15:00:01 <mnaser> #startmeeting tc
15:00:02 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Mar 25 15:00:01 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mnaser. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:03 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:05 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tc'
15:00:11 <mnaser> #topic rollcall
15:00:12 <mnaser> o/
15:00:14 <gmann> o/
15:00:15 <ricolin> o/
15:00:37 <belmoreira> o/
15:01:05 <yoctozepto> o/
15:02:00 <mnaser> #topic Follow up on past action items
15:02:17 <mnaser> ricolin Add retired SIGs section for governance-sigs repo
15:02:39 <ricolin> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance-sigs/+/783000
15:02:56 <ricolin> just propose a patch to update current retire process
15:03:11 <ricolin> please take a review:)
15:03:48 <ricolin> also send a ML for discuss about retire Containers SIG http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-March/021298.html
15:03:52 <ricolin> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-March/021298.html
15:04:12 <ricolin> Hopefully we can have someone take over containers sig
15:04:33 <mnaser> great
15:04:42 <mnaser> mnaser drop "Audit SIG list and chairs" from agenda <- done
15:05:31 <mnaser> mnaser reach out to OSA team about dropping nv jobs from gate <- did reach out, but did not follow up on it
15:06:15 <mnaser> #topic PTG
15:06:21 <mnaser> gmann: wanna take this as you've taken most of the lead on this?
15:06:29 <gmann> sure
15:06:34 <gmann> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-March/021283.html
15:06:49 <gmann> posted on ML about doodle poll and etherpad
15:06:56 <gmann> #link https://doodle.com/poll/2zy8hex4r6wvidqk
15:07:12 <gmann> we need to select the slots by today as we already passed the deadline
15:07:31 <gmann> and this is etherpad to collect the topics #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-xena-ptg
15:07:48 <gmann> mnaser: diablo_rojo_phon are pending to vote for slots
15:08:14 <gmann> and after that we can decide here about best available non-conflicting slots
15:08:29 <mnaser> ok, i'll add my times t oday
15:08:39 <gmann> thanks
15:09:17 <gmann> then we can wait for tomorrow to discuss the final slots?
15:09:31 <mnaser> sounds good to me
15:09:46 <gmann> we have penalty of slots available in PTG rooms https://ethercalc.net/oz7q0gds9zfi
15:10:23 <gmann> one item i think diablo_rojo_phon added 'Teams that usually meet that aren't signed up:'
15:10:47 <gmann> I think there are many teams have not signed up for the PTG but may be diablo_rojo_phon has the data
15:11:20 <yoctozepto> yes, that would be interesting to know
15:11:45 <yoctozepto> and yes, let's discuss the best slot tomorrow
15:11:58 <gmann> once we have data, as TC liaisons we can reach out to teams?
15:12:08 <gmann> yeah.
15:12:21 <yoctozepto> I agree
15:12:26 <gmann> once we select the slots, we have time to add topics
15:12:27 <yoctozepto> but do we have current liaisons?
15:12:43 <gmann> yoctozepto: I need to reset, waiting for PTL assignment patches to merge
15:12:45 <yoctozepto> (I mean, did not they reset?)
15:12:50 <yoctozepto> ah, OK!
15:12:53 <gmann> which can be done in this meeting
15:13:07 <yoctozepto> let's do it then :-)
15:13:13 <gmann> otherwise they conflict on merge with the PTL assignments patches
15:13:33 <gmann> that all form my side on PTG topic
15:13:46 <mnaser> awesome
15:13:48 <ricolin> gmann, while you plan to reset TC liaisons, can you also added TC liaisons for SIGs too?
15:13:50 <yoctozepto> agreed, nice
15:14:09 <ricolin> As we discussed in last meeting
15:14:34 <gmann> ricolin: sure, let me check the script for that
15:14:45 <ricolin> gmann, thx
15:14:57 <mnaser> cool, can we move ono?
15:15:02 <gmann> yeah
15:15:52 <mnaser> #topic Gate performance and heavy job configs (dansmith)
15:16:04 <dansmith> sorry, rc1 fire in -nova
15:16:16 <yoctozepto> uh-oh
15:16:22 <yoctozepto> happy extinguishing!
