14:00:16 <dhellmann> #startmeeting tc
14:00:18 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Dec  6 14:00:16 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dhellmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:20 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:20 <TheJulia> \o
14:00:22 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
14:00:26 <dhellmann> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-December/000467.html agenda for this meeting
14:00:26 <gmann> o/
14:00:33 <dhellmann> #topic roll call
14:00:34 <dhellmann> tc-members, please indicate if you are present for the logs
14:00:40 <cdent> o/
14:00:42 <dims> o/
14:00:51 <fungi> howdy
14:00:53 <gmann> o/
14:01:19 <TheJulia> Good morning
14:01:41 <dhellmann> I count 6 of us. I know smcginnis, ttx, evrardjp, and zaneb all said they would miss today
14:02:16 <TheJulia> Do we wait for one more to have a majority?
14:02:36 <dhellmann> we're not voting on anything, so I don't think we need to worry about quorum rules
14:03:01 <dhellmann> we're looking for mugsie, lbragstad , and mnaser
14:03:29 * mugsie is on the way, just walking back to a computer
14:03:37 <dhellmann> very good
14:03:43 <fungi> you, sir, need a wearable computer
14:03:50 <dhellmann> let's go ahead with some old business then
14:03:58 <dhellmann> #topic dhellmann complete liaison assignments using the random generator
14:03:58 <dhellmann> #info I have updated the team liaisons in the wiki. Please review the list of projects to which you are assigned.
14:03:58 <dhellmann> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_health_tracker#Project_Teams
14:04:06 <dhellmann> does anyone have questions or comments about the health-check process for this cycle?
14:04:46 <TheJulia> I do not.
14:05:01 <gmann> nothing from me
14:05:03 <dhellmann> taking (mostly) silence as a no, and moving on
14:05:10 <cdent> only to comment that since summit, I've not had a chance to do much checking (I did do some there)
14:05:24 <fungi> nope. i was planning to try to initiate mine via the new mailing list but wanted to make sure the old lists were closed down first so that the teams in question are more likely to be subscribed. as of two days ago that's done so i have no other reasons to procrastinate
14:05:40 * dhellmann hasn't started, yet, either
14:05:51 * mugsie needs to start as well
14:05:52 <TheJulia> nor have I started, time is always an issue :|
14:05:53 * cdent feels less bad, now
14:05:59 <dhellmann> #topic tc-members review the chair duties document
14:06:00 <cdent> :)
14:06:06 <dhellmann> #info The draft document has been merged and is now available in the governance repo as CHAIR.rst.
14:06:06 <dhellmann> #link http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/CHAIR.rst
14:06:42 <dhellmann> Are there any remaining questions about the list of chair duties? There weren't a lot of comments about missing or confusing items in the review itself, but that may need to wait for the next chair to try to interpret what I wrote. :-)
14:06:59 <cdent> the current list seems pretty good and complete
14:07:04 <cdent> and doesn't over-reach
14:07:18 <fungi> i bet it's awesome, i just need to finish reading it ;)
14:07:43 <dhellmann> heh
14:07:43 <gmann> yeah that was good and having list clear help new chair. thanks dhellmann
14:07:46 <TheJulia> It seems good, I think under joint leadership section a note should likely be made that the board should be updated on current events/status and that it is not a topic discussion time.
14:07:48 <mugsie> it seems pretty complete - the only worry would be the workload, but that would have to something someone would take in to account when running
14:08:09 <dhellmann> yeah, and I expect some things could be delegated, too
14:08:41 <dhellmann> TheJulia : that may be worth noting, although it may also change from meeting to meeting as expectations change
14:09:28 <mugsie> yeah - i think those meetings are going to be a lot more fluid going forward
14:09:40 <TheJulia> I concur it can change, which is kind of why I felt like it should be a note, some status needs to be conveyed as our context because otherwise our discussions would be in two separate contexties
14:10:36 <dhellmann> if there's nothing else, we can move on to some of our active initiatives
14:10:53 <dhellmann> #topic keeping up with python 3 releases
14:10:58 <dhellmann> We are ready to approve zaneb's resolution for a process for tracking python 3 versions.
