| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 04:07 | |
| *** akekane_ is now known as abhishekk | 06:41 | |
| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 07:09 | |
| *** rpittau|afk is now known as rpittau | 07:47 | |
| *** diablo_rojo is now known as Guest3371 | 08:27 | |
| *** Guest3371 is now known as diablo_rojo | 11:56 | |
| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 13:05 | |
| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 13:39 | |
| *** pojadhav is now known as pojadhav|out | 14:23 | |
| gmann | TC meeting in ~8 min from now | 14:52 |
|---|---|---|
| * diablo_rojo is ready | 14:53 | |
| spotz_ | here | 14:54 |
| dansmith | I'm double booked, so will be a little distracted, FYI | 14:57 |
| jungleboyj | I will be there. | 14:58 |
| gmann | #startmeeting tc | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Thu Aug 5 15:00:08 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'tc' | 15:00 |
| gmann | #topic Roll call | 15:00 |
| gmann | o/ | 15:00 |
| dansmith | o/ | 15:00 |
| diablo_rojo | o/ | 15:00 |
| spotz_ | o/ | 15:01 |
| jungleboyj | o/ | 15:01 |
| belmoreira | o/ | 15:01 |
| gmann | #topic Follow up on past action items | 15:01 |
| gmann | gmann to write to k8s steering team and cc diablo_rojo_phone | 15:02 |
| yoctozepto | o/ | 15:02 |
| gmann | done, sent email | 15:02 |
| gmann | #topic Project Skyline (diablo_rojo) | 15:02 |
| gmann | diablo_rojo: go ahead | 15:02 |
| diablo_rojo | So! At the last PTG Horizon talked to a group about a project they had been working on to replace Horizon | 15:02 |
| diablo_rojo | The Horizon team was on board with this given their lack of resources to get horizon the updates it really needs. | 15:03 |
| jungleboyj | Isn't Skyline the same name that VMware uses for one of their ddashboards? | 15:03 |
| diablo_rojo | ttx and I have been working with the team on their project- skyline- getting it ready to be proposed. | 15:04 |
| yoctozepto | it better not be | 15:04 |
| yoctozepto | though vmware already has its horizon | 15:04 |
| diablo_rojo | This one is from 99cloud? | 15:04 |
| yoctozepto | jungleboyj: it seems it's the name of their support panel | 15:04 |
| jungleboyj | Skyline is the name of one of the VMware products. | 15:04 |
| gmann | and as separate dashbaord project or within Horizon project ? | 15:04 |
| diablo_rojo | They are almost ready to go- just working on getting their tests setup with zuul. | 15:04 |
| belmoreira | diablo_rojo this would be a replacement for Horizon? | 15:04 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, separate to replace horizon | 15:05 |
| diablo_rojo | is the main goal from what I understand | 15:05 |
| gmann | humm | 15:05 |
| yoctozepto | diablo_rojo: but separate also governance-wise? | 15:05 |
| dansmith | man. | 15:05 |
| yoctozepto | dansmith: hmm? | 15:05 |
| diablo_rojo | I think the groups would merge? I don't know all the details yet. | 15:05 |
| dansmith | yoctozepto: as in.. "wow" | 15:06 |
| yoctozepto | dansmith: +2 | 15:06 |
| diablo_rojo | The horizon folks would be on board though based on the discussions back at the PTG | 15:06 |
| diablo_rojo | They already have some repos setup on opendev: https://opendev.org/skyline/ | 15:06 |
| yoctozepto | hmm, a different namespace for now | 15:06 |
| diablo_rojo | If anyone wants to take a look | 15:06 |
| gmann | is there ML thread started on this or just PTG discussion ? | 15:07 |
| yoctozepto | so is the question whether they can move into the official namespace? | 15:07 |
| yoctozepto | gmann +1 | 15:07 |
| belmoreira | would "skyline" have the developer/community to drive the new project that Horizon is lacking? | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann just ptg so far | 15:07 |
| gmann | or collaborate in horizon team instead of separate alternate project? | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | Once they have zuul setup I think the plan is to start a ML thread to start the proposal process | 15:07 |
| diablo_rojo | belmoreira, yes it seems so + ideally the remaining horizon team | 15:08 |
| fungi | i expect we'll want to chat with foundation legal/trademark folks on the name too before it gets officially accepted as part of openstack | 15:08 |