15:16:22 <dansmith> I don't really have anything for this this week
15:16:33 <mnaser> no worries
15:16:37 <mnaser> it'll be on our list
15:16:39 <mnaser> good luck :)
15:16:41 <dansmith> I haven't been involved in enough traffic to know if there are still lots of cinder fails or not
15:16:54 <dansmith> but lower volume has made life better regardless :)
15:16:57 <yoctozepto> ack
15:17:35 <mnaser> cool, we can hop onto next topic
15:17:41 <mnaser> #topic Consensus on lower constraints testing (gmann)
15:18:01 <gmann> sent the consensus of our last meeting on ML #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-March/021204.html
15:18:03 <diablo_rojo> gmann, sorry double meeting-ing
15:18:11 <diablo_rojo> we can circle back to my topic at the end
15:18:26 <gmann> and added patch for project-team-guide #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/781900
15:18:37 <gmann> diablo_rojo: sure, np!
15:18:42 <dansmith> glance has already proposed patches to drop those tests in wallaby and victoria
15:18:48 <gmann> +1
15:19:08 <gmann> once 781900 is merged then we are done on l-c things
15:19:24 <mnaser> perfect
15:19:31 <mnaser> awesome, happy we were able to move forward with it
15:19:40 <gmann> and from next meeting, we can drop this topic
15:20:05 <gmann> diablo_rojo: can you please check the reply on your question in 781900 ?
15:20:22 <diablo_rojo> gmann, yes I can do that too
15:20:26 <gmann> thanks
15:20:29 <mnaser> ok, cool, well no that note
15:20:31 <mnaser> #topic Elect TC chair
15:20:55 <mnaser> i noticed gmann put up their tc chair nomination and i support them, i've done this for a while and it'll be good to cycle things up
15:21:08 <mnaser> (i.e. i'm not running for chair)
15:21:10 <yoctozepto> 'tis the link ~> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/782811
15:21:29 <mnaser> perhaps if anyone else is interested they could also post their nomination, otherwise we can land this
15:21:35 <gmann> +1
15:21:49 <yoctozepto> are we waiting only today?
15:21:56 <yoctozepto> is there a schedule?
15:22:02 <mnaser> we've never really had a system or a schedule for this
15:22:08 <yoctozepto> ack
15:22:24 <gmann> yeah, may be we can wait for next meeting or so?
15:22:38 <gmann> or until all TC members ack on current nomination
15:22:45 <mnaser> eh, maybe lets just ask tc-members to vote on that patch
15:22:51 <gmann> yeah
15:22:55 <mnaser> if they vote yes, that means they arent running i assume
15:22:56 <ricolin> mnaser, +1
15:23:03 <yoctozepto> ++
15:23:09 <fungi> worth remembering, this is not going to be a vote of the entire tc because you're still missing a member
15:23:13 <belmoreira> +1
15:23:30 <belmoreira> fungi good point
15:23:38 <yoctozepto> unfortunately!
15:23:38 <belmoreira> shouldn't we discuss that first?
15:23:49 <yoctozepto> I think we are going to today?
15:23:59 <gmann> yeah, we have that as next topic
15:24:03 <mnaser> well, for what it's wroth, it'll be tc-1
15:24:09 <gmann> or after PTL one
15:24:11 <yoctozepto> tc--
15:24:29 <mnaser> lets hop into the tc one
15:24:32 <yoctozepto> and then liasons
15:24:35 <mnaser> #topic Discussion for one Vacant TC seat (gmann)
15:24:49 <mnaser> personally i think leaving it at 8 is ok
15:24:58 <dansmith> me too
15:25:05 <fungi> the charter disagrees?
15:25:08 <jungleboyj> o/
15:25:11 <yoctozepto> except for it being an even number and the sad charter
15:25:15 <jungleboyj> Sorry for being late btw.
15:25:31 <mnaser> then we can make a charter change, i doubt we're going to enter some giant deadlock as 8
15:25:33 <ricolin> I think we can keep it 8 till next chances to correct it
15:25:35 <yoctozepto> jungleboyj: it's only 25/60, still below the half
15:25:47 <fungi> and i'd hesitate to suggest taking votes of the tc to alter the charter when the tc is incomplete, if you want to be certain the changes you make to the charter are valid you need to fill the vacancy first
15:25:56 <yoctozepto> mnaser: yeah, I don't expect deadlocks
15:26:07 <jungleboyj> :-)  Missed the first ping and got distracted by other people pinging me.
