cdentthey feel like you have to join a club and learn the secret handshakes15:35
cdentfungi: because we keep saying we need and want casual contributors15:36
cdentif we don't, cool.15:36
mnaserwe're looking for an audience because some projects that can attract a lot of non openstack people (say, i think of openstack-ansible as an example) that can attract a lot of easy and casual contributions for bug fixes15:36
ttxcontributing to any decently-sized project is complicated, GitHub or not15:36
fungilooking for an audience isn't necessarily the same thing as improving our tools and workflows15:36
ttxYou have things like CLAs15:37
ttxa process, rules15:37
ttxI'm not sure most of our pain comes from choice of tools15:37
fungii want to make things easier for the people who want to contribute to openstack, not go and try to convince people who have never heard of it that it's some cool new thing they should be working on. that was the hype bubble i'm glad to see finally behind us15:37
ttxvs. the learning curve of shared understandings15:37
ttxor the CLA signing15:37
zanebas an aside, I really hate it when we talk about casual contributors as if there's a random pool of people out there looking for a project who might contribute to OpenStack as a hobby15:38
zanebIMO what we want is for *people who use OpenStack* to also contribute back15:38
mnaserzaneb: i agere15:38
mnaserthat's what i feel it is15:38
zanebeven if it is not their full-time job15:38
dhellmannzaneb : that's not what I mean when I say that. I mean people for whom writing software is not their first job, and who are likely users of openstack now.15:38
cdentzaneb: that's not what _I_ mean by casual. I mean people who are not magical unicorn openstack devs (like most of us). I mean users of openstack.15:38
fungizaneb: "casual contributors" to me is people deploying openstack in their organization who see a problem and want to fix it15:38
dhellmannso contributing a patch is not anywhere close to the top of their priority list15:38
ttxI'm all for removing steps in getting involved, but it feels like if we had everything under openstackID and no CLA that would already go a long way15:38
mnaserdoes openstackid also allow you to login via third party things like 'login with google' or 'login with github'15:39
clarkbmnaser: no15:39
clarkbit is the third party thing you login with15:40
mnaseroh i see15:40
dhellmannwhat tools are we using today that are tied to using launchpadid?15:40
clarkbso login to gerrit with openstackid15:40
mnaserso it is like "login with google"15:40
fungii also think that with the new pilot projects under the osf we have an opportunity to maybe push on even the sso/ccla concerns. for example, kata uses the dco and github. there's no tie-in for ccla tracking (nor even a ccla at all, i'd warrant)15:40
ttxdhellmann: launchpad, gerrit15:40
dhellmanncould we change gerrit to use the openstackid service?15:40
clarkbmnaser: but it will be more transparent if we continue to sso it15:40
dhellmannand storyboard?15:40
clarkbmnaser: I guess thats the difference I'm failing to articulate15:40
dhellmannwe're close to in a state where using launchpad is optional, aren't we?15:40
fungiand the wiki15:40
dhellmannand the wiki15:41
zanebcould we change gerrit to use *any* openID provider?15:41
fungizaneb: we _could_ yes15:41
* ttx needs to run15:41
dhellmannfungi , clarkb : right, what is holding us back from changing off of launchpad today?15:41
fungiright now the reason we can't is entirely a legal one15:41
clarkbdhellmann: cla15:41
dhellmannclarkb : I don't understand that answer, can you give me more details?15:41
mnaserfungi: sorry, can you please explain the legal reason we cant? (i'm sorry if this was discussed often in the past)15:42
clarkbthere are other concerns I hvae with making a switch to any openid provider as well. The biggest one having 10 accounts because you have 10 openids and never remember which you used last15:42
dhellmannI don't want to switch to any provider, I want to switch to the one the foundation runs15:42
dhellmannwhat prevents us from switching from launchpad to openstackid as the provider?15:42
fungimnaser: if we want to drop the icla yet in favor of the dco, the board (on behalf of legal counsel from a number of member companies many of whom i thnik aren't involved any longer) decided that we needed to provide an alternate means of tracking contributors which would allow them to match them up against contributor lists on their respective cclas15:43
zanebclarkb: can't they all tie back to one email?15:44
fungiand the solution they agreed to was moving them to an authentication system controlled by the osf so that it would integrate directly with ccla tracking mechanisms the osf web dev team have put together15:44
zanebah, ok15:44
clarkbdhellmann: for a direct move I don't think there are legal concerns it just requires that we figure out how to migrate everyone and do the database updates and delete the auth cache15:44
clarkbzaneb: I've not seen an consumer of openid implement it that way. Typically an openid (which is a url) maps to an account and then the other data like name and email is largely arbitrary15:45
mnaserfungi: thank you for that summary, all makes sense now15:45
fungiright, there's a fair amount of overlap, but wedon't have a perfect 1:1 mapping of to accounts15:45
dhellmannclarkb : ok. that feels like something we could go ahead and do, then? (modulo having someone to do the work, of course)15:45
clarkbzaneb: so if you login with a new openid that is a new account15:45
fungipartly because launchpad makes keeping your e-mail address private a default behavior15:45
fungiwe can build up a mapping by comparing openids on the systems we have to e-mail addresses tracked by some of those systems and then try to get a more exact match (though it still won't be 100% because not everyone using our lp-authenticated systems has signed up for an account)15:47
