| *** mriedem_away has quit IRC | 00:30 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 00:49 | |
| zaneb | o/ | 01:00 |
|---|---|---|
| fungi | ohai | 01:05 |
| gmann | o/ | 01:10 |
| fungi | worth mentioning, andymccr has expressed an interest in volunteering to be a technical election official, since some of us may need to recuse ourselves during the upcoming election: https://review.opendev.org/662808 | 01:13 |
| fungi | he hasn't +1'd the addition yet, but we'll be seeking tc consensus on the addition since the election officials are a delegation of the tc | 01:13 |
| *** spsurya has joined #openstack-tc | 01:18 | |
| mnaser | Cool. Thats awesome. | 01:22 |
| mnaser | Something of concern for our users that recently came up is that it seems users that are deploying on Centos might have a really bad experience | 01:23 |
| mnaser | I know it's not exactly in our control but something to note when people will say upgrades are painful | 01:24 |
| mnaser | It's pretty much an issue where there is no OpenStack release that covers both operating systems | 01:25 |
| fungi | deploying rdo on centos, or what? | 01:26 |
| fungi | also, what does "no OpenStack release that covers both operating systems" mean in that context? | 01:27 |
| clarkb | I'm guessing python2 vs python3 on centos 7 and 8 | 01:27 |
| clarkb | unfortunately that particular distro makes life difficult there | 01:27 |
| fungi | oh, i see, upgrading centos for openstack deployments | 01:27 |
| fungi | and simultaneously switching python major versions | 01:28 |
| fungi | by "both operating systems" i misunderstood and assumed "centos and ubuntu" rather than interpreting it as "both operating system versions" | 01:29 |
| *** Sundar has quit IRC | 01:30 | |
| clarkb | There isnt much we can do if we arent building our own distro | 01:31 |
| fungi | so idea being whether we should consider having the u release tested on both centos 7 and centos 8 (and so deferring our previous choice to start dropping python 2 support after train)? | 01:31 |
| clarkb | fungi that would prevent dropping python 2 in u | 01:31 |
| clarkb | that seems like a huge step backwards | 01:31 |
| fungi | right, that's what i meant | 01:31 |
| fungi | but i also wonder whether that actually makes the upgrading scenario any easier for them | 01:32 |
| fungi | i suppose it would offer a means of running one openstack release while piecemeal swapping out servers from centos 7 to 8, but still means running a mix of python2 and python3 systems | 01:33 |
| clarkb | right the proper solution here is the one every other distro supports | 01:34 |
| clarkb | have a python transition releaee | 01:34 |
| fungi | i've heard that running a mix of servers from two adjacent openstack releases works these days for piecemeal server upgrades... anyone know whether that's the case? | 01:34 |
| clarkb | it depends a lot on the service. Keystone yes. For other services we test the compute nodes being upgrade independent of the control plane | 01:36 |
| clarkb | dont think we test a mix of control plane aervices | 01:36 |
| fungi | so are upgrades from one major release to the next still a big bang where you have to replace the entire control plane in one shot? | 01:37 |
| clarkb | I dont think so. Keystone doesnt need that and you should be able to do a service at a time | 01:38 |
| fungi | yeah, so swap out centos version and openstack version one server at a time ought to work... the biggest unknown is mixed python2 and python3 then i guess | 01:39 |
| fungi | once we have centos-8 servers, we could set up multinode devstack jobs with a centos-7 and a centos-8 node and try a mix of services (assuming anyone from red hat is still helping keep devstack runnable on those) | 01:42 |
| gmann | does not moving the testing from stable (old OS version) to new release (new OS version) cover the upgrade scenarios of OS bump as well as py version bump ? we do not do these mix OS versions node testing anywhere. | 01:45 |
| gmann | for example, testing from rocky->stein made sure upgrade will be good from ubuntu xenial to bionic | 01:45 |
| fungi | might involve getting grenade working on centos 7 | 01:46 |
| fungi | i don't know if anyone's ever tried | 01:47 |
| gmann | yeah that is good idea. afaik it is not tried yet. | 01:47 |
| fungi | another alternative, if there are no parties interested in working on devstack and grenade on centos (it has historically been under-supported for sure), one of the deployment projects which focuses on centos might consider setting up similar sorts of jobs | 01:49 |