14:10:58 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/613145
14:11:06 <dhellmann> There is one wording update that we should prepare for approval as well.
14:11:06 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/621461
14:11:12 <dhellmann> The next step will be to approve Sean's patch describing the runtimes supported for Stein.
14:11:12 <dhellmann> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/611080/
14:11:20 <dhellmann> I would like for us to complete this work over the next week.
14:11:26 <dhellmann> Are we ready to vote on all of those items, or do we need additional changes?
14:11:55 <cdent> I haven't checked in the last 12 hours, but just prior to that there were some clarifications desired
14:12:08 <fungi> i feel like i'm ready to vote, was mostly waiting to see where those conversations ended up first
14:12:11 * TheJulia looks to see why one has a -1 now
14:12:26 * gmann will review tomorrow
14:14:04 <dhellmann> that -1 seems to apply to the stein patch but the comment was left on the resolution
14:14:34 <mugsie> the py3 (start of the chain) may cause testing matrixes to balloon  - specifically the "Each Python 3 version that was still used in any integration tests at the  beginning of the development cycle" line
14:14:50 <mnaser> Sorry for missing the meeting. I’ve had a personal thing come up this morning.
14:15:00 <mugsie> yeah, the -1 is that this is not how we did it for the stein cycle, which I think is OK
14:15:02 <dhellmann> mnaser: no worries, I hope everything is ok
14:15:27 <TheJulia> concur, I think we can proceed as zane did also follow-up on wording in the same paragraph
14:15:46 <dhellmann> ok, please vote and/or comment accordingly so we can see where everyone stands
14:15:59 <mnaser> dhellmann: it is all good now. A friend somehow disappeared overnight but we’ve just managed to find them. Keep your phones charged!
14:16:03 <dhellmann> when folks wait to vote until the conversation is "done" it tends to make the process drag on
14:16:11 <dhellmann> mnaser : whew!
14:16:54 <dhellmann> ok, moving on then
14:16:55 <dhellmann> we also have a few items of follow-up from the Berlin Forum sessions
14:16:59 <dhellmann> #topic Vision for OpenStack clouds
14:17:06 <dhellmann> We approved the basic vision at the forum.
14:17:06 <dhellmann> #link Vision for OpenStack Clouds  https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html
14:17:06 <dhellmann> #link forum session notes http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-December/000431.html
14:17:12 <dhellmann> At the same time, there were several suggestions for updates. Are all of those filed as patches?
14:17:18 <dhellmann> What is our goal for having those reviewed?
14:17:53 <fungi> i have one outstanding on my to do list i'm hoping to get pushed up later today
14:18:09 <fungi> but it should be a brief followup amendment
14:18:22 <mugsie> I only see one follow up so far?
14:18:26 <fungi> i'm ready to +1 the current state regardless
14:18:31 <dhellmann> would it be reasonable to set a goal of having those reviewed and done by our next meeting in January?
14:18:48 <fungi> that sounds reasonable
14:18:49 <gmann> i pushed one  - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621516/
14:18:50 <dhellmann> that's a long time, but with the holiday period in there...
14:18:59 <gmann> cdent: ^^ updated with few more clarification
14:19:00 <dhellmann> gmann : ack, thanks for that link
14:19:04 <mugsie> yeah, that seems OK, with the holiday period
14:19:12 <cdent> thanks gmann
14:19:31 <TheJulia> holidays are going to begin to cause people to disappear starting as early as next week, so we should "try" to wrap it up in the next week otherwise it may languish in review for a while
14:19:44 <dhellmann> #info our goal is to have all updates to the vision from the discussion at the forum reviewed and approved by the next meeting in january
14:19:50 <mugsie> does mordred own the drafting of one, or did I miss the SDK change?