fungiso whatever solution we settle on will need to involve ways for people to link up their "old" accounts with new ids manually15:48
*** dklyle has quit IRC15:48
*** ianychoi has joined #openstack-tc15:48
dhellmanncould we do that by having folks login to a special page on using the launchpad provider?15:48
fungiyes, that's one of the solutions we've talked about, though that just gets us the mapping. we still need to have some way of updating the ids in the respective systems once that's done15:49
dhellmannlike, login to your openstack account and go to the profile page and click the "link my launchpad id" button?15:49
fungifor people we can map in advance we can make it fairly seamless. for the rest, we'd either need some dangerous automated process performing database updates on gerrit, mediawiki, storyboard, et cetera or we need to manually batch those15:50
cdentJust to reset this conversation a bit, I think we all need to check our privilege a bit: When we have evidence from people not in power (ie not us) that they are experiencing barriers the correct response is "I didn't realize that, we'd like to do better". I don't feel like we're doing that.15:50
dhellmannI wonder where the cut-off is for people who actually need to have the mapping done vs. just creating a new account15:50
mnasernot that i want to complicate things more but not sure how that all falls into the 'winterscale' initiative15:51
mnaseris openstackid still going to be a thing.. is it going to be winterscaleid if we're hosting other things, i dont know the answers but something to keep in mind15:51
dhellmanncdent : what should we be talking about then?15:51
clarkbcdent: I think we've also largely dealt in hypotheticals, a specific "this is what I find difficult" may be helpful if we want to talk about not realizing problems and going from there to make things better15:51
clarkband I don't just mean "gerrit" what specifically about gerrit is difficult15:52
cdentWe should be more strongly recognizing the proble and analysing it before going straight to detailed technical solutions. There's little evidence that we've ack'd the problem15:52
cdentclarkb: right, more analysis required15:52
dhellmanncdent : one problem presented was having to sign up for multiple accounts. Removing launchpad means removing 1 account.15:52
cdentdhellmann: sure, but I think going to details on that is premature15:53
dhellmannwe have to have the openstack account to track affiliations and CLA anyway, so that one can't go away15:53
cdentit could easily be wasted energy15:53
cdentthere may be other things which are more relevant15:53
*** ricolin_ has quit IRC15:54
dhellmannthe question I posed was "what stops us from moving from launchpad to openstackid" for authenticating to the things we want to be our default services. the answer was technical because there is not a legal concern (which is what I was really worried about). I don't see a problem with that.15:54
cdentdo we know that moving from launchpad to openstackid will have any impact on so-called casual contribution? Or do we just think so?15:55
dhellmann"could" and "may" -- do you think there are?15:55
dhellmannI don't *know* anything. I'm trying to explore options.15:56
mnaseri might argue it makes things worse because now you go from POSSIBLY having a launchpad account already to now having to create "this openstack account"15:56
cdentWell, from the people I've spoken with, needing to get on the island in the first place is the main barrier, but conversation here seems to indicate that is an insurmountable change. If that's the case, I don't think logins makes much difference.15:56
dhellmannfungi : can you remind me what prevents us from allowing individuals to use the DCO instead of CLA?15:56
dhellmanncdent : I don't know what your island metaphor means.15:57
clarkbcdent: the specific concern you've heard then is simply that we aren't github?15:57
clarkbdhellmann: I think it basically means we don't use the tools they are already using15:57
clarkbdhellmann: whcih for many is github15:57
cdentclarkb, dhellmann : it's certainly one of the issues people report. And, like I said above, I'm not saying "unless we switch to github we are screwed". I'm saying there are factors out there we look at.15:58
dhellmannok, well, we also talked about the technical, social, and legal barriers to having github prs imported into gerrit15:59
cdentBut perhaps fungi has a point: maybe, because we don't have enough cores, we don't actually want more contributions?15:59
*** Guest88320 is now known as dansmith15:59
fungidhellmann: providing a means for interested legal representatives of various openstack member companies to map contributions to employees who are or aren't tracked in their respective cclas15:59
dhellmannso I feel like we're actually talking about many things, not solely focusing on any 1 thing15:59
fungidhellmann: basically the board said we could drop the icla and do this dco thing _if_ we made it easier for them to cover everyone under cclas15:59
jrollthis seems like one of those topics where we are unable to agree on the problems without immediately diving into the technical details of solutions and why they won't work :(15:59
fungia big part of it is that they don't believe we actually have "individual contributors" (or at least that those people aren't enough of a legal threat to care about)16:00
dhellmannjroll : there's a lot of history to some of these topics, and we can't ignore it16:00
mnaseri think the issue here that i brought up was that we operate our infrastructure in a silo16:00
dhellmannwhat I'm hearing is that16:00
mnaserand i dont know if dco/icla/legal stuff is the reason behind it16:01
dhellmann1. people don't want to use tools other than github16:01