| gmann | +1 | 01:51 |
| *** Sundar has joined #openstack-tc | 01:56 | |
| mnaser | Mixing deployment versions should be largely not problematic. | 01:59 |
| mnaser | The only concern I would see is different kernel versions which means different cpu flags being exposed | 01:59 |
| mnaser | Which could prevent live migrations too | 01:59 |
| fungi | yeah, hard to migrate between compute nodes on different kernels i guess? | 01:59 |
| fungi | right, that's what i suspected | 02:00 |
| mnaser | Well from 3.10 to 4.x is a big jump so yeah | 02:00 |
| fungi | ahh, with centos/rhel for sure yeah | 02:00 |
| fungi | well, i think we beat out the tuesday office hour by leaps and bounds this week! | 02:00 |
| mnaser | So the thing is if they have train (or Stein) released on both targets that would be good | 02:01 |
| * mnaser has been keeping a list of office hour discussion topics :p | 02:01 | |
| fungi | i don't really get how having stein (or train) supported on both centos versions solves the problem of live migrating when upgrading compute nodes from centos 7 to 8 | 02:02 |
| *** Sundar has quit IRC | 02:03 | |
| mnaser | fungi: I should clarify usually migrating to a newer kernel is possible but to an older one is not | 02:03 |
| mnaser | (usually) | 02:03 |
| mnaser | Because kernels don't usually remove cpu flags but add them | 02:03 |
| fungi | makes sense | 02:04 |
| mnaser | So if you boot an instance with the extra cpu flags, it won't be live migratable out but it can still recieve from an older machine. | 02:04 |
| mnaser | RH actually has a really good amount of effort in order to support cross os live migration | 02:04 |
| mnaser | You can do things like from rhel 6.0 to 7.6 live migration with no problems. They have a very good support for it | 02:05 |
| mnaser | I can't speak about what 8 looks like because I consume Centos | 02:05 |
| fungi | yep, we hope to add centos 8 images as soon as there is a centos 8 | 02:06 |
| *** lbragstad has quit IRC | 02:14 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 03:58 | |
| *** gmann has quit IRC | 04:23 | |
| *** gmann has joined #openstack-tc | 04:27 | |
| *** dtantsur|afk is now known as dtantsur\ | 06:29 | |
| *** dtantsur\ is now known as dtantsur | 06:29 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 06:31 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 06:58 | |
| evrardjp | zaneb: I have an hour between 1400 and 1500 UTC, or before 1300utc to talk about https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657447/3 | 07:06 |
| evrardjp | would that be okay for you? | 07:06 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 07:15 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-tc | 07:45 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 08:47 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 09:30 | |
| gmann | tc-members summarized the “help-most-needed” list discussions - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-June/006890.html | 09:46 |
| gmann | Feel free to add for any missing points | 09:46 |
| asettle | gmann, I saw that, thanks very much. | 09:57 |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 10:09 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 10:22 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 10:47 | |
| *** adriant has quit IRC | 11:12 | |
| *** gmann has quit IRC | 12:03 | |
| *** ricolin has joined #openstack-tc | 12:03 | |
| *** ijolliffe has joined #openstack-tc | 12:19 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-tc | 12:28 | |
| *** adriant has joined #openstack-tc | 12:34 | |
| *** adriant has quit IRC | 12:43 | |
| *** adriant has joined #openstack-tc | 12:46 | |
| *** mriedem has joined #openstack-tc | 13:10 | |
| *** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc | 13:17 | |
| zaneb | evrardjp: after 1400 should work for me | 13:17 |
| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 13:32 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 13:48 | |
| asettle | evrardjp, zaneb uh, when was that? | 13:54 |
| zaneb | in like 5 minutes | 13:55 |
| *** spsurya has quit IRC | 13:55 | |
| asettle | Oh shit | 13:55 |
| asettle | Okay | 13:56 |
| asettle | On the ball today, as usual | 13:56 |
| evrardjp | haha | 14:07 |
| evrardjp | where do we do this? | 14:07 |
| evrardjp | here sound fine :) | 14:07 |
| zaneb | here wfm | 14:07 |
| zaneb | asettle: o/ | 14:08 |
| evrardjp | ok so I wanted to say that this structure is nice, because it will allow yearly refreshes | 14:08 |
| evrardjp | I think ttx was also interested by this | 14:08 |
