15:00:10 #startmeeting tc 15:00:10 Meeting started Thu Nov 25 15:00:10 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:10 The meeting name has been set to 'tc' 15:00:17 #topic Roll call 15:00:19 o/ 15:00:30 o/ 15:00:42 o/ 15:00:42 * strigazi saw the agenda and joined 15:00:48 USA folks (4 TC ) are on Thanksgiving holiday 15:00:54 strigazi: hi 15:00:55 o/ 15:02:38 seems only 3 TC. 15:02:39 o/ 15:02:43 seems 4 15:02:45 +1 15:03:19 let's start 15:03:26 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda_Suggestions 15:03:30 today agenda ^^ 15:03:47 o/ 15:04:01 #topic Follow up on past action items 15:04:08 And apparentlly I need to update my calendar for an hour earlier 15:04:28 spotz: +1 15:04:36 one action item from previous meeting 15:04:37 gmann, ricolin_ to schedule adhoc meeting for pain point discussions 15:04:46 spotz :) 15:05:03 ricolin: did you find some slot for this ? 15:05:05 Partial 5 :) 15:05:40 * mnaser joining in from 37000 ft 15:05:48 +1, mnaser :) 15:05:58 gmann, didn't schedule any meeting, I though we gonna use TC meeting for it? 15:06:29 ricolin: yeah, initially we planned that but doing in a adhoc special meeting like we did for RBAC can be more productive 15:06:32 what you say? 15:06:55 +1 15:06:58 okay, let's schedule some time next week 15:07:50 +1, next week works fine. thanks 15:08:01 I will keep it open till then 15:08:11 #action ricolin_ to schedule adhoc meeting for pain point discussions 15:08:22 #topic Gate health check 15:08:27 it would be good if we involve the PTLs. A doodle with the TC members and PTLs would be great 15:08:47 belmoreira: +1. that will be great 15:09:09 in RBAC also we did same and having more member from community along with TC were very helpful 15:10:18 on gate health 15:11:05 I saw one failure occurring in few projects not other (not sure why). sphinx error ni SQLAlchemy1.4.27 - TypeDecorator 15:11:23 this one, #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/keystone/+/818652/1 15:12:03 I have not debugged much on this whether it is issue on SQLAlchemy side or in our code doc string 15:12:26 if anyone knows about it please let us know. it is happening in tacker, heat, keystone afaik 15:13:28 other thing is zuul config error 15:13:34 Fixing Zuul config error in OpenStack 15:14:01 you might have seen email from clarkb #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-November/025797.html 15:14:23 I have created a etherpad to track this for openstack #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/zuul-config-error-openstack 15:14:59 so that we fix it and do not forget. I will help on this sometime next week but if any other TC would like to help fixing those will be great 15:15:34 yoctozepto: does this solve all kolla error or you need to fix few more #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/798205 15:15:55 gmann: we are EOLing the old branches 15:16:29 I updated the etherpad 15:17:03 yoctozepto: perfect, thanks 15:17:19 yoctozepto: please add patch link also. 15:17:58 yeah, looking for it 15:18:06 thanks 15:18:08 any other thing to discuss on Gate health ? 15:18:51 not me 15:18:57 #topic Updates on community-wide goal 15:19:01 RBAC goal 15:19:03 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/815158 15:19:40 we discussed more bits around domain admin requirement in Yoga or not. lbragstad has uploaded the latest version 15:20:27 dansmith: and I are more involved in the same discussion so kind of co-authors. it will be great if other tc-members can have a look into that and vote 15:20:46 we have to merge it ASAP as yoga milestone-1 is already passed 15:21:17 I have to admit the contents seem very intense 15:21:46 And to be honest I trust in you and da smith so I may be tbh giving a RC+2 that’s delegated based on my trust in the folks who’ve worked on it 15:21:58 So I don’t hold things up too much 15:22:26 I'll give it a read through llater though I've been following the discussions in channel 15:22:38 thanks 15:23:30 other proposed goal is 'Proposed community goal for FIPS compatibility and compliance' 15:23:32 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/816587 15:23:58 I did not get chance to review, will try to do sometime next week 15:24:55 #topic Magnum project health 15:25:13 Yeah nothing on that in terms of knowledge or context 15:25:27 Okay so about that subject 15:25:36 I would appreciate some context and why I was not contacted before 15:25:53 Or invited to this meeting for example 15:26:07 sure 15:26:30 strigazi: sorry, I tried to ping on irc but no response — but the situation as I saw it was that I believe you are the only active core for magnum 15:27:08 Feilong and brtrkr (sp?) both left their orgs and said magnum is not a focus at their new employment 15:27:29 Hongbin doesn’t seem to have been doing any reviews lately which kinda leaves things up for you only 15:27:44 And even then I guess there’s not enough cores to merge things to start with 15:28:01 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack%252Fmagnum 15:28:10 open reviews in magnum 15:28:33 fwiw, this wasn’t a meeting to start taking action but more of raise awareness inside tc and try to see what action items we come up with (ie someone reach out to spyros) — rather than “let’s fix it” 15:28:35 Wouldn't a better approach be to ping me if I need help? via the mailing list? 15:28:59 That would be a productive action item of this exact discussion :) 15:29:18 strigazi: I think idea here was who all are active. and now we have more clarity that you are only one there 15:29:41 I think ML is best way to contact then IRC ? that also work fine 15:29:41 This was put here because I brought it up and this was a good time for the tc to be around and know that situation for us to figure out a plan 15:29:59 Sorry if it came off as trying to do things behind you or anything. It’s just an early stage discussion. 