dhellmann2. we have some legal issues with contributions from random anyones16:01
fungimnaser: agreed, i'd like to widen our silo and help people who are interested in software freedom work on projects which eschew non-free tools16:01
dhellmann3. we have considered many technical solutions to ease the transition16:01
fungii personally care 0 about people who like to use proprietary tools. they can go make proprietary communities and software for all i care16:01
dhellmann4. work on that has stalled (perhaps there's a better word) but is not blocked because of any legal decisions16:02
dhellmannis that right?16:02
cdentit appears there's a 5: some people on the tc care 016:02
cdentI agree that's a fine position to hold as an individual, but not one that is particular responsible here16:03
fungii care a lot about making free tools easier to use16:03
dhellmannI think it's more constructive for us to focus on friction in the tools we're using than to continue to rehash an argument about free or non-free tools16:03
*** jpich has quit IRC16:03
mnaserdhellmann: agreed.  at the end of the day, i think it's about growing the community as a whole16:04
jrolldhellmann: is that history documented somewhere? it seems like every time we discuss these things there's a giant wall of text and 3+ concurrent conversations, which makes it impossible for people without the history in their head to understand it16:04
dhellmannjroll : no, that's why I keep asking these questions today :-/16:04
dhellmannit would be good to get it written down somewhere16:05
dhellmannmaybe someone wants to volunteer to summarize today's discussion?16:05
jrollso when I say we haven't agreed on the problems16:05
jrollI don't think we have a full list of barriers for casual contributors16:05
jrolland we *definitely* don't have a list of things like "we can't fix barrier X because legal"16:05
jrollwhich is a problem that should be considered when we talk about fixing the "barrier" problem16:05
clarkbre silo of tools, basically the entire LF but cncf use Gerrit too. As does golang, android and its ecosystem, chromium (basically the big google open source projects). Eclipse, mediawiki, libreoffice, and others all gerrit as well. I don't think its fair to paint a picture we are the only gerrit weirdos out there16:06
mnaseri knew about LF but i didnt know about all those other users like eclipse and mediawiki etc16:06
cmurphywe've been cultivating this workflow for years because we know it works really quite well for collaboration across huge communities, it is not an arbitrary NIH decision16:07
* dhellmann notes the lack of volunteers to summarize this discussion16:07
jrollI'm having trouble summarizing it for myself, let alone a general audience16:07
zanebcmurphy ++16:07
fungialso worth noting, many (though not all) of those communities use gerrit now because we showed them it was a better alternative16:07
fungiand led by example16:08
zanebgithub is terrible because pull requests are the wrong model16:08
fungidhellmann: if i knew what needed summarizing i'd volunteer gladly16:08
mnaseroh i think github workflow is terrible :p16:08
mnaserbut i'm trying to see it in the view of potentially those who like it16:08
mnaserwhich, given the valuation they recently were bought out as, there's a few people who use it...16:09
jrollI believe github is perceived as awesome for people that haven't used better code review tools (many people). I also believe it takes weeks or months of using gerrit to understand why it is better.16:09
mnaserjroll: agreed16:09
cmurphyas a side note, a lot of people on my team internally has familiarity primarily with gerrit and very little experience with github and find github very unapproachable16:09
dhellmannfungi : we've talked about known issues with onboarding; blockers for streamlining logins; the requirements we have around CLA and DCO16:09
cdentJust to be clear: I'm not suggesting we bail and stop using gerrit or switch over to github. Rather that people who express that not using it is a problem have useful input.16:09
fungii don't personally know people who "like" github, except in comparison to other even worse tools they've used in the past. most people i know who use it do so because they're not aware of alternatives16:09
jrollalso of note: a huge amount of people new to software development are encouraged to contribute to OSS for their resume. a huge number of OSS projects (especially ones small enough for noobies to understand) are on github. so a large number of college grads come out knowing github and nothing else16:10
clarkbfungi: I think a history of how we ended up on gerrit (from bzr/lp), and how the CLA affects tooling choices due to legal concerns. Then summary of what we've said here about how it relates to today is what dhellmann and jroll are looking for16:10
jrollI know tons of people who like github16:10
dhellmannclarkb : yeah, that would be good16:10
jrollclarkb: ++16:11
fungiclarkb: dhellmann: oof, while i can wax nearly endlessly on those topics, coming up with appropriate citations from the annals of openstack history will take a lot of time. but i'm willing to prioritize it if that will keep this conversation from repeatedly coming up16:11
clarkbfungi: maybe don't cite it and just say "this is fungis historical perspective" )16:11
dhellmannfungi : even without citations it would be useful. we can work on the citations seprately16:11
fungijroll: heh, sounds like the historical reasons for the rise and fall of java16:12
clarkbthen we can work backward from that if necessary16:12
jrollyep, I'm fine without citations16:12
zanebcdent: so... yes... but it's not actionable. the tradeoff is between a bad tool that lots of people have already learned how to use and possibly have an account on, and a less bad tool that only some (very large) isolated communities use16:12
