18:00:11 #startmeeting tc 18:00:11 Meeting started Tue Mar 12 18:00:11 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is JayF. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:11 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:11 The meeting name has been set to 'tc' 18:00:15 Welcome to the weekly meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee. A reminder that this meeting is held under the OpenInfra Code of Conduct available at https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct. 18:00:15 Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee. 18:00:15 #topic Roll Call 18:00:18 o/ 18:00:23 \o 18:00:26 o/ 18:00:36 o/ 18:00:43 o/ 18:00:51 #info No expected absences noted on the agenda. 18:01:08 I'll give a few minutes for remaining tc-members to arrive 18:01:09 o/ 18:01:16 o/ 18:02:45 I'm going to continue with the seven of us :) 18:03:33 Skipping topic Follow up on Tracked Action items, there are none to follow up on 18:03:43 #topic Gate Health Check 18:04:12 not terrible of late, but basically all the underlying issues are still there I think 18:04:15 Ironic has been aggressively trying to fix/keep our gate working. 18:04:36 I have yet to try to examine our job that is running with extra swap and zswap to see how it's helping or not 18:04:36 o/ 18:04:45 I did get a response to my email calling for help with the gate, I am working with the people involved to get their permission to make their offer public 18:04:45 yeah, I will say much better considering the release time 18:05:01 I started slowly looking at the main reasons of rechecks - I hope to have some data this or next week and I will send email about it 18:05:05 there were some issues due to release candidates, but I think they should mostly be fixed by now 18:05:20 slaweq: I'll be very interested to see that for sure :D 18:05:35 Is there anything else to talk about here or should we move on? 18:06:05 #topic Implementation of Unmaintained Branch Statuses 18:06:11 how goes the great branch rename of 2024? :D 18:06:24 steadily proceeding I'd say 18:06:37 sadly not much feedback on the questions I posted last week 18:07:52 What questions/venue specifically? Just wanna make sure they get in the log if you have a link 18:08:05 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/unmaintained-release-issues 18:08:18 yeah, was looking for that already, bad preparation 18:08:56 frickler: i opened it last week but then forgot to add feedback. I will do this week (most probably today/tomorrow) 18:09:52 I updated the Ironic patch to try and move that forward, I have that etherpad open and will try to make a look at the others. 18:09:59 frickler: can we get that mailed out to the list for a larger audience? 18:10:15 I'm sure you can if you want 18:10:43 I'm just going to move on. 18:10:56 i'll note there's still been limited communication (as far as i've seen) on how to get involved with/grow the openstack-unmaintained-core group, which has led to some projects growing impatient and adding their own acls in order to be able to merge changes 18:11:30 ah, yes, I kind of keep seeing devstack bugs about it, too 18:11:50 so soon there also needs to be a discussion about when to consider EOLing stuff 18:12:10 Would the PTG be good timing/venue for that discussion? 18:12:26 added response for tempest/its plugins cases. 18:12:27 not the worst one I'd say 18:13:13 I added some notes about it in the PTG planning etherpad. 18:13:35 fungi: I believe there was a call to action to do that, I think project team guide was to be updated, then emails sent 18:13:58 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/910817 18:14:03 2x +2 but not yet workflowed 18:14:13 it seems like it'd be helpful to get that landed and an email sent out 18:14:23 yeah, in hindsight, we shouldn't have renamed branches until the process for adding people to review changes was decided and in place 18:14:47 instead it's led to a lot of impatience and projects taking the path of least resistance rather than waiting for further guidance 18:15:17 which adds to overall technical debt 18:15:30 fungi: well if any volunteer showed up, they could be added to the gerrit group 18:15:40 but I haven't heard any interest so far 18:15:50 volunteers keep showing up, but don't know how to ask to be added 18:16:03 where are they showing up? 18:16:13 yeah, did not see at least in ML 18:16:21 just ping the existing team members as usual 18:16:28 mostly by proposing acl changes for their projects to get control of those branches because nobody's been approving the changes on them 18:16:47 and then we point out that there's already a group with access to do that they could be added to instead 18:16:51 okay I'm not sure that's the same thing 18:16:59 I mean, it might be, but... 18:17:02 all acl changes I have seen were from people who explicitly did not want to add themselves to the global group 18:17:03 but the process is also not different and hidden also, just - "ask member of the group on how to be added" 18:17:19 and they wait for further instructions from the (two?) people who currently comprise that group but it never comes 18:17:28 so then they move forward with the original acl request instead 18:17:55 The path out of this is landing 910817 (linked above) and ensuring that path is as clear as possible 18:18:04 how we got here matters less than getting to a better place 18:18:36 even without being core, they could do thinks like propose CI fixes 18:18:42 *things 18:18:58 but not approvethem. the main concern i've seen raised is that the changes are sitting there unapproved 18:19:03 As I understand it, these are core reviewers seeing patches on branches they don't have votes on, trying to resolve their ability to vote on them. 18:19:15 yeah, if something they proposed and not merging then we can say we are blocking them 18:19:16 I had similar upset contributors in Ironic at one point because I botched the ACL we added for ironic-cores. 