| evrardjp | ttx: asettle https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657447/3 | 14:08 |
| zaneb | yeah, that seemed to be the way to go based on the feedback | 14:09 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 14:09 | |
| evrardjp | so I can drop my uncapping patch it's not needed anymore with that approach | 14:09 |
| zaneb | yes, I think so | 14:10 |
| evrardjp | the other action item, for the rename, I think it's fine like that, and we can iterate later | 14:10 |
| zaneb | evrardjp: I agree with you and Doug that we should try to merge (equivalents to) the existing items at ~the same time as this patch | 14:10 |
| evrardjp | I guess the next items would be to decide or not if we want to have SIGs included/exit criteria/ and what do we do with the previous ones | 14:11 |
| zaneb | but I'm reluctant to just import them verbatim without rewriting in the format we've specified | 14:11 |
| zaneb | because we all know it won't happen after they get merged ;) | 14:11 |
| evrardjp | I agree with that | 14:11 |
| evrardjp | which is why I thought to make those the "2018" ones? | 14:11 |
| evrardjp | it's kinda weird at the same time | 14:12 |
| evrardjp | but this is effectively what it was | 14:12 |
| zaneb | oh, that's a interesting idea | 14:12 |
| zaneb | that would keep a record of them around | 14:12 |
| evrardjp | and so we could rephrase those for 2019 in a later patch | 14:12 |
| evrardjp | it's not perfect I agree | 14:13 |
| zaneb | I'm happy to do that | 14:13 |
| evrardjp | but I have the impression we're not gonna get completion criteria for those existing, while new ones can be written with that in mind (outside the yearly expiry criteria) | 14:13 |
| evrardjp | I can do that too, but I wanted to make sure we are aligned :D | 14:14 |
| evrardjp | if you agree to that idea, we are already two with this ! :p | 14:14 |
| zaneb | but the big question in my mind is how we're gonna get them rewritten into the format we want for 2019 :) | 14:14 |
| zaneb | some days I think I could just dive in and start rewriting some | 14:15 |
| evrardjp | For that, I suggest we can just start to dive in on an etherpad? | 14:15 |
| zaneb | other days I am more realistic about how much time I have to spend on this :/ | 14:15 |
| *** jaosorior has joined #openstack-tc | 14:15 | |
| evrardjp | it's less formal than through reviews | 14:15 |
| evrardjp | then we add each of those new under review | 14:15 |
| zaneb | I like that idea | 14:15 |
| evrardjp | let me paste stuff into https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/2019-upstream-investment-opportunities-refactor | 14:16 |
| zaneb | I think we will want input from the original authors as well, so the etherpad makes sense as a place to start that | 14:18 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 14:18 | |
| aspiers | sorry for the drive-by, but I wonder if we can do anything about this: | 14:22 |
| aspiers | https://www.stackalytics.com/?company=awcloud&metric=marks&release=train <- 25 contributors with 100% approval ratio | 14:22 |
| zaneb | evrardjp: fwiw I don't believe we need exit criteria | 14:22 |
| evrardjp | mmm | 14:22 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 14:22 | |
| evrardjp | that was discussed in the ptg? | 14:22 |
| zaneb | the exit criterion is "is it the end of the year yet?" | 14:22 |
| aspiers | I wonder if people's bonuses are subject to how many reviews they do upstream | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | haha | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | I thought we had the need to make sure it's possible to have another thing, so that we can consider it a success or not (I am not sure if success or not matters, though) | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | because the fact it disappears next year could mean so many things | 14:23 |
| evrardjp | but I am not 100% sure of remembering what we discussed during ptg for that | 14:24 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: there is one with 86.7 :) | 14:24 |
| zaneb | my recollection is that we discussed exit criteria, and decided that clearing them out automatically, reproposing and reviewing on the merits was the better approach | 14:25 |
| evrardjp | sounds good | 14:25 |
| evrardjp | let me remove that. It should be "easier" to write them | 14:25 |
| evrardjp | hahaha | 14:25 |
| aspiers | evrardjp: ah yeah OK, so 23 contributors at 100% | 14:25 |
| *** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-tc | 14:26 | |
| evrardjp | ... | 14:26 |