| diablo_rojo | fungi, +1 | 15:08 |
| yoctozepto | I guess we would need devstack integration too | 15:08 |
| yoctozepto | are they including this in their "zuul setup"? | 15:08 |
| jungleboyj | fungi: ++ | 15:08 |
| dansmith | yoctozepto: yeah good point, we would want to see a very stable devstack integration before anything serious I would think | 15:08 |
| gmann | but before that, we need to discuss with the governance structure they want to propose and how Horizon team thinking on this? | 15:08 |
| jungleboyj | Concerned with the overlap with VMware here. Despite the fact that I like the name. | 15:08 |
| diablo_rojo | yoctozepto, I am not sure, but if we want to require it before they apply to become an offical project, they are a super receptive team | 15:08 |
| diablo_rojo | jungleboyj, thats an easy fix? changing the name isn't really a concern I don't think? | 15:09 |
| yoctozepto | diablo_rojo: ok, then we want :-) | 15:09 |
| belmoreira | wondering about the process to deprecate Horizon and introduce the new project | 15:09 |
| jungleboyj | diablo_rojo: Gets harder the longer the project is around. :-) | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | belmoreira, yeah I am not sure what that would look like | 15:09 |
| gmann | yeah, what we will do/plan with horizon? | 15:09 |
| dansmith | not saying anything negative about this team I don't know, but.. I would really want to avoid making any rash decisions | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | jungleboyj, then lucky this is rather new ;) | 15:09 |
| yoctozepto | re horizon: ask horizon folks | 15:09 |
| dansmith | like, keep them both around as alternatives for many cycles | 15:09 |
| diablo_rojo | dansmith, I totally get it. | 15:10 |
| diablo_rojo | Yeah I think we shouldn't get rid of horizon right away or anything | 15:10 |
| dansmith | we would want to see some uptick in adoption, reports from the field that it's a suitable replacement, etc before we even mark horizon as deprecated, IMHO | 15:10 |
| yoctozepto | if horizon folks want to refocus | 15:10 |
| yoctozepto | then let them refocus | 15:10 |
| yoctozepto | dansmith: +2 | 15:10 |
| gmann | diablo_rojo: well, Horizon facing resource issue so I prefer the collaboration with horixon team and improve there what is lacking | 15:10 |
| gmann | dansmith: ^^ | 15:10 |
| yoctozepto | we really need devstack + some prod deployment projects to pick it up and users to deploy before declaring anything on horizon | 15:10 |
| gmann | alternate projects things is what we did mistake in past right? | 15:11 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, the horizon team is on board with project Skyline though? | 15:11 |
| yoctozepto | diablo_rojo: I would assume this would be q to you | 15:11 |
| spotz_ | Yeah having an option to choose would be good for the shorter term as each component would need a dashboard created | 15:11 |
| fungi | the horizon maintainers already concluded on the ml thread earlier this year that the way forward was to rewrite horizon's frontend portion completely | 15:11 |
| fungi | (and that they have their hands full maintaining the version they already have) | 15:12 |
| jungleboyj | Wow. | 15:12 |
| diablo_rojo | You can find some of the PTG discussion here: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/xena-ptg-horizon-planning on line 141 | 15:12 |
| diablo_rojo | yoctozepto, which question? Sorry I am starting to lose track lol | 15:13 |
| fungi | well, the conclusion was that they picked a dead-end framework, so there's no incremental way to migrate it to newer paradigms. this is the world of web application frameworks apparently | 15:13 |
| diablo_rojo | fungi, thank you, yes. Was trying to find that ML thread | 15:13 |
| fungi | i can look for it too, though i'm in three meetings at the moment | 15:13 |
| dansmith | fungi: afaict, the "world of web application frameworks" is a total disaster :) | 15:14 |
| gmann | om PTG, it is not clear if they are proposing alternate horizon proejct or within horizon | 15:14 |