18:19:21 Can there be a bakcup plan to get people added if no response? 18:20:12 well I'd certainly add anyone who asks for it, assuming someone known within the community 18:20:12 but anyways we can merge 910817 soon as no objection on that or if anything need more clarity than can be done later 18:20:18 i didn't really want to be involved in unmaintained branches, but at this point i'm willing to just add anyone to that group myself if they ask, assuming that's acceptable 18:20:59 I'm in that group and would basically take the same approach fungi says (Just adding people), but IMO the right path forward, as gmann has also said, is to land https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/910817 18:21:04 because it might be less work for me than dealing with the additional acl changes 18:21:10 well if no response then existing group needs to be cleaned up so it is kind of re-activation of this global group which can happen anytime or like to any other core group also 18:21:24 fungi: if they are a core in a preexisting OpenStack project, I am +2 to it. If not I'm like, +0.5 lol 18:22:47 JayF: yes, some proven experience with gerrit and zuul would be expected IMO 18:22:47 anyway, i didn't want to derail, just pointing out that not prioritizing completing the process document/guidance is leading to additional work for some people and accumulation of tech debt 18:23:04 It seems like we have clear paths forward: 1) land https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/910817, 2) review and try to get fixes for issues documented here https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/unmaintained-release-issues 18:23:14 both of those are doable; is there any other actionable suggestions before we move on?> 18:23:17 ++ 18:23:23 because people don't want to wait for further instructions, they just want whatever will get them back to approving changes soonest 18:24:34 #topic Testing runtime for 2024.2 release 18:24:42 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/908862 18:24:56 I believe this currently has enough support to merge once the waiting period has completed (it should be landable by EOD). 18:25:05 Please cast your vote there if you haven't already 18:25:12 Is there any discussion needed related to this? 18:26:27 all said and done I guess 18:26:38 nothing from me too. mentioned plan sounds good 18:27:06 I will work on generic job template change after it merge 18:27:09 I'm sorry we couldn't get to a point where we have unanimous consensus, but I'm glad we're going to have a runtime defined for the next release. 18:27:14 Thanks for all the participation 18:27:19 #topic TC vPTG 2024.2 18:27:25 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/apr2024-ptg-os-tc 18:27:44 I also tentatively booked us some time in line with times from last cycle 18:28:08 Please let me know if any of the booked times for os-tc on https://ptg.opendev.org/ptg.html (Monday, Tuesday, Friday) are a hardship. 18:28:18 and if you have any topics for discussion, please add them to the etherpad 18:28:51 s/Tuesday/Thursday/ 18:28:55 #topic Open Discussion and Reviews 18:28:58 #undo 18:28:58 Removing item from minutes: #topic Open Discussion and Reviews 18:29:01 frickler: that is correct 18:29:10 Merged openstack/project-team-guide master: Add NOTE about becoming Unmaintained core team member https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/910817 18:29:21 Wow, I really want to "Tuesday" these, don't I. That's the second time I've made that specific mistake. 18:29:50 Moving on 18:29:52 #topic Open Discussion and Reviews 18:30:11 I'll note that mnasiadka asked we particularly try to get https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/910240 landed for magnum 18:30:19 I'll be up at Texas Linux Fest as an organizer on Friday but I was just going to find a quiet place to sit for it 18:30:32 In general, we have a lot of governance patches up, shortly after lunch I'll be landing any eligible patches 18:30:40 spotz[m]: Where in TX is that? 18:31:26 Austin at the Palmer events center 18:31:39 I may have to leave a bit earlier on Friday 18:31:40 ah, I don't know anyone up that way but I hope you have a good time o/ 18:31:47 but other than that it's good for me 18:31:51 alright 18:32:11 Giving a couple minutes for new items for open discussion or further chat on any open topic before closing the meeting 18:33:32 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/910817 merged, how can you not love projects with a fast CI stack :) 18:33:47 That's the exact kinda positive note we should leave on :D \o/ 18:33:49 #endmeeting