15:26:09 <fungi> i'm curious why there's a desire not to actually follow the guidlines laid out in the charter
15:26:15 <belmoreira> even numbers are not good!
15:26:16 <gmann> charter change need 2/3 of total TC which still can be completed
15:26:28 <mnaser> fungi: what exactly do we do in this case?
15:26:29 <jungleboyj> What happened to a special election for spotz ?
15:26:49 <mnaser> i don't know how i feel about late entrances, we've previously denied people for late proposals to be honest
15:26:53 <fungi> mnaser: the charter says, quite plainly, that if there's a vacant seat and it's more than a few weeks to the next election, you hold a special election
15:27:04 <yoctozepto> yeah, I remember that special election promise
15:27:18 <fungi> see the election section of the charter, last bullet
15:27:23 <mnaser> ok cool, so i guess then we have nothing to discuss
15:27:26 <mnaser> lets get an election for one person going
15:27:46 <yoctozepto> ++
15:27:47 <belmoreira> mnaser this is not "late entrances". It's a new election
15:27:47 <gmann> for me it is not clear if special election mention in charter is for election vacant term or in between vacancy
15:27:50 <jungleboyj> ++  Assuming that spotz is still interested.
15:27:51 <fungi> i'm happy to set that up, just wanted to make sure that was the plan first
15:28:03 <fungi> gmann: this is between terms now
15:28:15 <mnaser> it doesn't seem like there's much of other choices
15:28:18 <fungi> it's a technicality that the seat was vacated on the day the election closed
15:28:27 <belmoreira> ++ for the new election. But we should expect new candidates
15:28:32 <yoctozepto> I'm with fungi on this, we have nothing better
15:28:34 <mnaser> so maybe we should start to do that asap so we can have a chair
15:28:46 <yoctozepto> belmoreira: ++ on that comment
15:28:48 <jungleboyj> ++
15:28:55 <gmann> ok.
15:28:58 <fungi> yes, i'll get the announcements going today, we can have a short period for nominations, and for voting
15:29:05 <yoctozepto> verrry short
15:29:06 <yoctozepto> :-)
15:29:07 <jungleboyj> belmoreira:  agreed
15:29:13 <gmann> so we should open campaign also for that?
15:29:15 <mnaser> having said that, if we have enough people voting for gmann to be chair
15:29:22 <mnaser> we should probably just land that change
15:29:23 <dansmith> should be normal nom time if we're going to do an election right/
15:29:27 <gmann> or just nomination and then election
15:29:32 <dansmith> totally not fair to have a 1-hour nom time or anything like that
15:29:39 <yoctozepto> lol
15:29:46 <dansmith> tbh, this seems like kinda weird to me
15:29:56 <fungi> yes, i think the only concern there would be if whoever wins the special election wanted to volunteer as a chair candidate, but i haven't looked closely at the chair selection part of the charter to know if that's really a problem
15:29:58 <dansmith> like making a special exception for a late submission
15:30:01 <ricolin> mnaser, but that will give the new elected member no chance to run for chair
15:30:05 <gmann> yeah, we should follow the week or so nomination at least
15:30:09 <dansmith> and if it was some random person, I wonder if that would really be happening, but.. whatever :)
15:30:12 <mnaser> ricolin: but if the majority of tc members already want gmann to run
15:30:20 <fungi> dansmith: no special exception, there's going to be an election, additional people can volunteer if they want to be candidates
15:30:25 <belmoreira> mnaser it would be great if we give the new member the opportunity to vote
15:30:34 <mnaser> ok
15:30:46 <mnaser> (i gotta admit, this seems very bureaucratic right now and going to slow us down a bunch)
15:30:52 <jungleboyj> fungi:  ++
15:31:02 <yoctozepto> mnaser: yeah, it's a sad occurrence
15:31:03 <mnaser> but sure, let's have a full on election, i'll keep serving chair duties for another week or two as we settle all this out.