| yoctozepto | diablo_rojo: I meant yours at gmann, does not matter :-) | 15:14 |
| diablo_rojo | yoctozepto, ahh got it | 15:14 |
| diablo_rojo | dansmith, too true, thankfully 99cloud wants to help with that. | 15:15 |
| dansmith | I mean the entire world of frameworks, a problem no one entity could hope to resolve :) | 15:15 |
| diablo_rojo | dansmith, touche. | 15:16 |
| gmann | may be once we have the clear proposal then we can discuss further and with Horizon team | 15:16 |
| ttx | ohai | 15:16 |
| diablo_rojo | ttx, hello :) | 15:16 |
| diablo_rojo | Talking about Skyline | 15:16 |
| ttx | Re: skyline drive vs. horizon, my understanding from teh PTg discussion was that they are using different JS technologies | 15:17 |
| ttx | so it might be easier to get people to contribute to the newer ones | 15:17 |
| diablo_rojo | i.e. the horizon team would merge with the skyline team | 15:17 |
| dansmith | yeah, that's kinda the problem is that they're always a moving target | 15:18 |
| dansmith | so definitely understand that hope, as long as existing people can jump to the new thing and keep contributing | 15:18 |
| ttx | That was the big question we asked back then... from the horizon team perspective would it be better as a Horizon next version, a separate thing, or just if it did not exist | 15:18 |
| ttx | They said "separate thing will be easier, even if some would likely be contributing to both" | 15:18 |
| dansmith | people that maintain horizon installs now are also more likely familiar with "whatever horizon uses" and moving around a lot generates ops churn that won't be great or welcomed | 15:19 |
| ttx | like it's probably the only way to ever update our dashboard to more modern webtech | 15:19 |
| belmoreira | dansmith +1 | 15:19 |
| ttx | But I would expect both to coeexist | 15:19 |
| gmann | ttx: but that will distribute the maintainers too so both might face maintainer issue what horizon is facing ? | 15:19 |
| ttx | gmann: if you assume JS developers know all the frameworks, yes. In reality, you find those using one OR the other | 15:20 |
| ttx | One of the reasons Horizon is struggling is that it's not a super-new shiny JS thing | 15:20 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, you're not splitting up the skyline folks or the horizon folks really. | 15:20 |
| gmann | dansmith: +1 usage is also good point | 15:21 |
| ttx | But yeah, I don;t expect miracles either :) | 15:21 |
| diablo_rojo | You would have horizon folks maybe still doing horizon things and also doing skyline things | 15:21 |
| gmann | diablo_rojo: ? is it? horizon team is lacking in resources to do Horizon things | 15:21 |
| gmann | I do not think they are ready to do both? | 15:21 |
| ttx | It's a bit of a leap of faith, but that's precisely the case we envisioned when we allowed "multiple projects doing the same thing" | 15:22 |
| gmann | like, system scope support in horizon is one example | 15:22 |
| diablo_rojo | It seems like they wouldn't be doing both though. Parts or all of horizon would be getting deprecated? | 15:22 |
| dansmith | I really just think we shouldn't consider any "leaps of faith" and let another project come up alongside, | 15:22 |
| dansmith | until it is clearly the better choice | 15:22 |
| gmann | yeah so question is what is our plan for Horizon. if deprecation is what we want then that is other thing | 15:22 |
| dansmith | that means make it deployable in devstack as an option, include them in messaging, encourage operators to try it, provide feedback, survey who wants to use that instead of horizon | 15:23 |
| ttx | dansmith: that would be a departure from the previous policy, but I can see why | 15:23 |
| diablo_rojo | At this point, skyline still has a little work to do, like I said. I mostly wanted this conversation to see if there were any other things they need to do before we figure out the proposal + replacement/deprecation etc plan. | 15:23 |
| dansmith | ttx: departure from the previous policy of what? choosing one project per realm? I feel like we've waffled back and forth on that before anyway | 15:23 |
| ttx | previous policy = let projects incubate within the community rather than outside of it) | 15:24 |