| zaneb | aspiers: so I agree that it's silly and pointless, but it's not clear that we need to do something about it? | 14:26 |
| aspiers | zaneb: well we could at least contact the company asking them to ask their employees to stop doing this? | 14:26 |
| aspiers | and point to the documented policy which it violates | 14:27 |
| zaneb | we could, but why? is it hurting anyone? | 14:27 |
| aspiers | yes | 14:27 |
| aspiers | it's creating noise on reviews | 14:27 |
| aspiers | and hence devaluing real +1s | 14:27 |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 14:28 | |
| zaneb | I'm finding it hard to get exercised about that ;) | 14:28 |
| evrardjp | asettle: would you like to tackle the first item in https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/2019-upstream-investment-opportunities-refactor ? | 14:28 |
| * asettle blinks | 14:28 | |
| asettle | Up | 14:28 |
| asettle | Um* | 14:28 |
| aspiers | it's not a super serious problem, but equally I don't think it's asking much to find a contact at the company in question and write a simple email from the TC | 14:28 |
| asettle | Let's just say yes for now | 14:29 |
| aspiers | Sounds like a 10 minute job, no? | 14:29 |
| asettle | aspiers, mate don't add time to my schedule right now | 14:29 |
| aspiers | asettle: wasn't talking to you :-p | 14:29 |
| asettle | ... sorry | 14:29 |
| asettle | :( | 14:29 |
| * asettle goes back to her stress bubble | 14:29 | |
| aspiers | j/k ;) | 14:29 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: I like the fact you're raising this | 14:30 |
| aspiers | It sounds like super easy low hanging fruit to me, but maybe I'm missing something | 14:30 |
| zaneb | aspiers: I'd be interested in helping them find a way to channel their obvious desire to contribute into something more productive for them. not really interested in telling them to sod off | 14:30 |
| aspiers | zaneb: Of course the email should be phrased in that direction. I'm not suggesting to tell them to sod off :) | 14:30 |
| evrardjp | I want to convert things into something positive, and I am not sure how we're gonna achieve that. I agree with zaneb there | 14:31 |
| aspiers | It's super easy | 14:31 |
| evrardjp | but in any case, i believe it's something the chair should do | 14:31 |
| aspiers | This is one paragraph of text in an email | 14:31 |
| evrardjp | it sends a message. | 14:31 |
| zaneb | aspiers: this has been a perennial topic of discussion. we're hoping that e.g. the contributing organisation guide and the upstream investment opportunities thing we're discussing at the moment will help | 14:31 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: you volunteer for writing said paragraph? | 14:32 |
| aspiers | "Thanks a lot for your contributions. Please be aware that ... blah blah link to documented guide about how to review effectively ... and we would be super grateful if you could suggest that your employees read this guide and follow it. Thanks again!" | 14:32 |
| aspiers | evrardjp: I pretty much just did. Kinda feels like you are seeing this as much more complex/difficult than it needs to be :) | 14:32 |
| evrardjp | that sounds friendly enough :) | 14:32 |
| evrardjp | It doesn't really express the problem you're raising though | 14:33 |
| evrardjp | how british! ;p | 14:33 |
| zaneb | shots fired | 14:33 |
| evrardjp | hahaha | 14:35 |
| evrardjp | zaneb: after further thinking if we bring 2018 verbatim, there is no pressure on getting 2019 in at the same commit, so we can probably go ahead and separate the duties of writing the 2019 goals to each person who want it :D | 14:41 |
| aspiers | evrardjp, zaneb: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/empty-plus-one-reviews | 14:41 |
| aspiers | Yeah, that was about 10 minutes | 14:42 |
| aspiers | Now it just needs sending from an official address | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | yup | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | thanks aspiers | 14:43 |
| aspiers | and saving in case it's needed for future | 14:43 |
| evrardjp | we don't have an official tc "email" though, so I thought using chair's email. But it might be better to come from an openstack domain I guess? | 14:44 |
| evrardjp | fungi: any opinion on what we can achieve here? ^ | 14:44 |
| aspiers | definitely from openstack.org | 14:44 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: we've discussed in the past about having ML for tc, but this is a little different | 14:44 |