14:20:08 <mugsie> sorry s/SDK/region/
14:20:23 <TheJulia> mugsie: I interpretted it as mordred owning that, but it would likely be good to follow-up with him
14:20:29 <dhellmann> I was hoping zaneb would be here today to summarize that, but yes I think there's one on regions yet to be written
14:21:30 <dhellmann> is there anything else to talk about on the technical vision?
14:21:58 <dhellmann> right, moving on again then
14:21:58 <dhellmann> #topic Train cycle goals
14:22:05 <dhellmann> I posted my summary of the forum session.
14:22:05 <dhellmann> #link  http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-November/000055.html
14:22:11 <dhellmann> Each of the candidate goals have work to be done before they could be selected, so we will
14:22:11 <dhellmann> need to work with the sponsors and champions to see where enough
14:22:11 <dhellmann> progress is made to let us choose from among the proposals.
14:22:13 <mugsie> I see I proposed a goal :/
14:22:22 <dhellmann> #info lbragstad and evrardjp have agreed to lead the selection process for the Train goals.
14:22:26 <TheJulia> Zane also started another discussion if memory serves
14:22:47 <TheJulia> oh, no it was lance
14:22:55 <dhellmann> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-December/000558.html
14:23:10 <dhellmann> yep, thanks, I forgot to include that one in my notes
14:23:55 <dhellmann> the thing that strikes me is that all of the suggested goals have a lot of pre-work to do
14:24:00 <mnaser> We should probably think about having one or two projects trial a goal first
14:24:01 <TheJulia> My whole point in reply was that we need to better define what each item entails and the scope or stepping of each before we try and make a decision
14:24:01 <mugsie> yeah.
14:24:06 <mnaser> Just to see what the work looks like
14:24:22 <dhellmann> and that's going to make it hard to ensure we have even 1 of them ready to go
14:25:02 <mugsie> Yeah, the way we had nova's check in advance helped a lot this year
14:25:09 <dhellmann> because I'm not sure it's really clear to the proposers that we're expecting them to do that work
14:25:25 <mnaser> That way we avoid being in a situation where we don’t have a clear path to accomplish the goal (avoiding the historic going back and forth). But that’s just addition to actually picking the goals
14:25:45 <dhellmann> mnaser : yes, I think that fits into the "pre-work needed" category
14:25:47 <gmann> may be we can divide the osc one into 2 part with 2 cycle goal but it need volunteers to do work..
14:26:01 <fungi> though we've had prior goals where it got implemented in a couple of projects but once we asked more projects to do the same we got pushback because of the variety of implementations
14:26:03 <dhellmann> gmann : yes, there were at least 3 separate phases for the OSC goal
14:26:40 <fungi> i agree having a couple of projects try to implement first could help, but it won't entirely solve that problem
14:26:57 <dhellmann> and that step seems unnecessary with the OSC goal, for example
14:26:58 <gmann> yeah and till we do not make them goal all these part, it is stuck always
14:27:09 <mugsie> yeah, if we assume all projects look like $THING, it can make it hard to implement elsewhere
14:27:10 <mnaser> I think we should start prioritizing the goal selection process, or even see if there’s other ones to seek out for now if those seem too big
14:27:14 <dhellmann> so it's useful to have a couple of projects try something new, but not necessary all the time
14:27:41 <TheJulia> I think it is going to depend on the effort and the desired end state
14:28:09 <dhellmann> what specific guidance would you give lbragstad and evrardjp on that?
14:28:12 <mnaser> Could this be something that we want to reach the community out with via the foundations new newsletter?
14:28:14 <mugsie> yeah - things like passing request-id may be able to be done in say oslo.context, and then small tweaks in projects, but most of them are pretty big
14:28:16 <gmann> i think OSC should be  alone goal for that cycle otherwise it might be hard to drive other goal along with that
14:28:41 <mnaser> I feel like we might get more feedback from a wider audience than the usual one that’s in the mailing list
14:28:59 <dhellmann> sure, going for broader input is all part of the process
14:29:00 <mugsie> healthcheck needs someone to write the framework and tests for oslo.db / messaging, but should be low impact for the projects
14:29:02 <TheJulia> I think it would help to make it more relatable, even if it is just "this is being discussed in three phases, and roughly entails x,y,z" Otherwise you would have to have been present in the room for the discussion to understand how it might impat you
14:29:03 <TheJulia> impact
14:29:15 <dhellmann> do you think we need new ideas now? or do we need to focus on refining these ideas we have?