| belmoreira | honestly I think OpenStack needs a "modern looking" UI. But a completely new project from nothing sounds a risky strategy... Almost every cloud uses Horizon | 15:24 |
| dansmith | oh | 15:24 |
| dansmith | belmoreira: agree | 15:24 |
| gmann | belmoreira: true, usage is more imp and whether ops want to migrate it or how easy that will be | 15:24 |
| dansmith | ttx: tbh I don't really feel like the current policy is not to incubate projects inside, but I'm sure the letter of the policy law is different | 15:25 |
| ttx | belmoreira: the path to a "modern looking UI" is through a new project, according to the Horizon folks | 15:25 |
| yoctozepto | the path is right | 15:25 |
| dansmith | ttx: things like cyborg are still trying to achieve deployable-and-usable status | 15:25 |
| yoctozepto | the worry is about the maturity | 15:25 |
| ttx | anyway that probably warrants a thread... I need to jump to another meeting | 15:25 |
| gmann | yeah also horizon team feedback what they things and plan for horizon | 15:25 |
| ttx | dansmith: change in policy = accept projects once tey are mature, rather than when they are under development | 15:25 |
| diablo_rojo | Yes, a ML thread is definitely in the future. | 15:26 |
| gmann | let's ask them to start the ML thread and we continue discussion there | 15:26 |
| diablo_rojo | Repeating myself again- skyline still has a little work to do, like I said. I mostly wanted this conversation to see if there were any other things they need to do before we figure out the proposal + replacement/deprecation etc plan. | 15:26 |
| dansmith | ttx: okay I'm confused, but sounds like we understand something needs to happen here | 15:26 |
| spotz_ | And I think a PTG session, either during our leadership one or another added. I think the projects need some input if they make their own UI | 15:26 |
| ttx | for now they need to work on Zuul integration anyway :) | 15:26 |
| jungleboyj | Agreed. Something has to be done. | 15:26 |
| diablo_rojo | I would think that it would make sense for them to attend Horizon things again yes. | 15:27 |
| gmann | dansmith: ttx policy discussion is interesting. would you like to add it in PTG sessions? | 15:27 |
| diablo_rojo | But I would also think we would like to make progress before then and not just put it on hold till then. | 15:27 |
| gmann | if so please add in PTG etehrpad | 15:27 |
| gmann | moving on? | 15:28 |
| dansmith | gmann: I dunno, I'm much more of a "let's just figure out what needs to happen and do it" person than a "figure out the current/new policy" but whatever ya'll want | 15:28 |
| gmann | diablo_rojo: yea ML thread can be good as next step | 15:28 |
| diablo_rojo | dansmith, yes, trying to figure out what needs to happen for these Skyline people lol. | 15:29 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, okay. | 15:29 |
| gmann | dansmith: sure. please add topic. this is important | 15:29 |
| gmann | #topic Gate health check (dansmith/yoctozepto) | 15:29 |
| jungleboyj | dansmith: ++ | 15:29 |
| dansmith | there have been a number of infra-related (I assume) timeout type things I've hit lately | 15:29 |
| dansmith | haven't had a lot of time to debug them for sure, but things like no logs uploaded, etc which I assume are just infra | 15:30 |
| yoctozepto | we also had a breakage with grenade due to cinder hardening their validation | 15:30 |
| clarkb | that can happen if networking crashes on the instance or if the instance crashes | 15:30 |
| dansmith | there was also the grenade thing, and the nova lvm job thing, both of which are resolved | 15:30 |
| yoctozepto | but this has been already fixed | 15:30 |
| gmann | yeah cinder API change failed grenade and blocked gate for sometime but it is solved now | 15:30 |
| clarkb | I'm not aware of general upload issues to clouds right now | 15:30 |
| gmann | clarkb: may be dansmith will ping you on infra about it, he said double booked so might be busy in another meeting ? | 15:33 |
| gmann | any other issue on gate we want to discuss? | 15:33 |
| dansmith | I don't have anything to ping about, just noticed the timeouts, but I expect they're normal things | 15:34 |