zanebcdent: that tradeoff isn't going away. there's no way to split the difference16:12
jrollfungi: heh16:12
clarkbworth noting that gitub is why we gerrit today iirc :)16:12
cdentzaneb: it is actionable. we find some of those people, and talk to them and find out some things we can tune, doing that doing without making assumptions about the problems16:12
cdents/that doing/that tuning/16:12
clarkbwe went to them asking for a couple features to make github work with openstack and they told as to go away16:12
jrollclarkb: just making a guess at the problems, but funny enough I believe they are solved now16:13
clarkbfungi: ^ you can put that in your history uncited :P monty can probably give better background on that though16:13
cdentzaneb: that's all I'm really pushing for here: the usual: let's speculate less and engage with peopple.16:13
jrollmandatory reviews, protected branches, CLA things, etc16:13
cmurphya ton of people have asked them for features that go unsolved
fungiyeah, there was that brief "we need to move off bzr" period where we didn't know what git service we should collaborate in16:13
fungicmurphy: in fairness, the feature request wishlist for gerrit is miles long too and as we learned running a fork of it gets painful real fast16:14
* dhellmann looks at the feature backlog of openstack16:14
cmurphyfungi: but at least it's open source and someone could theoretically submit a patch16:15
cmurphyno go with github16:15
fungidhellmann: best you just don't even open the lid on that one ;)16:15
cdentgitlab :)16:15
clarkbjroll: ya in the last 9-12 months they've improved a lot of it but it took them what, 7 years?16:15
jrollclarkb: yeah, just thought it was interesting that they eventually did what we needed16:15
fungihaving used gitlab i find it not entirely terrible, but it's copied a lot of pain from github for the sake of feature parity. also it's more open-core than gerrit (but gerrit is almost open-core too)16:16
dhellmannI am not interested in optimizing our developer experience for individuals who write 1 patch a year. I *am* interested in *improving* their experience.16:16
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-tc16:16
cdentdhellmann: that's a good way to put it16:16
fungii'm starting to think that our thursday office hour is just going to be a double-hour most weeks16:17
cdentseems like it16:17
jrollcmurphy | as a side note, a lot of people on my team internally has familiarity primarily with gerrit and very little experience with github and find github very unapproachable <- missed this until now, but have seen the same. people are going to like what they're familiar with, for any type of tool16:17
dhellmannwe do call it "office hours" right? :-)16:17
mnaserfungi: making up for all the other ones :)16:17
* jroll would love to see those two hours spread across the week more16:17
fungimnaser: yeah, wednesday was a total bust this week16:17
mnaseri personally struggle with github, but then it's probably cause i don't use it often enough16:18
mnaseri guess people feel the same about gerrit..16:18
fungijroll: if only we could figure out how to make cdent and ttx not need sleep16:18
jroll"cram it all into an hour or two" makes things super unapproachable, I had a meeting overlap which made it hard to comment on some things I wanted to comment on16:18
clarkbmnaser: that is some of it but some things are just objectively bad. Highest on my list is not preserving review history16:18
clarkbmnaser: they recnetly improved this by keeping diffs and comments around but that is it, you can't fetch real commits16:18
jrollfungi: there are options but their coherency might taper off :P16:18
dhellmannjroll : I've given that some thought, and I wonder how much the "clumping" of conversation has to do with the fact that people are usually busy doing many things, so having a dedicated time makes it easy to leave topics until we know others are going to be around.16:19
mnaseri think for github users trying/using gerrit is the idea of a 'single commit'16:19
fungialso my coherency tapers off before the 01:00 utc office hour starts most weeks16:19
mnaserand amending onto your commit and pushing that up, probably not a concept they are used to16:19
mnaser(for revisions)16:19
jrolldhellmann: yeah, I suspect that's part of it. I wonder if folks would still dedicate time to have discussions here if we didn't have scheduled time, or if we would just talk less16:19
fungimnaser: in contrast, it's pretty easy for people coming from the lkml to wrap their heads around16:20
dhellmannclarkb : having some of that detail in fungi's write up about why we prefer gerrit would be good16:20
fungiyeah, i plan on rereading this entire log16:20
dhellmannjroll : I'm worried we would talk even less :-/16:20
mnaserfungi: oh of course :)16:20
jrollme too16:20
fungibefore i even start to attempt to summarize16:20
*** kumarmn has quit IRC16:21
fungimnaser: i have a feeling it's not coincidental that the largest free software project (before openstack at least according to some people) use a very similar patch review workflow as we do, even if we use a different toolset and approval structure16:21
dimsfolks, fyi, i'll be out next week (vacation)16:23
mnaserfungi: i think we happen to have one of the best tooling and i enjoy using it.16:23
fungidims: thanks for the heads up16:23
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc16:23
smcginnisGitHub does not really scale well to large communities, at least in my opinion. Without a lot of custom tooling to handle it.16:23
mnaseri think we all agree gerrit is great, but i guess i'm just trying to think about the people who aren't in this conversation..16:23
mnasermaybe they might think gerrit is great too, none of us can answer this except them :)16:24
fungic.f., the kubernetes and ansible communities struggling with it now16:24