| fungi | catching up, i have a feeling "more contributors on the team" isn't really a useful wishlist item because contributors come and go and so the same request is likely to just be repeated over and over (the infra one is a prime example). better for a team to identify particular things they want to accomplish and those become defacto completion criteria | 14:44 |
| fungi | evrardjp: unfortunately, for better or worse, the @openstack.org e-mail is co-opted by the foundation, so messages "from" that domain aren't really an indication they're on behalf of the project leadership anyway | 14:45 |
| fungi | they're an indication of official communication from foundation staff | 14:46 |
| fungi | this is a big reason why i don't use my @openstack.org address for anything besides foundation business | 14:46 |
| evrardjp | yes that's exactly what I thought | 14:46 |
| evrardjp | what would be the most official way "the tc" sends something? | 14:47 |
| evrardjp | an email* | 14:47 |
| fungi | messages from addresses listed at https://governance.openstack.org/tc/#current-members | 14:47 |
| evrardjp | yeah. So that comes back from my initial idea of making mnaser send that. As a chair. | 14:48 |
| jroll | I think it would be fine to do something like: signed, mohammed naser, chair, openstack technical committee (especially if it's clear this was a group communication) | 14:48 |
| aspiers | That sounds good | 14:48 |
| jroll | or really anyone, but "chair" feels more official | 14:48 |
| evrardjp | jroll: agreed. | 14:48 |
| evrardjp | double agreed | 14:48 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: thanks for raising that | 14:49 |
| evrardjp | and doing 99% of the work | 14:49 |
| fungi | but on that topic, should we be including a link to review guidelines somewhere in https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/organizations/ | 14:49 |
| aspiers | evrardjp: yw | 14:50 |
| zaneb | aspiers: I'm opposed to legitimising stackalytics by linking to it in this email | 14:50 |
| fungi | ideally with a summary of the sorts of behavior we want to encourage/discourage? | 14:50 |
| aspiers | zaneb: stackalytics is known about and used whether you like it or not. That genie is already well out of the bottle | 14:51 |
| fungi | the idea being that's a document we should (maybe when it gets more polish) be putting in front of management at organizations employing contributors | 14:51 |
| zaneb | given that putting undue weight on stackalytics numbers is the *cause* of this phenomenon | 14:51 |
| fungi | i would say it's not the root cause, just a convenient manifestation | 14:51 |
| zaneb | aspiers: it's not in the sense that the TC hasn't endorsed it | 14:51 |
| aspiers | zaneb: mentioning it in an email is not endorsement | 14:52 |
| aspiers | but if you are really worried about that, then tweak the wording to emphasise that it's unendorsed | 14:52 |
| zaneb | sure it is :) | 14:52 |
| evrardjp | We don't need the link | 14:52 |
| evrardjp | for that | 14:52 |
| aspiers | evrardjp: the link is there for a reason | 14:52 |
| evrardjp | i mean for the message | 14:52 |
| fungi | the root cause is that some organizations like to be able to use their involvement in the community as a means of marketing their products and services, and to differentiate themselves from the competition in their customers' eyes, so seek a grading system which shows their superiority in some area | 14:52 |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 14:52 | |
| zaneb | also the link doesn't provide evidence for your claim (that there are no comments accompanying the +1s) per se | 14:53 |
| aspiers | if you send that letter to a manager at $COMPANY without the link, they will have no evidence of the phenomenon you are talking about | 14:53 |
| aspiers | zaneb: good point | 14:53 |
| evrardjp | exactly what I wanted to say. | 14:53 |
| aspiers | well, maybe better evidence can be collected | 14:53 |
| fungi | if stackalytics went away, those same companies would just find another source of questionable statistics to leverage. and if we published official statistics then those same companies would focus on ways to game the official stats | 14:53 |
| aspiers | but the problem isn't just lack of comments, it's also lack of critical -1 reviews | 14:54 |
| aspiers | admittedly my draft didn't cover that correctly | 14:54 |
| zaneb | fungi: which is one reason why we don't publish official stats | 14:54 |
| evrardjp | I will edit this | 14:54 |
| evrardjp | let's not make it harder :p | 14:54 |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 14:54 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 14:55 | |