15:31:07 <dansmith> so, we need what like two weeks?
15:31:07 <gmann> yeah, we can hold Chair by then, with our charter previous Chair is default chair until new chair is being elected
15:31:11 <jungleboyj> Yay for red tape.
15:31:17 <dansmith> a week to let people know that noms will open in a week, then a week for noms,
15:31:22 <dansmith> then a week for voting right?
15:31:22 <belmoreira> mnaser ++ but I think is the right thing to do
15:31:26 <fungi> good reason to put more effort into getting people to run for the tc next time, or spending this cycle amending the charter to schedule further reducing the tc size
15:31:34 <yoctozepto> jungleboyj: YAY!
15:31:48 <mnaser> we've got other important topics to deal with like, keystone not having a ptl
15:31:56 <jungleboyj> Indeed.
15:31:57 <fungi> dansmith: i said "short" we can make it a few days for nominations, no campaigning period, a couple days for voting
15:31:58 <mnaser> so can we just get started with a full on election for one vacant tc seat
15:31:58 <yoctozepto> agreed
15:32:06 <dansmith> fungi: how is that fair?
15:32:27 <fungi> dansmith: how is it not? almost everyone volunteers candidacy or votes on the last day anyway
15:32:27 <dansmith> fungi: people need time to run it by their managers, consider the commitment, etc
15:32:30 <gmann> how about this: noms open 25-3 until 1-4 and then election form 2-4 until 8-4 ?
15:32:30 <yoctozepto> dansmith: people already had a chance to participate
15:32:38 <yoctozepto> this is a special election
15:32:44 <yoctozepto> does not have to be full blown
15:32:45 <yoctozepto> but realistic
15:32:55 <mnaser> this isn't a special election imho, it has to be normal if we want to be following 'the charter'
15:33:03 <yoctozepto> oh
15:33:05 <mnaser> if this is just a procedural thing so we can put one more name to make it 9
15:33:15 <gmann> yeah special election but we should give time to people to think on running
15:33:18 <fungi> the charter doesn't say how long a special election needs to be, it just says to hold a special election
15:33:20 <mnaser> then let's just not pretend it is and just put in the late candidate and call it a day
15:33:31 <yoctozepto> xD
15:33:31 * dansmith has a call, brb
15:33:47 <fungi> i'm all for less bureaucracy, but if you want less bureaucracy YOU NEED THE CHARTER REVISED
15:33:48 <yoctozepto> I love it how each one of us has a slightly different opinion on that
15:33:57 <mnaser> yoctozepto: welcome to the tc :)
15:34:00 <mnaser> that is healthy though, mostly.
15:34:03 <gmann> I feel noms for a week and then election can be of 3-4 days if needed to be
15:34:11 <yoctozepto> mnaser: yeah, it looks fine sof ar
15:34:14 <yoctozepto> so far*
15:34:30 <mnaser> how about this
15:34:37 <mnaser> open noms for 2 weeks and announce it today
15:34:45 <mnaser> that way we'll have the same normal 1 week notification before hand
15:34:46 <yoctozepto> (we surely need to prioritise the charter revision)
15:34:49 <mnaser> just merged into two
15:35:04 <fungi> i can do that. will send it shortly after the tc meeting wraps
15:35:22 <jungleboyj> yoctozepto: ++
15:35:27 <yoctozepto> that's very permissive and closes the discussion
15:35:30 <yoctozepto> let's go with that
15:35:36 <yoctozepto> what about voting time, another week?
15:35:37 <gmann> +1
15:35:49 <mnaser> yes, a week for election, same way we always do, if we have an election that is
15:36:10 <yoctozepto> well, it would be all for nothing if nobody actually stepped up
15:36:12 <gmann> yeah that is fair enough
15:36:18 <yoctozepto> what then :D
15:36:25 <diablo_rojo> Right, if no one else puts their name up then we wouldn't need the polling period.