zanebfungi: right, GitHub copied the wrong part of the kernel workflow, and have been unwilling or unable to acknowledge that ever since16:24
zanebpull requests are great for a branch *in which all of the patches have already been reviewed*16:24
zanebthey're terrible for code review16:24
* mnaser has to run and setup for a 12:30 call, dropping off.16:25
dhellmannmnaser : so let's start by writing down why we think it's good, and then we can get people to tell us where their opinions differ16:25
* jroll just makes single-commit pull requests in a chain when using github16:25
mnaserfwiw github added a 'squash changes and merge' feature or something16:25
mnaserdhellmann: i think that's good, i dont know if i currently have time to write that up though, sorry16:26
jrollshould probably make a little github PR chain management tool16:26
* mnaser actually has to go now :p16:26
fungithanks mnaser!16:26
dhellmannjroll : I think jd__ has done some work on that, you should check with him16:26
jrollneat, thanks :)16:26
clarkbdhellmann: they've made it a paid srvice even16:26
fungiyeah, gnocchi needed something to make working with github tolerable16:26
fungiafter they were used to developing in gerrit16:27
cdentyeah, jd_ has done quite a bit of github tooling, including starting a company about it16:27
*** spsurya has quit IRC16:28
fungilooks sort of like a zuul scheduler16:29
fungibut without the ci and speculative execution16:29
clarkbfungi: its more like the prolog in gerrit I Think16:29
*** e0ne has quit IRC16:30
clarkbprolog as a service16:30
dtroyerAnyone know if the day for the PTG-located board meeting been set yet?16:32
smcginnisdtroyer: I was wondering the same thing. Haven't seen anything yet.16:32
fungiit sounded like that might not be happening after all16:33
fungii'll double-check16:33
fungiyeah, erin just confirmed it for me16:34
fungismcginnis: dtroyer: ^ no board of directors meeting at the ptg this time16:34
* cdent sighs16:35
smcginnisfungi: Oh... is there going to be a different opportunity for real time communication between the groups?16:35
fungiprobably berlin? i want to say we'd talked about scaling it back to two joint leadership meetings a year?16:35
dtroyerheh, ok, thanks fungi.  that'll be interesting for the things being deferred until that specific meeting… :)16:36
fungithe argument for two was that we seem to mostly spend the time just rehashing the same things, if memory serves16:36
mugsieI do not think that woulkd have been a problem this time16:37
smcginnisAnd that couldn't possibly be because folks need to be reminded what those things were.16:37
fungii want to say that came up at the joint meeting at the last ptg16:37
mugsieand it was only some people pushing for two16:37
persiaAs an observer, I generally see progress on about half the things brought up at each joint meetings, with deferment to the next for the other half.  Given my general experience with repeating governance meetings, I think that is fairly normal, regardless of cadence.16:37
fungipersia: i tend to agree16:38
mugsieit does highlight the board <> TC communication issues quite succinctly though16:39
fungiactually, i guess there wasn't one. must have been sydney?16:39
dtroyerthe things I am thinking about are not things deferred from a prior meeting, but "until the next f2f" that also happen to fall within a 1-year window that expires approx at the next f2f in Berlin16:39
fungiwe're already on the semi-annual cadence looks like16:39
* mugsie goes back to driving a fire truck16:39
fungiwe met in sydney in november, then vancouver in may, and will probably meet again in berlin in november16:39
fungiright, the board met in person in dublin but there was no joint leadership meeting because it overlapped with the first day of the ptg16:40
* cdent gives mugsie a nice hat16:40
persiaSeveral members of the TC attended various topics at the board meeting at the PTG in Dublin, some of which seemed very openstack-the-project specific (vs. general foundation).  I am surprised that it was not formally a joint meeting.16:41
smcginnisAt least in Dublin there was an opportunity to sit in if you could juggle your schedule.16:41
mugsiepersia: some members of the board pushed for a meeting during the PTG, which hosed that plan16:42
cdentI think we're going to need to be pretty concerted and attentive in our efforts to insure that communications between tc, uc, board and other "top-level projects" is good.16:47
* cdent states the obvious16:47
smcginnisShould we end the "meeting"?16:47
cdentyeah, we've tailed off16:48
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Technical Committee office hours: Tuesdays at 09:00 UTC, Wednesdays at 01:00 UTC, and Thursdays at 15:00 UTC | | channel logs"16:48
openstackMeeting ended Thu Jun 21 16:48:09 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)16:48
openstackMinutes (text):
cdentI think we should stop those16:48
smcginnisStill not really liking the meeting format.16:48
fungiit was in response to feedback/request at the forum. we should find out from rocky and others who supported the idea if it's actually been useful for them16:51
fungii (and i think many of us) were unconvinced it would actually be useful, but we agreed to give it a shot16:51
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc16:52
*** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk16:52
* dhellmann looks into rebooking his flight and hotel since he guessed the wrong way on the joint meeting this time16:52
fungiwhat, you don't want to be stuck hanging the warehouse district by the old denver airport a day early? but it's such a scenic area ;)16:53
smcginnisPlenty of "recreational" things to do in Denver. :D16:54
dimswith trains! :)16:54
fungihop a train with the hobos16:54
