14:00:08 <mark-burnett> #startmeeting airship
14:00:09 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jul 31 14:00:08 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mark-burnett. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:10 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:12 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'airship'
14:00:14 <mark-burnett> #topic role call
14:00:15 <seaneagan> hi
14:00:18 <srwilkers> o/
14:00:26 <mark-burnett> Hey all, may want to chime in again if you did it early :)
14:00:27 <sthussey> here
14:00:32 <b-str> hello
14:00:34 <mattmceuen> o/
14:00:35 <jayahn> o/
14:00:42 <mark-burnett> Here's our agenda for today: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/airship-meeting-2018-07-31
14:02:08 <mark-burnett> #topic Specs publishing
14:02:41 <mark-burnett> So sthussey and b-str have updated the specs repo to actually render the RST and publish it to read the docs
14:03:02 <b-str> also added some further instructions to help with indexing usage of the repo.
14:03:05 <mark-burnett> There are a couple of specs up there for folks to look at: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/airship-specs
14:03:09 <mark-burnett> Ah, good point, thanks
14:03:48 <sthussey> https://airshipit.readthedocs.io/projects/specs/en/latest/
14:05:07 <mark-burnett> Maybe we can just comment here on the pegleg issue
14:05:25 <mark-burnett> There is a pegleg spec for rearchitecting it as a pipeline + plugin system
14:06:04 <mark-burnett> It would be great to get some feedback on those ideas
14:06:19 <mark-burnett> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/587127/
14:06:26 <mark-burnett> ^ spec
14:06:37 <mark-burnett> and a very rough skeleton of what it might look like in the code: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/587095/
14:06:46 <mark-burnett> OK, let's move on to SKT's timeout/wait issue
14:07:05 <mark-burnett> #topic Armada timeout with parallel deployments
14:07:35 <mark-burnett> Can you show us a sample set of manifests that behave this way, just to make it more concrete?
14:08:18 <powerds0111> we have just one chart group for all charts without wait=True
14:08:46 <powerds0111> vary simple structure
14:08:49 <mark-burnett> Yeah, I see
14:09:22 <mark-burnett> I see Scott has offered to review, I'm happy to review today too.  I agree that updating the timeout should ideally not basically turn on a "sequenced" behavior
14:09:33 <powerds0111> and need to increate default timeout because it takes long time to deploy
14:09:36 <powerds0111> yeap :)
14:09:50 <mark-burnett> OK, any other thoughts?
14:10:18 <mark-burnett> #topic Consider rescheduling weekly meeting
14:10:37 <hogepodge> hi
14:11:01 <mark-burnett> I know we recently voted to schedule the meeting at this time, but a concern has been raised that our timing overlaps with the Edge compute meeting.
14:11:20 <mark-burnett> I think there may be people from that group who want to participate.
14:11:25 <portdirect> o/ hogepodge
14:11:42 <mark-burnett> Can we come up with some candidate times to distribute on the mailing list, so that people can chime in and see where we land?
14:12:28 <jayahn> good idea, probably using doodle?
14:12:34 <mattmceuen> I'd suggest 2 hours from now (rather 1 hour 45 min)
14:12:40 <mattmceuen> as one option
14:12:50 <jayahn> after openstack-helm meeting?
14:12:57 <mattmceuen> yep
14:12:58 <portdirect> +1
14:12:58 <jayahn> that will  be 2am for us
14:13:02 <portdirect> :(
14:13:06 <mark-burnett> Yeah, one of the reasons it's now is so SKT can come
14:13:07 <mattmceuen> hmm that would be rough
14:13:16 <sthussey> How about 0830 CT
14:13:31 <mark-burnett> That might work, since we really only need 30 minutes most days
14:13:44 <mattmceuen> I'd be open to 8am CT also
14:14:16 <b-str> I think 8:30 - 9 once a week is good.
14:14:27 <hogepodge> Since I'll be coming to the meetings, 8:30 CT would be much better for me. 6:30 is easier than 6:00 AM.
14:14:36 <sthussey> 1330 UTC
14:15:06 <mark-burnett> Ok, I'll include some sample options in a follow up email for discussions
14:15:35 <mark-burnett> #topic Core member list maintenance
14:16:06 <mark-burnett> I've included the list in the etherpad
14:16:44 <mark-burnett> Felipe's not here, but he had raised a concern about having some inactive folks on the list
14:17:07 <mark-burnett> I know that Anthony's contributions have decreased lately, so it might be fair to remove him from the list
14:17:36 <portdirect> has anyone asked him what his plans are?
14:17:55 <mark-burnett> Anthony?  No, I don't believe anyone has reached out to him yet.  I will do that
14:17:56 <portdirect> its not uncommon for people to go walkabout for a month or two
14:18:10 <mattmceuen> I'd say shoot him an email and see if they think they'll be able to remain active reviewers, I've seen that done successfully in openstack projects
14:18:16 <portdirect> ++
14:18:21 <mark-burnett> Sounds good
14:18:32 <mark-burnett> Any other thoughts?
14:18:47 <mattmceuen> Do you know if marshallmargenau will be staying active in the armada world?
14:18:57 <mattmceuen> I know he's going on vacation for a bit :)
14:19:06 <mark-burnett> Right, I'm not sure he'll remain active after that
14:19:17 <portdirect> we need to do a better job of reviewing overall - theres a lot of patches that sit around for a long time
14:19:19 <mark-burnett> It seems harmless to leave him on the list for a bit
14:19:34 <mattmceuen> +1
14:19:53 <portdirect> it there anyone who we should be trying to get ready for core status?
