18:05:03 #startmeeting uc 18:05:04 Meeting started Mon Jul 31 18:05:03 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is emagana. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:05:05 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:05:08 The meeting name has been set to 'uc' 18:05:25 #chair ShillaSaebi mrhillsman jproulx 18:05:26 Current chairs: ShillaSaebi emagana jproulx mrhillsman 18:05:34 hello 18:05:38 #topic Roll Call 18:05:42 o/ 18:05:42 o/ 18:05:50 We have 4 out the 5 members. We have quorum, let move on. 18:06:05 #topic Review request from Public Cloud WG to be under UC governance (Tobias Rydberg) 18:06:13 Is Tobias around? 18:06:44 tobberydberg ping! 18:07:11 Maybe not a good time for him. He was attending the last WGs meeting. 18:07:27 yeah, i think he is on the otherside of the world 18:07:35 Who has received the request from Tobias about this WG? 18:07:47 he mentioned it to me in that meeting 18:08:10 in addition to the email thread 18:08:39 #topic https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudWorkingGroup 18:08:43 bah 18:08:53 #topic Review request from Public Cloud WG to be under UC governance 18:09:03 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudWorkingGroup 18:09:32 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/2017-July/002211.html 18:10:13 For some reason I missed that email. 18:10:26 It seems that they have been regular and are doing well. 18:10:30 they have been meeting for some time and gaining traction 18:10:53 I do not have any request for them at this moment. Maybe we can vote for its acceptance under UC umbrella. 18:11:02 yeah they seem pretty well defined and organized 18:11:11 +1 from me 18:11:14 +1 18:11:31 Ok, let's vote. wait for my request. 18:11:37 ok 18:11:46 +1 18:11:54 #startvote Should we accept Public Cloud WG to be under UC governance? Yes, No, Maybe 18:11:54 Begin voting on: Should we accept Public Cloud WG to be under UC governance? Valid vote options are Yes, No, Maybe. 18:11:56 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 18:11:59 #vote Yes 18:12:03 #vote yes 18:12:03 #vote Yes 18:12:06 #vote Yes 18:12:24 #showvote 18:12:25 Yes (4): ShillaSaebi, mrhillsman, jproulx, emagana 18:12:41 Ok, WG accepted. Thank you all. 18:13:03 #endvote 18:13:04 Voted on "Should we accept Public Cloud WG to be under UC governance?" Results are 18:13:05 Yes (4): ShillaSaebi, mrhillsman, jproulx, emagana 18:13:30 i can send out an announcement/reply to the thread if that is standard process 18:13:45 Congratulations to the Public Cloud WG! Looking forward to hearing from the team work. 18:13:50 Yes, please mrhillsman 18:14:04 will do 18:14:06 Sounds like a good idea with link to minutes from this meeting 18:14:14 #action mrhillsman send out an announcement/reply to the thread about WG acceptance 18:14:23 ++ jproulx 18:14:39 anything else on this topic? 18:14:45 not from me 18:14:48 ^ 18:14:55 ok, moving on. 18:14:58 #topic UC Election Planning Update 18:15:18 We have election officials! 18:15:32 woohoo! 18:15:34 thx amy and ed! 18:15:49 Amy Marrich and Ed Leafe 18:15:57 yes thanks! 18:15:58 The process is looking good so far. 18:16:01 i sent a reminder earlier 18:16:04 #link https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2017.html 18:16:06 saw that, thanks Melvin 18:16:30 So we have until August 11, 05:59 UTC to receive the nominations 18:16:36 very welcome 18:16:42 Today is the first day for nominations! 18:17:21 Is there anything that we have not covered for the election? 18:17:44 I think we are good on our deliverables and timelines so far 18:17:48 just need to publicize esp nomination period 18:17:54 agreed 18:17:58 ^ 18:18:13 i'll tweet :) 18:18:24 ditto 18:18:26 i saw nuzzel referenced the superuser article earlier 18:18:28 same here! 18:19:25 seems like we are good other than that 18:19:38 #action ShillaSaebi mrhillsman jproulx emagana Spread the word about the UC election. 18:20:09 ok. next topic. 18:20:39 #topic UC WGs in UC Charter Repo 18:20:55 This one was not in the agenda but we have some time and I wanted to know what is the status. 18:21:04 This is the commit from mrhillsman 18:21:10 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/436752/ 18:21:41 we had to ratify the requirements doc first, and since we did that, we can revisit definitely 18:21:47 As far as I remember we were waiting to merge the acceptance criteria. I think we should work on the above commit now that we merged the acceptance one 18:21:56 ++ 18:22:01 mrhillsman: correct! we are in the same page 18:22:07 ;) 18:22:34 Let's do not work on this via IRC. My goal is just to set up a reminder for all of us to review the commit and provide feedback. 