15:36:27 <yoctozepto> need to get the charter right next time
15:36:35 <diablo_rojo> And we can be done after nominations close
15:36:44 <jungleboyj> \o/
15:36:50 <yoctozepto> diablo_rojo: well, if we stay with 8 out of 9
15:36:53 <yoctozepto> we are still deadlocked
15:36:57 <yoctozepto> :D
15:37:04 <mnaser> that's the thing i find silly
15:37:08 <mnaser> is that if we don't have anyone
15:37:08 <yoctozepto> me too
15:37:12 <mnaser> anyone can just show up
15:37:13 <mnaser> put tehir name
15:37:14 <diablo_rojo> Right, like I said, if we only get one nomination to fill the one seat
15:37:14 <mnaser> be 9th
15:37:15 <mnaser> and stay afk
15:37:35 <mnaser> so that's why this just feels like we want to have 9 people for the sakes of having 9 people
15:37:38 <yoctozepto> diablo_rojo: we were discussing as if 0 came ;-)
15:37:38 * jungleboyj is shaking my head
15:37:41 <mnaser> but anyways, this is something we should work out in the charter
15:37:46 <diablo_rojo> ohhh
15:37:52 <yoctozepto> jungleboyj: whose head?
15:37:58 <diablo_rojo> this is what I get for doing two meetings in parallel
15:37:58 <gmann> yeah, we need clear wording in charter
15:38:02 <jungleboyj> :-)  My own at the moment.
15:38:10 <yoctozepto> :D
15:38:22 <fungi> mnaser: anyone could already just show up and put in their name
15:38:27 <fungi> that's what the charter *says*
15:38:50 <jungleboyj> mnaser:  Yeah, that is no different than if we only had one candidate during the election.
15:38:58 <fungi> if you want some minimum merit barrier to entry for being a tc candidate, you need to adjust the charter
15:39:06 <mnaser> ok
15:39:12 <mnaser> now
15:39:17 * jungleboyj nominates my cat
15:39:27 <yoctozepto> fungi run that election and we worry during it
15:39:29 <mnaser> do we all ABSOLUTELY feel like the 9th person to come here HAS to be present for us to nominate a chair?
15:39:33 <gmann> jungleboyj: :)
15:39:33 <yoctozepto> that's the plan :D
15:39:44 <spotz> I'll resend my nomination
15:39:46 <mnaser> my concern is that given this might be 3 weeks
15:39:47 <fungi> (your cat needs to be a foundation individual member, might not qualify on legal grounds as a "person")
15:40:16 <jungleboyj> Oh fungi, I can always count on you to know the charter.
15:40:21 <mnaser> we'll be so close to PTG time
15:40:46 <jungleboyj> spotz:  Do you want to run for chair?
15:40:52 <gmann> then let's make nomination as 1 week and result 1 week, if that can help
15:41:00 <spotz> No on chair
15:41:07 <gmann> s/result/election
15:41:26 * dansmith is back
15:41:27 <ricolin> I think 1 for nom and 1 for election will be a good plan
15:41:28 <yoctozepto> I read the charter, can't find anything that would block us from selecting the chair
15:41:28 <mnaser> the 9th member can show up and disagree on gmann being a chair, if all 7 of us want to nominate them as chair, then that's a bit of a waste of time
15:41:33 <jungleboyj> I am ok with still voting on chair, but I know it is technically not fair.
15:41:34 <dansmith> I think that waiting on the chair voting is crazypants
15:41:46 <yoctozepto> dansmith ++
15:41:52 <dansmith> so please, we're doing the red tape thing for the election, let's not delay the chair deal
15:41:55 * diablo_rojo crosses fingers no one else tries to run and its just spotz and we can have all this done in a week
15:42:25 <jungleboyj> Ok, so lets go with a week nomination, week selection.
15:42:26 <yoctozepto> come on, the chair election is not blocked by any legal yadda-yadda
15:42:33 <jungleboyj> Then do the chair now.
15:43:03 * yoctozepto remembers being taught to never use the phrase "do somebody"
15:43:06 <mnaser> tc-members: please vote on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/782811 if you feel like gmann is a good chair candidate.  if we have consensus that cant be broken by another vote, then we'll look into it
15:43:17 <belmoreira> ok... about the 4 TC candidates? When they start the new term?
15:43:20 <mnaser> and merge it
15:43:24 <mnaser> they've already started, acls are updated
15:43:28 <mnaser> and they will be voting on that change
15:43:32 <yoctozepto> belmoreira: yes, hi!