| aspiers | evrardjp: you're no fun, I think we should bikeshed it until any progress is completely blocked ;-p | 14:55 |
| fungi | zaneb: yup. but we also have to accept that there will always be some source of statistics those companies will use to similar effect, so it's not necessarily the fault of stackalytics | 14:55 |
| aspiers | right | 14:55 |
| aspiers | statistics are not inherently bad | 14:55 |
| aspiers | abuse of stats is | 14:55 |
| aspiers | if anything stats are inherently useful | 14:56 |
| zaneb | fungi: I agree we have to accept that, but we don't have to act like looking at such things provides any kind of meaningful insight in our opinion | 14:56 |
| aspiers | OK I have to go now | 14:56 |
| aspiers | thanks all for your attention | 14:56 |
| fungi | zaneb: totally, which is why i favor communicating that, along with anything else we care to apprise them of | 14:59 |
| fungi | and i also agree with you about not including links to stackalytics | 15:00 |
| fungi | if the behavior we're warning them away from is driven by a desire to improve stackalytics ranking, then they almost certainly already know the name of the service and its url | 15:00 |
| fungi | if they're somehow *not* aware of it, then best we don't send them there to start with | 15:01 |
| zaneb | oh, I'm sure they're well aware | 15:01 |
| zaneb | but they don't need to hear it from us | 15:02 |
| evrardjp | I have edited aspiers's text | 15:03 |
| zaneb | since our whole message is basically stop worrying about that kind of counterproductive stuff and actually do something useful | 15:03 |
| evrardjp | maybe it's better? | 15:03 |
| mnaser | awcloud is a Chinese company, right? | 15:03 |
| evrardjp | does it matter? | 15:03 |
| zaneb | mnaser: yes, I was gonna say, we should like to the Chinese translation | 15:03 |
| mnaser | yes. I'd like us to take another way. the email can come off as very hard to swallow thing for a group like that. | 15:03 |
| mnaser | for example | 15:03 |
| zaneb | s/like/link/ | 15:03 |
| mnaser | tricircle had the issue with WeChat meetings | 15:04 |
| fungi | "Based in Beijing Zhongguancun high-tech park, AWCloud is the leading provider of. enterprise OpenStack-powered IaaS for public, private and hybrid cloud solutions in China." | 15:04 |
| mnaser | I (with gmann) worked with Horace (foundation staff) to reach out to them | 15:04 |
| mnaser | and we had a very nice and productive discussion, explaining it more within a scope of discussion, rather than a "notice" email | 15:04 |
| mnaser | and it was very successful | 15:04 |
| mnaser | the team all got on-boarded on how to do irc meetings | 15:04 |
| mnaser | and they now hold irc meetings | 15:04 |
| mnaser | I think this is a really good opportunity for us to ask for Horace help again and do something more informal/close rather than just a "email notice" | 15:05 |
| fungi | i agree an official notice could come across as aggressive and shame-inducing in conflict-averse cultural contexts | 15:05 |
| mnaser | English is not easy there. translation tools are really not good either in my experience, they don't carry context well | 15:05 |
| fungi | and getting horace involved would be great | 15:06 |
| evrardjp | fungi: agreed | 15:06 |
| fungi | i know he's at least tangentially aware of these review practices already | 15:06 |
| evrardjp | Yes I think horace could totally help here. Either to help on passing the message through email or differently. | 15:07 |
| evrardjp | aspiers: just wanted to pass that there is something harmful, and I think it's up to us to do a follow up then | 15:07 |
| mnaser | I've found that they a lot of times, we feel like its malintention "We are trying to show off that we contribute" or "we're padding stats" and a lot of times, it's good to just have the conversation and explain things in a back-and-forth basis. I'd assume he has a reasonable relationship with that organization already | 15:08 |
| fungi | but i do also think getting the things we want to express summarized in and linked from the "contributing organization guide" would be good, since we can keep a translation of that published to point people at easily | 15:08 |
| mnaser | fungi: yep, that has to happen regardless | 15:08 |
| zaneb | mnaser: ++ | 15:08 |
| mnaser | I agree. | 15:08 |
| fungi | we have a lot of placeholders in there we brainstormed in past forum sessions, with the expectation they'd be fleshed out and augmented by input from the community on how we want to steer folks | 15:09 |