dhellmanntc-members: since there isn't a joint leadership meeting at the ptg, do we want to use sunday as a tc day?16:54
* dhellmann asks in a transparent attempt to avoid rebooking his flight16:54
smcginnisI think we could use that.16:54
dhellmannin addition to the friday?16:55
smcginnisIf we can get a room at the hotel or something, I'm sure we could hash out some things while we're there.16:55
cmurphyi'd prefer using a sunday instead of the friday16:55
smcginnisAnd could ease the conflicts during the week if we can get some things out of the way.16:55
smcginniscmurphy: ++16:55
fungithat's sunday september 9?16:55
dhellmannwe've traditionally kept some time at the end of the week in case topics come up during the week, but we could try not doing that16:56
smcginnisfungi: That appears correct.16:56
dhellmannhave people already booked hotel and flights?16:56
pabelangerI believe I'm travelling into PTG on the monday this day, so sunday is a miss for me. I can likely do remote16:56
fungii haven't16:56
cmurphyi haven't16:56
pabelangers/this day/this time16:56
smcginnisWe could still keep some time reserved on Friday for follow up.16:56
smcginnisI have reserved hotel starting Saturday but have not booked flight yet.16:57
fungiwe'd need to figure out _where_ we could meet i think, as i doubt the foundation meeting coordinators have booked any of the venue for sunday16:57
cdentI like sunday and friday16:57
dhellmannsure. I figured before I went that far I would make sure people were actually available16:57
dhellmannwe don't need much, just a conference room16:57
smcginnisThere's that nice patio area at the brewery around the corner.16:57
dhellmannhaha, or that16:58
dhellmannthe irish pub down the street wasn't terrible, either16:58
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc16:58
dhellmannI'll start a mailing list thread to get more input16:59
smcginnis++ thanks dhellmann17:00
dhellmannfungi : was there no board meeting at all? or no *joint* meeting?17:01
zanebI am ready to book my flight and I would really like a definitive answer before I do17:04
zanebnot like Vancouver where somebody was like 'oh, we'll move the TC/Board dinner to Saturday' about 30 minutes after I booked my flight in on late Saturday17:05
fungidhellmann: for denver ptg in september, no in-person board meeting17:08
dhellmannI've emailed the tc-members list and erin to ask about facilities17:08
dhellmannfungi : thanks17:08
fungi has a placeholder for "Date TBA, Board F2F (PTG), 9am - 5pm" between the July 17 call and November 12 F2F17:09
fungibut i gather they're not planning to exercise that17:10
dhellmannyes, well, that's what I get for making assumptions I suppose17:10
fungii think it was a fairly recent decision17:11
fungilike in the past week or two maybe (last week was the first i'd heard anyway)17:11
cdentis it fair to ask "why weren't we consulted?". I'm never too sure about that.17:12
dhellmannyeah, I'll ask Alan about that17:12
zanebyeah, I mean, we have our very own mailing list and everything. why are we still guessing *after* we've booked flights what events we're expected to be at17:15
dimsugh. right zaneb17:16
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc17:30
dhellmannzaneb : metal tubes aren't enough for you, you need an escape room, too?17:42
zanebthere's no escape from a metal tube17:43
dhellmannthat's so depressing17:43
jrolloh, there's an escape, it's just risky17:45
mnaseri have no idea why17:45
cdentI was wondering who was going to be the pedant this time, jroll17:45
mnaserbut i booked my flight to arrive at 9:36 am in denver17:45
mnaseron sunday17:45
mnaseri'm questioning my decisionmaking why i picked this flight17:46
mnaserbut i guess it works out nicely if we do sunday17:46
jrollcdent: :D17:46
zanebjroll: that's just the kind of comment that will get you on a watchlist17:46
jrollcouldn't resist17:46
cdentsomebody has to do it17:46
zanebfungi: I think you might be living in a bubble as far as travel expense budgets go18:06
fungiperhaps. but 5 nights vs 4 doesn't seem like a huge difference when it's already a week-long meeting18:07
cdentthank you zaneb, I was thinking about that too18:07
zanebit's a $250 per-night hotel, plus per-diem expenses18:07
zanebfungi: this is the first time I haven't had to ask for permission just to get to the PTG18:08
fungicomparing this to having the tc meet somewhere separate from the ptg or forum, how would you compare the ability of others in the community to join?18:08
smcginniszaneb: Actually, the PTG hotel rate is $149.18:08
fungismcginnis: well, probably not for sunday since it's unlikely to be covered by our negotiated rate18:09
zanebfungi: we're not comparing to that though, we're comparing to meeting on the Friday like we did in Dublin18:09
fungizaneb: sure, i still think we need to meet on friday, but adding sunday would be preferable to meeting somewhere else as a separate trip18:09
zanebsmcginnis: ah, whoops. relying too much on memory. (if memory serves we get the same rate on Sat night though)18:10
smcginnisLooks like the negotiated rate is available from the 5th to the 17th.18:10
fungii probably conflated my points. i think that if we meet on sunday we need to remind members of the community at large that they're welcome to join us18:10
fungiindependent of whether we meet on friday18:10
fungiand that i don't think the number of interested people who can swing that is 018:10
zanebfungi: the thing I said I was not a fan of was "1. Meet together Sunday only"18:11
fungiyou also said you didn't think anyone who wanted to join us on sunday outside the tc would be able to do so18:11
zanebI do of course agree that any meeting we have on Sunday should be open to anyone in the community18:11
cdentnot "anyone". "some people" because their travel constraints are different than fungi's18:12
fungiyes, that's what i was trying to express, apparently not very well18:12