14:19:54 <mattmceuen> to portdirect and mark-burnett
14:20:07 <portdirect> as it would be great to increase review coverage
14:21:08 <portdirect> hogepodge: to help here, do you know how we can get stackalitics to give stats for airship as a whole?
14:21:31 <hogepodge> I don't know offhand
14:21:36 <b-str> you mean grouped up for all airship, not the individual components?
14:21:47 <sthussey> Probably rather than picking people, a process should be decided
14:21:54 <mattmceuen> my thoght is it should correlate well to frequent good reviews - going back to the "we should do a better job of reviewing overall" point
14:22:04 <portdirect> ^
14:22:09 <sthussey> Because the current core list is likely to see considerable turnover
14:22:17 <hogepodge> Maybe this file. https://github.com/openstack/stackalytics/blob/master/etc/default_data.json
14:22:37 <portdirect> hogepodge: i want pie charts ;)
14:23:40 <hogepodge> It looks to me like project configuration uses a full URL, and isn't hardcoded to the git.openstack.org domain. Try a PR there and see if the maintainers give you the thumbs up.
14:23:41 <mattmceuen> hogepodge: I want pie but would settle for charts
14:23:55 <portdirect> will do - cheers dude
14:24:04 <mark-burnett> I think having a clearer process would be good.  My intuition is that deep project understanding is really helpful - maybe reviews are a good proxy for that, but it's not clear to me that's true.
14:24:34 <portdirect> it depends i suppose on how much airship wants to align with the openstack way of life
14:24:55 <portdirect> where its made clear that its "core reviewer" as opposed for "core merger"
14:24:55 <mattmceuen> Here's the OpenStack core reviewer's guide, gives a good overview of the traditional responsibilities: https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/core.html
14:25:32 <mark-burnett> My main concern is that the projects are really useful, not how closely we align with traditional openstack practices.
14:25:33 <portdirect> and that we should consider people based on their input to the community, which makes the critera somewhat fuzzy
14:26:28 <mark-burnett> I agree that looking at reviews is useful, but I doubt that statistics about the number of reviews would be very informative.
14:26:42 <portdirect> its a small part of the picture
14:26:44 <sthussey> Seems like it would need a balance of reviews and contributions to show interest in the platform, but also an understanding on how the platform should be extended and maintained
14:26:50 <b-str> I've captured some of these ideas on the etherpad.
14:26:59 <mark-burnett> I don't think we're going to solve this today, so let's move on.
14:27:20 <mark-burnett> #topic PTG Agenda
14:27:22 <b-str> please update the etherpad with more ideas on core identification. We can decide process later too.
14:27:35 <jayahn> stackalytics should not be a main source defining core. period. it can be a supplemental info though. (my personal thought)
14:27:37 <mark-burnett> Not looking to set the agenda today, but just pointing out the etherpad for the agenda
14:27:53 <mark-burnett> Thank you guys for those comments, sorry for moving the topic on too early.
14:28:50 <mark-burnett> PTG Schedule: https://www.openstack.org/ptg#tab_schedule   Airship agenda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/AirshipPTG4
14:29:08 <mark-burnett> Does anyone have thoughts about how to prepare for the PTG so we get the most out of it?
14:30:03 <portdirect> from my exp
14:30:12 <portdirect> fin sessions that are not "your own"
14:30:35 <portdirect> the biggest thing ive got out of the ptg is meeting new people in tangental feilds
14:30:56 <portdirect> and some of the stuff that falls out of those conversations can be gold
14:30:58 <b-str> so networking
14:31:08 <portdirect> yeah
14:31:16 <mark-burnett> Ok, one last thing before we close.
14:31:23 <mark-burnett> #topic Help leading next 2 meetings
14:31:28 <portdirect> esp as a new project, if we stay in a room on our own, we dont gain much over this irc meeting :)
14:31:29 <jayahn> denver ptg site has a great beer place near by. :)
14:31:49 <mark-burnett> I'm going to be out of town the next two weeks, and almost certainly not be able to attend these meetings
14:31:53 <mark-burnett> (There is a tiny chance)
14:32:06 <mark-burnett> Can I get one or two volunteers to run these?
14:32:22 <mark-burnett> I will just attend if able
14:32:25 <b-str> I can run at least one
14:32:34 <mark-burnett> Can I put you down for next week?
14:32:42 <aaronsheffield> I can run one or both.
14:32:43 <b-str> just need the instructions on the meetbot
14:32:49 <mark-burnett> Ok, sounds good
14:32:51 <b-str> yeah, I'll take next week
14:32:53 <mark-burnett> Thanks
14:33:01 <mark-burnett> Ok, and Aaron can run the following
14:33:15 <mark-burnett> #topic Closing thoughts
14:33:24 <mark-burnett> Anyone have any final thoughts?  We're a little over, sorry
14:33:38 <portdirect> is the meting 30 mins or one hour?
14:34:00 <mark-burnett> I think some of us usually only have 30 minutes
14:34:20 <mark-burnett> We may have blocked off the whole hour though
14:34:43 <mattmceuen> one more good constraint to take into account when rescheduling :)
14:34:51 <hogepodge> #link https://github.com/openstack-infra/meetbot/blob/master/doc/Manual.txt meetbot manual
14:35:11 <mark-burnett> Thanks Chris :)
14:35:28 <mark-burnett> Ok guys, thanks for coming.  I think this is the most participation we've had so far!
14:35:34 <mark-burnett> #endmeeting