15:43:38 <jungleboyj> yoctozepto: Ooops.
15:44:02 <mnaser> the reason i'm strerssing about this
15:44:02 <yoctozepto> jungleboyj: TIL? :D
15:44:04 <ricolin> 5 tc +1 already
15:44:08 <mnaser> is because PTG is coming up soon
15:44:15 <belmoreira> mnaser ok
15:44:16 <mnaser> and i really don't think a chair transition a week before PTG
15:44:28 <mnaser> is probably going to do us any good
15:44:41 <jungleboyj> Agreed.  Thankfully gmann has already started organizing things.  Thank you!
15:44:43 <ricolin> mnaser, agreed
15:45:05 <gmann> jungleboyj: np!
15:45:11 <mnaser> anyways, we can discuss this more, but please be mindful of that
15:45:30 <mnaser> i'm happy to continue to do my job as chair, but i just think for our overall health, we should settle this out
15:45:31 <diablo_rojo> While not ideal, its not like the new chair is going to be super new to everything and not have the context?
15:46:04 <mnaser> right, but PTG organization is generally a chair responsiblity amongst other things, so do i start doing all of those only to talk out a week before
15:46:25 <mnaser> or do i organize them with gmann and have them do the same thing which essentially means we're just red taping stuff and we're all just agreeing for something that's going to inevitebly happen
15:46:37 <diablo_rojo> Well its not like it *has* to be *only* the chair doing it ahead of time and its already happening anyway?
15:46:40 <dansmith> we have 5 already,
15:46:44 <dansmith> can we not just merge that thing?
15:46:51 <yoctozepto> merge
15:47:00 <dansmith> merge
15:47:01 <dansmith> merge
15:47:02 <dansmith> merge
15:47:03 <dansmith> merge
15:47:04 <mnaser> lol
15:47:05 <jungleboyj> merge
15:47:06 <yoctozepto> stop it
15:47:06 <diablo_rojo> Lol
15:47:17 <mnaser> i feel bad because gmann gets a not-so-great welcome :(
15:47:25 <mnaser> and im sorry they got caught in all of this
15:47:37 <gmann> no worry, its TC :)
15:47:46 <yoctozepto> gmann, know we want you as our chair!
15:47:58 <yoctozepto> at least the 5 of us :D
15:48:01 <diablo_rojo> Unfortunate timing, but that doesn't mean we appreciate gmann any less :)
15:48:10 <jungleboyj> ++
15:48:22 <yoctozepto> diablo_rojo: you vote too :D
15:48:25 <mnaser> im going to merge this.  if any tc member disagrees with it, please propose a revert with reasoning and if enough tc members agree wih the revert, we can revert.
15:48:33 <yoctozepto> ~> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/782811
15:48:42 <diablo_rojo> yoctozepto, as soon as I stop being split in half by meetings
15:49:01 <belmoreira> ops
15:49:14 <yoctozepto> diablo_rojo: is it vertical split? or a horizontal one?
15:49:16 <mnaser> now, we have a chair pending zuul.  congrats gmann, with 5/9 votes you're at 55% so over 50%
15:49:18 * yoctozepto needs to know
15:49:20 <jungleboyj> I had 9 meetings scheduled in 3 hours this morning.
15:49:26 * jungleboyj is tired of meetings.
15:49:31 <diablo_rojo> yoctozepto, vertical
15:49:43 <mnaser> and for the vacant seat, we'll wait for the results of the election
15:49:46 <yoctozepto> diablo_rojo: ack!
15:49:49 <mnaser> we have very little time
15:49:51 <jungleboyj> gmann:  Congratulations and thank you!
15:49:51 <mnaser> #topic PTL assignment for Xena cycle leaderless projects (gmann)
15:49:54 <mnaser> i'd like to focus on keystone
15:49:58 <gmann> thanks
15:50:06 <gmann> yeah next topic
15:50:10 <yoctozepto> ( gmann: congrats! )
15:50:14 <jungleboyj> ++
15:50:17 <gmann> thanks
15:50:21 <belmoreira> congrats gmann
15:50:27 <gmann> keystone meeting did not happen i think
15:50:35 <yoctozepto> at all?