zanebright, yes, I think that very few would be able to. for example there is no way I would be able to if I were not on the TC18:12
fungii find that unfortunate, but believable18:13
zanebthis is our 3rd of 4 events this year. many of our developers don't get to go to the PTG at all, and every extra expense incurred by those who do go increases the number of people who can't go18:13
fungii have a feeling that for organizations where openstack is the only software project they have staff contributing upstream, it may be easier to see as a normal expense than for organizations involved in lots of software projects whose staff want to attend all the things and they have to set some limits out of concern that their travel expense policies will be abused18:14
*** annabelleB has quit IRC18:14
fungiwhen i worked at a service provider, i pushed by management to attended week-long trainings out of town several times a year whether i wanted to go or not18:16
fungier, i was pushed18:16
cdentthat's a lot different from what many of us experience18:16
fungiwell, it was icky stuff like cisco or vmware product training18:16
zanebnobody is suggesting that travel budgets will be abused. the travel budget is fixed and every 'normal' expense pushes somebody else over the cap, and it works like that in basically every organisation that is not the OSF18:17
zanebbecause it's easy to justify travel budget for your own event18:18
fungiwell, sunday wouldn't be, most likely18:19
fungii agree i probably don't have a formal travel budget either way, which is why i relate things like this to when i was an operator at a for-profit service provider18:20
dtroyereven well-funded headline sponsors with purchased keynotes still count heads and nights for events…18:21
fungiyup. part of the mistake with the ptg was promoting it as an "event" rather than a "meeting"18:22
cdentsame issues applied back in the days of the midcycles18:22
zanebdtroyer: yep, because marketing budget and travel budget are separate, and never the twain shall meet18:22
fungibut when you have marketing department and event coordinator hammers, every meeting looks like an conference nail18:23
zanebfungi: that is absolutely not the problem. marketing budget is 10x easier to get than developer travel budget18:24
dtroyerI haven't had to do this at my current employer, but in the past have cast meetups as conferences to tap into that sweet, sweet marketing lucre18:24
fungizaneb: i'm saying the osf is used to putting on big flashy events, so when you ask them for some meeting space that's what they hand you18:24
zanebfungi: that I agree with18:25
fungisome of us keep asking why we can't do things like, say, debconf does. share dorm rooms at a university during break week and pay next to nothing for some empty classrooms18:26
dhellmannam I sensing that folks now don't want to meet on sunday?18:26
cdentdhellmann: if you're getting that sense from the chat here in IRC, that's not the read I would make. What's being discussed is if fungi is in a travel budget bubble.18:26
dhellmannfwiw, I've only asked for a room big enough for the 13 tc members.18:27
zanebdhellmann: apart from pabelanger, no. this discussion is more about *only* meeting on sunday18:27
cdentit appears no one wants that18:27
fungifwiw, my "travel budget" is that i'd rather stay home and not go anywhere, but i accepted a job which requires me to travel (more and more every year, it seems) so my view of travel expenses is probably quite skewed as a result18:27
fungier, travel bubble18:28
pabelangerI usually would travel on a sunday, just this time around I have a family event on friday, and leaving buffer to recover18:29
fungii skipped mid-cycles back when that was an option18:29
pabelangertravel for a sunday*18:29
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc18:30
* cdent needs dessert or something18:33
fungizaneb: anyway, the reason i was saying sunday was a friendly option for community participation was as compared to what we'd discussed previously (last week?) about trying to find options to meet up separate from forum/ptg18:33
fungimaybe the number of people in the community who can justify an extra night around the ptg is just as zero as those who could justify joining the tc members at some other separate venue another time entirely. my perspective is apparently rarefied18:34
zanebfungi: ok, I understand your point better now18:36
fungiit's becoming increasingly obvious to me that i have more of a travel quota than a travel budget, but unfortunately that's been the case for me at previous jobs going back decades18:37
jrollif we only have a room big enough for the TC, others not being able to join sunday isn't much of a problem, right?18:37
fungiand probably plays to the fact that i hate to travel18:37
zanebI think it depends on the agenda18:37
dhellmannright now we don't have a room at all, but I had intended for it to be a time for us to talk amongst ourselves, with a summary to come later18:38
zanebit's essential that we set aside time during the actual PTG to have discussions in public and give other members of the community the opportunity to raise issues18:38
dhellmannyeah, that's why I kept friday on the list18:38
dhellmannwe do have things that we, as a team, need to discuss or work on or at least make progress on18:38
zanebif in addition to that we want to meet to work on stuff as a group, then we should do that18:38
zaneband unfortunately that in inevitably going to exclude most of the rest of the community18:39
zanebbut that's probably mostly unavoidable18:39
fungii think that we should have time to collaborate on things at the ptg, but i don't see that as being tc-specific time. it's time for topics of general interest to the community in which the tc members should definitely be involved18:39