14:29:46 <mnaser> dhellmann: I think that’s the question we should discuss. It doesn’t seem like everyone is super convinced at the current list of ideas and how feasible it might be
14:29:51 <TheJulia> I think we should always be open to new ideas, but we should clearly continuously refine
14:29:54 <mugsie> I think if we cannot get people to sign up to do the work for these new goals, we need new ones
14:30:26 <dhellmann> mugsie : that's a pretty clear way to filter the list :-)
14:30:35 <mugsie> (for the record, I would love healthchecks, but I didn't propose it :) - I know I will not be able to )
14:31:04 * mugsie wasn't even in the room at the time these were discussed :)
14:31:15 <dhellmann> I think your name came up because of past interest
14:31:47 <mugsie> yeah - possibly aspiers or someone from self-healing sig might be able to run with it
14:31:52 <cdent> the goal situation has a history of needing a super strong champion, from the outset. in the current cycle mriedem and dhellmann have demonstrated a lot of ownership and leadership
14:31:58 <cdent> if we don't have that, we're kinda stuck
14:32:10 <cdent> so maybe instead of seeking out goals, we need to seek out people
14:32:17 <cdent> and let them choose a goal :)
14:32:18 <mugsie> cdent: ++
14:32:22 <dhellmann> I think aspiers was in the room, so that may have been how that one came up
14:32:28 <TheJulia> cdent: that is a really good point
14:32:29 <gmann> cdent: true
14:32:32 * aspiers wakes up
14:33:26 <cdent> I admit that I don't like that this is the case. I think it should be easier to orchestrate in a more consensual way, but... pudding
14:33:33 <TheJulia> cdent: I also suspect many of us who are entrenched have goals and desires that are hyper focused or that might not be practical or reasonable across the community, where as if someone who wants to get involved from the outside wants magical-thing-z to be a thing across the board, then they are going to be much more motiated to engage
14:33:52 <cdent> TheJulia: yes
14:33:58 <aspiers> I'm definitely not a super strong champion but I would love to see health checks finally implemented across many projects, so maybe I can help
14:34:25 <TheJulia> maybe a half and half effort, or a thought for Train
14:34:26 <dhellmann> perhaps that makes the "hard delete resources" suggestion more likely to be successful, since there were folks willing to work on that
14:34:26 <TheJulia> err
14:34:28 <TheJulia> post train
14:34:33 <fungi> champions need not be herculean
14:34:52 <cdent> no, but they need to be verbose and committed
14:34:59 <cdent> (at least thus far)
14:35:16 <fungi> aspiers seems like a verbose and committed individual to me ;)
14:35:19 <aspiers> I can talk to my manager about the idea of taking this onto my plate
14:35:19 <TheJulia> and even if they are herculean, I doubt they could carry two earths
14:35:36 <aspiers> fungi: hah thanks, I'm good at pretending at least ;-)
14:36:06 <fungi> TheJulia: that sounds more atlassian, but i concur
14:36:20 * dhellmann points out the double meaning behind "goal champions need to be committed"
14:36:42 <TheJulia> fungi: I think there was a trick somewhere along the way in mythology
14:36:51 * cdent sends dhellmann home
14:37:00 <TheJulia> lol
14:37:02 <aspiers> X-D
14:37:07 <TheJulia> I sense we can move on for now :)
14:37:16 <fungi> yes please ;)
14:37:21 <dhellmann> so, it sounds like our advice for evrardjp and lbragstad is to focus on finding goals with champions ready to do the work
14:37:27 <mugsie> dhellmann: ++
14:37:29 <dhellmann> or at least drive the work
14:37:35 <cdent> drive
14:37:38 <fungi> agreed
14:37:40 <TheJulia> dhellmann: and be open to other possibilities I think
14:38:00 <dhellmann> other possibilities for what?