| fungi | so if someone's already drafting some relevant prose, please also stuff it into a review for that doc | 15:09 |
| fungi | looks like we already have it in 7 languages, including chinese | 15:11 |
| fungi | https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/zh_CN/organizations/index.html | 15:12 |
| fungi | (i always like having reminders like this of just how amazing our community is) | 15:12 |
| zaneb | (also credit to ricolin, who IIUC did a lot of the chasing to get translations from various user groups) | 15:14 |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-tc | 15:16 | |
| evrardjp | I am closing that etherpad, I trust mnaser to follow that up :p | 15:18 |
| ricolin | and if we can actually cover more language will be super cool! | 15:18 |
| asettle | OKAY I now can read scroll back | 15:19 |
| asettle | I agreed to a thing and was mean to aspiers is the only bits I know | 15:19 |
| *** jaosorior has quit IRC | 15:27 | |
| cmurphy | fwiw we already have something like this summarized in the contributing organization guide "The community does not encourage attempting to boost one’s contribution statistics by proposing large quantities of low-value commits or voting on large numbers of change proposals without providing thoughtful reviews. " https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/organizations/index.html | 15:42 |
| cmurphy | +1 on engaging in a back-and-forth conversation and gently pointing out the guide, a notice email doesn't seem to do anything ime | 15:43 |
| evrardjp | agreed on the soft approach | 15:45 |
| evrardjp | and on the docs | 15:45 |
| zaneb | ++ | 15:49 |
| *** Sundar has joined #openstack-tc | 15:54 | |
| *** dtantsur is now known as dtantsur|afk | 16:01 | |
| ttx | +1 on leveraging Horace to convey that message in a culturally-acceptable way | 16:26 |
| ttx | Also I wonder if we should not ask Stackalytics to revert to displaying commits by default | 16:27 |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 16:28 | |
| ttx | although I guess empty/typo commits are also a thing | 16:28 |
| fungi | yes, we had far more of those before we asked them to switch to showing reviews by default | 16:37 |
| fungi | though we do still get a significant number of both | 16:37 |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 16:53 | |
| *** e0ne has joined #openstack-tc | 18:20 | |
| *** Sundar has quit IRC | 18:21 | |
| *** weshay has quit IRC | 18:26 | |
| *** weshay has joined #openstack-tc | 18:27 | |
| *** ricolin has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** tdasilva has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** lpetrut has joined #openstack-tc | 19:23 | |
| *** lpetrut has quit IRC | 19:27 | |
| *** bsilverman has joined #openstack-tc | 19:42 | |
| *** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC | 19:59 | |
| *** ijolliffe has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| mnaser | evrardjp: thanks, i've started the conversation with horace. it's a little bit late there, but i'll stay up later to explain and give more context and help bridge this | 20:04 |
| scas | I have an opinion about Chinese contributors, because I was around for the waves for a time, where people have contributed to Chef. it has a small amount of contributors, so it's good to get micro on the details when the commits are numerous | 20:45 |
| scas | in general, it's well-intended | 20:45 |
| scas | fixing urls here, correcting spelling there | 20:45 |
| scas | if someone doesn't know how to modify the code, they (this is a people thing, regardless of nationality) proofreading is a good way to get one's feet wet. the people from China I have worked with in-person burn through tickets like they're paper | 20:47 |
| scas | breadth becomes a thing, in my observations | 20:47 |
| scas | as far as stackalytics, I would prefer seeing reviews by default | 20:48 |
| *** tdasilva has joined #openstack-tc | 20:59 | |
| *** tjgresha has quit IRC | 21:18 | |
| *** Sundar has joined #openstack-tc | 21:21 | |
| *** gmann has joined #openstack-tc | 21:45 | |
| *** Sundar has quit IRC | 21:52 | |
| *** whoami-rajat has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** adriant has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| *** adriant has joined #openstack-tc | 22:02 | |
| *** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| *** ijolliffe has joined #openstack-tc | 22:37 | |
| *** tdasilva has quit IRC | 22:53 | |
| *** ijolliffe has quit IRC | 23:45 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!