zanebalthough I agree with fungi that to the extent we can get it done in 1 day, doing it adjacent to the PTG would at least give folks the best chance18:40
fungihonestly, if we're as tc members spending time collaborating on things which aren't of general interest to the community, i worry we're maybe focusing on the wrong things18:41
dhellmannif we think we're going to need a huge space, we should probably not bother. because if the foundation can't get us a room then we're going to be at a restaurant or something where we would have even more limited options.18:43
smcginnisI think we can be open to the community without necessarily making accomodations for a large part of the community to be physically present.18:48
smcginnisEtherpad notes or even live streaming if someone really wants to be present.18:48
dhellmannwe could also write up what we discuss after the fact18:50
smcginnisYeah, a recap the ML seems like it would be a good thing regardless.18:50
zanebI think if the TC has work products we need to produce as a team, then it makes sense to get together and produce them even in isolation, and collect the feedback after the fact19:13
*** e0ne has quit IRC19:17
fungiagreed, doing needed work in isolation and communicating after is certainly better than not doing it at all19:17
*** annabelleB has quit IRC19:30
*** mfedosin has quit IRC19:32
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC19:34
*** mfedosin has joined #openstack-tc19:44
*** kumarmn has quit IRC20:06
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc20:07
*** kumarmn has quit IRC20:07
*** kumarmn_ has joined #openstack-tc20:10
mnaserwhile i think we should do all of our work in the open, there should be times where the team needs to work together20:17
mnaseri think the two times works nicely because we can maybe have some things to keep in mind throughout the PTG20:18
mnaserso we can recap and say "well, we thought X but apparently Y"20:18
*** kumarmn_ has quit IRC20:26
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc20:29
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc20:36
clarkbre running a stackalytics in infra, we tried at one time but the software is not really easy to run. There were/are issues with how it reads and caches its data20:44
clarkbThe last time there was a major push on it was around the Boston summit. We talked about turning it off entirely and someone from red hat (I don't remember who it was) was adamant they needed it and volunteered to do the work then nothing ever happened aiui20:45
fungimrmartin proposed some patches to fix its data storage model and make it more stateful, but it also seems that there's nobody actively maintaining the software20:47
clarkbfinding people to work on it may be particularly difficult given its reputation20:50
*** cdent has quit IRC20:53
smcginnisI think if we got Mirantis to shut off the current instance (or just not fix whatever the current problem is) we would probably have a few vendors stepping up to get a replacement in place.20:54
clarkbI'm not sur ewe want it to be vendor managed, thats like 99% of the problem today20:55
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc20:56
smcginnisOh, I mean we would probably see some vendors willing to provide resources to get a replacement running.21:00
smcginnisCuz $diety forbid we can't get metrics.21:00
*** rosmaita has quit IRC21:11
fungithere's a delicate balance to strike though. can't damage the pride of the current sponsoring organization by making it look like they couldn't hack it and a competitor had to step in and take it over21:21
smcginnisIf it's community hosted I would hope that wouldn't be a problem.21:21
fungiwell, the bigger issue with it right now (in my opinion) is convincing the current maintainers21:22
smcginnisOtherwise I think we would be fine with us working with them to "announce" they are no longer going to do it before we pick it up so that it's clear they chose not to do it anymore rather than were unable to.21:22
fungiwe had that same discussion in the past21:22
fungibetween the infra team and the stackalytics maintainers21:24
fungiwhen we were trying to run a copy of it at stackalytics.openstack.org21:24
fungipabelanger also has some history on this topic he might be willing to share when around21:38
fungias he was basically leading the effort at the time21:39
*** kumarmn has quit IRC21:40
*** annabelleB has quit IRC21:45
pabelangerYah, stackalytics.o.o was running in parallel for almost 2 years, but we never flipped the switch. Some of it was related to general ops tasks (eg: weekly reboots) and others are what clarkb mentioned. It wasn't really friendly to stop / start because it stored all the data in memcached.  I did have it loading from a snapshot on boot, but still took a long time (1.5 days) to prime its data if lost.21:46
pabelangerwe have puppet-stackalytics now, so if we want to bring it back online, it shouldn't be too hard. Just need people to care and help maintain it21:47
*** annabelleB has joined #openstack-tc21:53
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC21:57
fungiand as mentioned, mrmartin has patches proposed to use redis or something to store its state so it doesn't have to redo all its historical analysis on restart21:57
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc22:04
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc22:14
*** kumarmn has quit IRC22:18
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc22:20
*** edmondsw has quit IRC22:24
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc22:26
*** edmondsw has quit IRC22:35
*** edmondsw has joined #openstack-tc22:35
*** edmondsw has quit IRC22:40
*** kumarmn has quit IRC23:06
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc23:23
*** kumarmn has quit IRC23:54
*** kumarmn has joined #openstack-tc23:58

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!