| dansmith | sometimes there's a rash of them it seems, maybe while providers are doing stuff, I dunno | 15:34 |
| dansmith | moving on.. :) | 15:34 |
| gmann | dansmith: ok i thought you become away :) | 15:34 |
| gmann | #topic Xena Tracker | 15:34 |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-xena-tracker | 15:34 |
| gmann | any update on items form Xena tracker ? | 15:34 |
| gmann | for PTL guide goal, it is almost done only murano project left or which I pinged PTL many times but no response. | 15:35 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%2522project-ptl-and-contrib-docs%2522+status:open | 15:35 |
| gmann | requesting everyone please check your assigned item in etherpad | 15:36 |
| gmann | #topic Wallaby testing runtime for centos8 vs centos8-stream | 15:36 |
| gmann | Wallaby testing runtime is centos8 #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/runtimes/wallaby.html | 15:36 |
| gmann | but from current issue it seems liek centos8 cannot be tested on wallaby as no wallab y repo present for centos8 | 15:37 |
| gmann | discussion in #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/803039 | 15:37 |
| gmann | now question is whether 1. we should update the wallaby testing runtime from centos -> centos8-stream and test centos8-stream or 2. remove centos job from testing as there is no way to test it | 15:38 |
| gmann | ? | 15:40 |
| gmann | IMO, option2. as I think updating the wallaby testing runtime (and migrating testing to cento8-stream) is little bit extra work now. | 15:41 |
| clarkb | I would at least suggest not promising anything about centos 8 | 15:41 |
| clarkb | because it will stop updating in 5 months | 15:41 |
| gmann | clarkb: yeah we changed that in Xena so no more testing or cetnos8 in Xena onwards | 15:41 |
| gmann | but here question is wallaby testing which was working fine but now stop working | 15:42 |
| yoctozepto | I say just backport stream fixes down to victoria | 15:42 |
| yoctozepto | and test only stream | 15:42 |
| gmann | it can happen with ubuntu also like Bionic stop working and cannot be fixed we cannot change all our testing to focal for old stable | 15:42 |
| yoctozepto | this is more sensible reality-wise | 15:42 |
| yoctozepto | gmann: we don't support openstack stuff beyond ubuntu lifetime | 15:43 |
| gmann | yoctozepto: like Pike? not sure what version we support there but it is working | 15:43 |
| gmann | I think supporting centos8-stream from Xena onwards make sense and not in old stable | 15:44 |
| clarkb | gmann: I think thei mportant piece of info here is centos-8 is a dead end. The other platforms we run and test on aren't, but when they hit their end of 5 years of support we shut them off too | 15:44 |
| fungi | on the bionic example, ussuri was the last release to officialy support ubuntu bionic according to the pti, and it's scheduled to transition to extended maintenance in a few months | 15:45 |
| gmann | "shut them off" you mean for current or for all old stable testing too? | 15:45 |
| fungi | (november looks like) | 15:45 |
| yoctozepto | extended maintenance is not eol | 15:45 |
| fungi | extended maintenance also does not guarantee we keep running all the same tests/platforms | 15:46 |
| fungi | em is a "best effort" testing only | 15:46 |
| yoctozepto | yup | 15:46 |
| gmann | and we stop testing it anything stop working in EM | 15:46 |
| fungi | we no longer tag point releases in em, we no longer guarantee we'll even fix security vulnerabilities in em branches | 15:46 |
| clarkb | gmann: we shut off hte test platform. Anything use that test platform will stop testing there | 15:46 |
| gmann | clarkb: +1, yeah that is my understanding | 15:47 |
| yoctozepto | come on, I don't think it's that painful to just make sure devstack works on stream for stable branches and just communicate this at tc level that we lost centos-8 earlier than planned | 15:47 |
| clarkb | gmann: so you can either turn off centos-8 now or in 5 months | 15:47 |
| clarkb | yoctozepto: that depends entirely on whether or not stream updates function :) I know libvirt has updated in ways that caused problems already | 15:47 |