14:38:09 <mugsie> yeah, don;t limit ourselves to the 3 we have if we people willing to do the work
14:38:20 <dhellmann> oh, yeah, we have a long backlog still
14:38:23 <mugsie> on other ones (that are resonable)
14:38:26 <fungi> other possible goals, i assume
14:38:32 <TheJulia> if they find a champion that has a different take, that we are not prescribing or dictating, but otherwise enabling and expressing desire
14:38:55 <dhellmann> ok
14:39:15 <dhellmann> I had 1 more topic on the agenda for today then
14:39:17 <dhellmann> #topic Other TC outcomes from Forum
14:39:23 <dhellmann> We had several other forum sessions, and should make sure we have a good list of any promised actions that came from those discussions.
14:39:44 <dhellmann> do we have any sessions for which we haven't had a summary posted, yet?
14:40:12 <TheJulia> I'm still working on the community outreach session summary, but I _think_ all the action items have already been raised and initiated
14:40:29 <dhellmann> excellent
14:40:37 <fungi> i think i owe a summary of the opendev session
14:40:48 <TheJulia> I should have that done sometime this morning, and will verify and follow-up on that
14:41:14 <TheJulia> After I go back to sleep for an hour or so
14:41:34 <dhellmann> I have not gone through the summaries to copy action items onto a central list. Should we do that? Are there any that we need to be tracking as a group?
14:42:40 <dhellmann> I'm going to take that as a "no" then :-)
14:42:41 <TheJulia> I feel like sending a summary is more an action of trying to convey context and remind others. Creating central lists might be good... at the same time I can see a case where it might be a bad idea
14:43:03 <gmann> i remember mnaser idea of checking with community about what TC should or should not do
14:43:27 <gmann> that might be good to track and work as group based on feedback
14:43:49 <mnaser> I think I might have picked it up, I’m slowly unpacking my berlin baggage :)
14:43:50 <dhellmann> that applies to the work on the "role of the TC" right? https://review.openstack.org/622400
14:43:54 <TheJulia> gmann: Indeed... I guess that kind of shifts the needle for me into that we need a list of future relavent items, but maybe not all items
14:44:10 <mnaser> I wanted to bring up that review to the community soon
14:44:20 <mnaser> Once we had a good idea of what it looks like
14:44:57 <dhellmann> yeah, it's probably worth having the tc do a pass for wording and content before we advertise it
14:44:59 <cdent> My understanding was that we were goig to give it a few days to get review from tc people, and then make a wider "Hey, look!"
14:45:01 <cdent> jinz
14:45:05 <cdent> jinx, even
14:45:29 <dhellmann> ok, so everyone go review that patch :-)
14:46:04 <dhellmann> did any other big items come up that we need to be tracking at the tc level? I wasn't in all of the sessions, so I may have missed some items.
14:46:16 <TheJulia> I concur
14:46:24 <gmann> i check this as one of item in my health check of project about "what they except TC should do more for them" but no feedback yet
14:46:27 <dhellmann> and I mean "at the tc level" as in on the agenda for this meeting, rather than on our individual todo lists
14:46:55 <dhellmann> oh, that's an interesting question to have some answers to
14:46:57 <cdent> not that I recall. It all seeed quite chill.
14:47:07 <cdent> seemed
14:47:24 <cdent> (except for the walks to the far side of the world)
14:47:35 <mugsie> yeah - I don;t remember anything major
14:47:35 <TheJulia> There is one from the community outreach regarding meetings and encouraging agendas and the like. I feel like that same discussion came up in another session too
14:47:53 <dhellmann> did I include enough context in the agenda email I sent out for this meeting?