15:30:03 I am one core, but we are 4-5 ppl dedicated to magnum at CERN 15:30:56 strigazi: with one core, do you still have require 2 core for merging any patch or just one ? 15:30:56 I understand 15:31:06 gmann read my mind :) 15:31:21 We require one, best practice 2 15:31:59 At this state we can move fwd with one I guess 15:32:09 If that's ok with you as well 15:32:34 I’m in no position for this but I’d suggest adding other cores 15:32:38 I keep in mind to get a +1 from reviewers outisde CERN as well 15:32:41 If there are more people working on it are any of them possible cores? 15:33:12 Jake Yip has enough knowledge 15:33:16 There are a few contributors I’ve seen pushing in +1s 15:33:24 and they are active 15:33:27 yeah, if there are more people interested and eligible, having more core will help 15:33:40 I can ask around 15:33:53 and report in 2-3 weeks 15:34:06 great. 15:34:07 I do think strigazi is the best core when it comes to knowledge and understanding of project but doesn’t hurt to have a few more in case you’re off or anything like that 15:34:15 There might even be people who do +1s from outside CERN who would be thrilled to be asked 15:34:51 mnaser: agree 15:35:13 +2 15:35:24 spotz: at the moment I know only jake yip well enough and can vouch for them 15:35:41 strigazi: Ok it's a start for sure to get you help 15:36:03 let's wait for strigazi checks on more core and meanwhile it is all fine on strigazi plan to do one core (which is you) merging things 15:36:11 strigazi, maybe Catalyst Cloud will be interested to send another person into community? 15:36:28 yeah if single core merge is ok, then it’s not that much of an issue 15:36:29 ricolin: they said they'll be in touch when they have someone 15:36:48 strigazi, got it 15:36:53 but I was concerned is there’s not even enough cores to merge things if there was a 2 +2 rule 15:37:06 yeah 15:37:14 this stats two core only #link https://github.com/openstack/magnum/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst 15:37:44 Anyways, I appreciate your work strigazi — I didn’t raise this because I didn’t think you weren’t contributing or doing your stuff — but it was more since there wasn’t as much people to help 15:37:45 gmann: is the best practice 15:38:03 gmann: the link you shared 15:38:10 mnaser: no worries 15:38:30 Sorry if it came off weird, but we’d probably actually have started to send an ML message as an action to the discussion once the tc was made aware 15:38:58 strigazi: yeah, actually many new people might be checking that but anyways plan of chekcing new core possibility sounds good 15:39:13 let's do like this then, since there is interest, I can do a reviews/clean up of the backlog and looks for cores 15:39:34 let's do like this then, since there is interest, I can do reviews and a clean up of the backlog and look for cores 15:39:49 +1, sounds good 15:40:01 yeah — we’re doing a big push for magnum here to try and make the experience more smooth with the edge cases so we’ll be submitting quite a few things here and there 15:40:04 +1 15:40:19 +1 15:40:38 (and while they’re all up streamed I feel bad running locks patches — since the community won’t benefit it out of the box and might get a bad taste) 15:40:54 Thanks for that though strigazi — much appreciated 15:41:10 and if you need to reach the tc I hear one of them is next door :P 15:41:20 strigazi: really appreciate your updates/plan and taking charge of project again as PTL too. 15:41:34 +1. anything else on this topic ? 15:41:54 mnaser: :) he works from home today otherwise literally next door 15:42:10 * strigazi waves to belmoreira from the office 15:42:11 strigazi thanks for joining the meeting 15:42:27 I feel like that’s a good productive wrap up on the topic 15:42:53 indeed 15:42:58 agree. thanks belmoreira also. 15:43:02 mnaser: if you want discuss a bigger push on magnum, we could do it in the ML or storyboard :) 15:43:20 strigazi: will do :) 15:43:30 great to see the topic was covered and some more clarity spread around it 15:43:32 :) 15:44:10 #topic Adjutant need PTLs and maintainers 15:44:22 Adjutant till need maintainer or PTL 15:44:33 this is last I heard on ML #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-November/025786.html 15:44:39 I think there’s as someone from Verisign 15:44:50 Who was waiting fir a sort of approval or something 15:44:50 Braden, Albert, yeah 15:45:19 yeah, I will get in touch with them and check the status. meanwhile I will keep it in agenda 15:46:00 #topic Pain Point targeting 15:46:32 this we already discussed to start discussion as adhoc meeting sometime next week 15:46:44 ricolin: belmoreira anything else you would like to cover today ? 15:46:48 on this topic 15:46:53 not from me 15:47:10 looking forward for the meeting 15:47:26 cool 15:47:39 #topic Open Reviews 15:47:42 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+is:open 15:47:54 8 open reviews 15:48:06 RBAC, FIPs we already talked about 15:48:42 this is goal cleanup as per new structure, appreciate the review on this #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/818845 15:49:43 for kolla repo, mnaser can you check this project-config patch #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/819326 15:49:44 All links open to look at later 15:49:50 spotz: thanks 15:50:21 I think that is all from me today. anything else from anyone 15:50:48 next meeting will be on Dec 2nd video call. 15:51:32 Looks like tentatively there will be an OPS Meetup the Friday after Summiit hosted at Deutsche Telekon 15:51:55 spotz: in June 2022 summit right? 15:52:01 that's great! 15:52:10 gmann: Yeah on 6/10 the Friday 15:52:20 ok, sounds great. 15:53:01 and Thanks to everyone on Thanksgiving day! and safe flight to mnaser (thanks for joining from 37000 feet :)) 15:53:10 let's close for today 15:53:15 Thanks guys. Take care :) 15:53:25 thank you all 15:53:49 #endmeeting