18:22:52 hrmm...also 18:22:55 Once we merge it, I will remove the information from the wiki: 18:23:03 need to get the auc/extra-auc one done 18:23:10 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee 18:23:23 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479462/ 18:23:32 let me work on that one exclusively today 18:23:54 but that should not stop the one you mention 18:24:17 sounds good! Let's complete this work ASAP. 18:24:19 but will have to update it afterwards 18:25:04 sounds good 18:25:08 of course, they need to be active ;-) 18:25:42 sorry, i meant update the format of it to match the auc/extra-auc changes 18:26:25 ah got it. 18:26:45 ok, anything else on this topic? before to move to Open Discussion 18:26:57 nothing from me 18:27:09 #topic Open Discussion 18:27:43 Folks! Please, talk to your teams and community about the Ops Meet-up in Mexico City. We are less that two weeks away! 18:28:11 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MEX-ops-meetup 18:28:35 indeed! 18:28:46 We need to be sure we have a good level of attendence 18:30:54 Any questions/updates as well can be answered by attending the meeting #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ops_Meetups_Team 18:31:04 +1 18:31:11 anyone, anything? 18:31:16 Or sending an email to operators ML - openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org 18:31:29 I did have one thing other than this 18:31:38 I think we mentioned it before but setting goals 18:31:42 go for it 18:32:00 Would be great for us to start thinking about some 18:32:28 iirc we said it made sense to really put it on the agenda after the election 18:32:52 just wanted to keep that in the back of everyone's mind 18:33:00 nothing more from me 18:34:03 as we are getting close to the summit, we need to have a better idea. Besides, we will potentially have new UC members by the end of August. Maybe we should wait until then. 18:34:06 one quick item from me 18:34:22 please, go ahead leong 18:34:26 do we have any updates related to "Financial WG"? 18:34:40 i mentioned i talked with them in Beijing 18:34:46 leong: Good that you ask. 18:34:52 have not heard from them yet 18:35:11 i will follow up with them and get them onboard 18:35:16 I sent an email to Alan Clark to get more details about them. 18:35:25 I am waiting for a response. 18:35:34 they said they were ready to submit emagana 18:35:48 They have been saying that even before Boston. 18:36:07 but i assume they are getting situated from osd china 18:36:09 So, I do not know why they haven't. I have been making myself available for helping and guidence. 18:36:15 has UC reviewed their initial proposla? 18:36:18 would be great leong if you reach out 18:36:36 mrhillsman: i will reach out to them for more details and finalizing the proposal 18:36:37 leong: I do not have the initial official proposal yet! 18:36:46 they pulled it but we did read it afaik 18:37:00 yeah, no "official" one provided 18:37:29 mrhillsman, emagana : i will follow up with UnionPay for the Financial WG 18:37:29 LOL! I just received the email from Alan. 18:37:44 Yes, let's follow up over ML 18:37:52 +1 18:37:57 I need to review carefully Alan's email and get back to you all. 18:38:02 oh leong 18:38:10 enterprise wg 18:38:14 still active? 18:38:14 Thanks for bringing this topic leong 18:38:25 my pleasure 18:38:47 sorry i had not attended since i did a couple weeks back or so 18:38:50 EWG is still active, but i am planning to wrap it up.. :) 18:39:14 asking because we need to push through the review for updating the list of Teams/WGs 18:39:20 should we just leave it off? 18:39:28 i will formalise a proposal and submit to UC for consideration regarding EWG past work/achievement and future direction 18:39:58 ok, this is the patch should you want to comment there as well - #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/436752/ 18:40:34 mrhillsman: for now, it is still "officially" active..:) 18:40:44 ok 18:41:02 things might changed after Sep/Oct :-) 18:41:27 sounds good 18:41:42 keep us undated! 18:41:47 updated* 18:41:56 +1 18:43:04 anything else? 18:43:30 Thank you all! Until next week. 18:43:33 #endmeeting