15:50:41 <gmann> i pinged on keystone channel and gagehugo added it in their meeting agenda
15:50:47 <gmann> belmoreira: thanks
15:50:52 <yoctozepto> hm
15:51:15 <gagehugo> gmann: we had a meeting this week
15:51:18 <diablo_rojo> I did see knikolla sign up for PTG time for keystone.
15:51:25 <gmann> gagehugo: ohk, sorry
15:51:33 <gmann> any updates
15:51:36 <gagehugo> general consensus is using the DPL
15:51:40 <gagehugo> DPL model*
15:51:46 <mnaser> oh cool
15:52:21 <gmann> +1,
15:52:29 <mnaser> gagehugo: do you need help in figuring out the roles etc
15:52:47 <gagehugo> #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2021/keystone.2021-03-23-16.59.log.txt
15:52:51 <mnaser> gagehugo: i feel like i can already identify the security liaison :p
15:52:58 <gagehugo> haha
15:53:16 <gagehugo> knikolla mentioned he would propose moving to DPL
15:53:21 <yoctozepto> that's one very compressed meeting
15:53:21 <gagehugo> and yeah I'll assume that role
15:53:22 <gmann> gagehugo: these are three roles need as mandatory https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/782195/2/reference/projects.yaml#939
15:53:46 <gagehugo> it is :(
15:54:13 <gmann> gagehugo: knikolla thanks for taking responsibility
15:54:14 <mnaser> ok well this is some good news
15:54:52 <gmann> other than keystone, all PTL assignments and Mistral DPL model is all up and might be ready to merge?
15:54:55 <jungleboyj> gagehugo: and knikolla  Thank you!
15:55:25 <mnaser> gmann: i think so, i can go over them or  work with you on those
15:55:39 <gmann> mnaser: +1 thanks
15:55:57 <yoctozepto> thanks to our keystone heroes, gagehugo and knikolla, let the keystone realm prosper under their reign
15:56:04 <yoctozepto> (or so it says)
15:56:25 <gagehugo> :)
15:56:28 <mnaser> cool, anything else?
15:56:48 <yoctozepto> ptls clear
15:56:52 <yoctozepto> now tc liaisons?
15:57:14 <gmann> nothing from my side, its great we figured out all the leaderless things before PTG \o/
15:57:21 <yoctozepto> ++
15:57:25 <gmann> yoctozepto: yes, I will propose
15:57:54 <yoctozepto> ack, thanks
15:57:58 <mnaser> having said that
15:58:06 <yoctozepto> I was just wondering if we want to discuss anything regarding them
15:58:11 <mnaser> i think if anyone wants to propose themselves as a liaisnon for a specific project
15:58:14 <mnaser> and then the rest are randomized
15:58:28 <knikolla> o/ sorry, i'm out sick and haven't had a chance to propose the change
15:58:41 <yoctozepto> does it make sense to be the PTL and tc liaison for a project?
15:58:46 <yoctozepto> (thinking about Masakari here)
15:58:54 <yoctozepto> (tbh, that would be the shortest path result)
15:59:00 <dansmith> I forget,
15:59:08 <dansmith> do I propose my change before gmann proposes the random ones?
15:59:14 <mnaser> yes
15:59:15 <gmann> yeah, I will reset it and then we can start proposing ourselves as liaisons and then random assignments for remaining projects
15:59:17 <mnaser> other tc-members too
15:59:20 <dansmith> or do I slip gmann a $20 under the table to give me the "random" things I want
15:59:28 <yoctozepto> lol
15:59:44 <gmann> yoctozepto: there is no restriction on PTL and liaison at same time
15:59:48 <yoctozepto> ( dansmith: psst, it's $30 nowadays )
15:59:54 <gmann> dansmith: heh
15:59:54 <openstackgerrit> Merged openstack/governance master: Add Ghanshyam nomination as chair  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/782811
15:59:55 <dansmith> man, inflation
16:00:02 <yoctozepto> :-)
16:00:09 <mnaser> nice change to merge to end on
16:00:14 <mnaser> thanks for having me as chair y'all :)
16:00:16 <yoctozepto> gmann: officially the new chair during the meeting
16:00:18 <mnaser> #endmeeting