14:47:55 <TheJulia> No volunteer but I think that was going to be something that I would go find the appropriate text and amend it
14:48:06 <TheJulia> dhellmann: meaning for the community at large, not just for the tc
14:48:28 <mnaser> I liked the idea of doing a “how working with upstream is beneficial”
14:48:29 <dhellmann> yeah, I'm not sure what the action was there, so I was just asking for feedback on my agenda
14:48:54 <TheJulia> oh, yes, you provided great context in your agenda
14:49:00 <mugsie> dhellmann: for this meeting, I think so. I was able to flick through it this morning, and read up on the topics
14:49:06 <TheJulia> I wish it was not in an email, but I'll live :)
14:49:20 <dhellmann> mnaser : yeah, that's a good one to remember. I think we talked about trying to make that a keynote theme.
14:49:25 <gmann> dhellmann: yeah. it was very clear
14:49:58 <mnaser> I don’t think we got anything actionable out of it (and probably still way too early for Denver)
14:49:58 <cdent> TheJulia: where do you want it?
14:50:03 <dhellmann> TheJulia : given the concern that we not get too deep into community issues, I want to differentiate between suggestions on the wiki page and the official agenda
14:50:11 <dhellmann> but I'm open to suggestions for how better to do that
14:50:19 <fungi> on the meetings overhaul idea, the infra team did pick up the suggestion and incorporate it (having a cut-off for agenda additions so people could decide whether it was worth attending a particular meeting)
14:50:32 <TheJulia> I just find email a pain, but that is just me. I recognize I'm a bit of an oddball in that regard
14:51:08 <TheJulia> pages I can go load tend to have less clutter, things that can distract me from going and reading, but again, this is more a comment coming from how I read and interpret information
14:51:37 * TheJulia admits she is an oddball and will just deal with it
14:51:51 <dhellmann> I tend for forward emails I need to keep handy into evernote myself
14:52:11 <TheJulia> That is not a bad idea
14:52:37 <dhellmann> especially if there's an action I need to take based on the content
14:52:48 * mugsie takes note of that idea
14:52:56 <dhellmann> if we're going to trade productivity tips I think we're probably done with the meeting :-)
14:53:01 <dhellmann> #topic next meeting
14:53:13 <dhellmann> #info the next TC meeting will be 3 January 2019 1400 UTC in #openstack-tc
14:53:32 <dhellmann> I assume that date is OK for everyone?
14:53:37 <cdent> is for me
14:53:43 <TheJulia> works for me
14:53:52 <mugsie> works for me
14:53:54 <TheJulia> too early in the year to be metal-tubing
14:54:06 <mugsie> you hope
14:54:10 <gmann> i might be on holiday that time, first week of jan
14:54:12 <lbragstad> will an invite be sent out?
14:54:15 <dhellmann> if we find that we have a large group unable to make it, we can talk about skipping
14:54:20 <TheJulia> mugsie: :(
14:54:23 <dhellmann> lbragstad : it's on eavesdrop
14:54:41 <dhellmann> #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Technical_Committee_Meeting
14:54:43 <mnaser> It’s okay for me. I wanted to ask if we wanted to have an adhoc meeting to discuss and figure out goals too.
14:55:00 <mnaser> Just to get some traction going
14:55:03 <dhellmann> I expect we will have many discussions about goals
14:55:03 * lbragstad must have been creating them manually - oops
14:55:12 <dhellmann> I'll leave that to lbragstad and evrardjp to organize
14:55:13 <TheJulia> mnaser: I think it might be a good idea, I'm just worried about the time of the year
14:55:26 <mnaser> Let’s defer that to the next meeting
14:55:26 <fungi> i'll be around for january 3, so sounds fine
14:55:26 <dhellmann> If you have suggestions for topics for the next meeting, please add them to the wiki at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda_Suggestions
14:55:36 <mugsie> yeah, I think the 3rd might be the soonest we can expect a meeting from now
14:55:38 <TheJulia> Thanks dhellmann!
14:55:46 <dhellmann> Thank you, everyone!
14:55:59 <mnaser> Thanks douggg!
14:56:05 <gmann> thanks dhellmann
14:56:12 <dhellmann> #endmeeting