| yoctozepto | clarkb: true that | 15:48 |
| gmann | yoctozepto: we can do that i am not saying stop testing centos8-stream there but in TC defined testing runtime which is min thing to do we should not update it to centos8-stream | 15:48 |
| jungleboyj | :-( | 15:48 |
| gmann | any project can test anything extra there is no limit on that | 15:48 |
| yoctozepto | jungleboyj: why the sad face? | 15:48 |
| gmann | yoctozepto: need to know every expression/feeling :) | 15:49 |
| jungleboyj | yoctozepto: The fact that a libvirt update already broke things. | 15:49 |
| yoctozepto | gmann: so you suggest to not change anything and just tell people the platform disappeared and it's platform's fault? | 15:49 |
| yoctozepto | works for me :-) | 15:49 |
| yoctozepto | jungleboyj: well, there was a huge bump in version | 15:49 |
| yoctozepto | but it was not that bad | 15:49 |
| gmann | yoctozepto: yeah and if you wan to add centos8-stream job in wallaby we are all ok | 15:49 |
| yoctozepto | gmann: I don't really "want", I just don't oppose it :-) | 15:50 |
| gmann | yoctozepto: ok :) ditto | 15:50 |
| yoctozepto | perhaps some other tc-members opinions? | 15:50 |
| spotz_ | The original plan for Xena was for RDO to be oon CS9, we're looking at optionns annd will discuss in our meeting next week | 15:50 |
| yoctozepto | because now only qa and infra spoke :-) | 15:50 |
| yoctozepto | spotz_: well, we are not yet thinking about CS9 at all tbh | 15:51 |
| yoctozepto | but yeah, good to refresh this info | 15:51 |
| mnaser | isnt the only reason oepnstack is essentially tested on centos is pretty much tripleo? | 15:51 |
| yoctozepto | we will likely need to adapt the version tested late in the cycle | 15:51 |
| mnaser | because reality is we only run jobs on focal | 15:51 |
| yoctozepto | most jobs run on focal | 15:51 |
| yoctozepto | like, most = 99.5% | 15:52 |
| yoctozepto | ;-) | 15:52 |
| gmann | mnaser: yeah we have job in devstack and devstack based too but mostly tripleo | 15:52 |
| gmann | we are running out of time.. | 15:52 |
| fungi | the devstack job has been failing again for a while, last i looked | 15:52 |
| fungi | and is non-voting | 15:52 |
| gmann | fungi: yeah | 15:52 |
| yoctozepto | the interesing question is do redhat people actually develop on centos or ubuntu? ;D | 15:52 |
| mnaser | and essentially centos 8 / cs8 is not that huge of a delta to be honest | 15:52 |
| gmann | so to summarize, 1. no update in wallaby testing runtime 2. devstack or any project can test centos8-stream in wallaby as extra thing. 3. no guarantee of testing in centos8 or centos8-stream in wallaby as per current situation in platofrm | 15:53 |
| TheJulia | yoctozepto: depends on the project and focus | 15:53 |
| yoctozepto | TheJulia: hello :-) | 15:53 |
| gmann | everyone ok with the above plan? | 15:53 |
| TheJulia | So, what about the fact that centos8 is EOL | 15:53 |
| gmann | if not then we can continue discussion in next meeting.. | 15:53 |
| TheJulia | are we doing the right thing by saying the tested against runtime is an EOL thing? | 15:54 |
| yoctozepto | gmann: I can accept it | 15:54 |
| fungi | also rhel has "free" (gratis) licenses for developers, but that doesn't seem to extend to running in public clouds so not applicable for our ci/cd | 15:54 |
| mnaser | i mean | 15:54 |
| mnaser | i know our tested runtime list is supposed to be set hard-set-in-stone | 15:54 |
| mnaser | but we can append a change to it and explain why we did it | 15:54 |
| fungi | absolutely | 15:55 |
| yoctozepto | either approach works for me | 15:55 |
| gmann | mnaser: but appending it need move testing to new version | 15:55 |
| TheJulia | But is that still the right thing for those who wish to consume our software? | 15:55 |
| yoctozepto | not blocking, not endorsing | 15:55 |
| mnaser | TheJulia: well, when we promised c8, we didnt expect it to be eol'd | 15:55 |
| gmann | anyways I will keep it for next meeting, moving to next topi5 min left | 15:55 |
| yoctozepto | TheJulia: people consume openstack on rhel and debian and neither is listed ;-) | 15:55 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: true | 15:55 |
| mnaser | and so i guess since things changed... we'll just have to adopt.. | 15:55 |
| gmann | #topic PTG Planning | 15:56 |
| mnaser | if anything, i'd say we'd do disservice if we didn't adapt and left an eol os there :) -- but onto the next! | 15:56 |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-yoga-ptg | 15:56 |
| TheJulia | mnaser: I concur, fwiw | 15:56 |
| gmann | ok, let's continue it in next meeting or after meeting | 15:57 |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-yoga-ptg | 15:57 |
| diablo_rojo | 3 min left. | 15:57 |
| gmann | please add topic there^^ | 15:57 |
| gmann | #topic Board informal Brainstorming sessions about "community health and resource management"(gmann) | 15:57 |
| gmann | no update on this | 15:57 |
| gmann | #topic OpenStack newsletter items | 15:57 |
| gmann | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/newsletter-openstack-news | 15:58 |
| diablo_rojo | Just a reminder that the ML etherpad is ongoing really. | 15:58 |
| gmann | please add topic there | 15:58 |
| diablo_rojo | Drop things as you find them. | 15:58 |
| diablo_rojo | Don't need to wait for me to put the call out. | 15:58 |
| gmann | diablo_rojo: when is deadline to finalize ? | 15:58 |
| fungi | in about a month | 15:58 |
| gmann | is it for Aug or next month? | 15:59 |
| fungi | (they're published ~monthly, and today was the most recent one) | 15:59 |
| gmann | ohk, we missed that may be | 15:59 |
| gmann | anyways let's add item there as it comes | 15:59 |
| fungi | usually the deadline is a day or two before it's distributed | 15:59 |
| gmann | fungi: yeah that is not clear to me :) | 15:59 |
| gmann | anyways I will check and make it more advance next time | 16:00 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, it varies month to month | 16:00 |
| gmann | #topic Open Reviews | 16:00 |
| diablo_rojo | I added a few of the things that were mentioned yesterday | 16:00 |
| diablo_rojo | And will keep the rest for next month. | 16:00 |
| gmann | ok | 16:00 |
| gmann | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+is:open | 16:00 |
| gmann | only one review which is waiting on projects side | 16:00 |
| gmann | \o/ | 16:00 |
| gmann | thanks all for joining today | 16:01 |
| gmann | #endmeeting | 16:01 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Thu Aug 5 16:01:11 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:01 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-08-05-15.00.html | 16:01 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-08-05-15.00.txt | 16:01 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2021/tc.2021-08-05-15.00.log.html | 16:01 |
| spotz_ | Thanks gmann, everyone! | 16:01 |
| diablo_rojo | Thank you gmann! | 16:01 |
| jungleboyj | \o/ | 16:01 |
| jungleboyj | Thank you! | 16:01 |
| yoctozepto | thanks gmann | 16:01 |
| *** akekane_ is now known as abhishekk | 16:01 | |
| fungi | to clarify the newsletter situation, the editorial team usually lets us know at least a few days, sometimes as much as a week, before they plan to publish a new edition. usually we would try to give bodies like the tc as much advance warning as possible to submit topics, but if things can be added to that etherpad on a continuous basis then at least we have something we can publish in the | 16:03 |
| fungi | openstack subsection | 16:03 |
| fungi | the cadence is roughly monthly, but varies based on a number of external factors | 16:03 |
| fungi | so there's no rigid schedule to plan for, unfortunately | 16:03 |
| gmann | fungi: yeah, knowing the final deadline is good as we can finalize the added things. | 16:04 |
| diablo_rojo | Yes. It gets pushed forward and pulled back depending on other Open Infra news + projects releases etc | 16:04 |
| diablo_rojo | gmann, yes and normally I am more on top of that. | 16:04 |
| gmann | yeah, thanks | 16:07 |
| *** rpittau is now known as rpittau|afk | 16:41 | |
| -opendevstatus- NOTICE: The Gerrit service on review.opendev.org is going down for a quick restart to adjust its database connection configuration, and should return to service momentarily | 20:04 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!