I can do anytime ranging from 16:00 UTC to 03:00 UTC, Mon-Fri, maybe up to
07:00 UTC assuming that it's once bi-weekly.
From: Jens Harbott
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 10:49:25 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [open
Hi Doug and ALL,
Thank you for the reminder.
This was my mistake and really
s
orry for any inconvenience this may have caused.
This will not happen again.
Patches are up to review for following projects.
>
masakari-monitors
>
masakari
--- Regards,
Sampath
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 3:04 AM
2018-04-23 13:11 GMT+02:00 Graham Hayes :
> Hi All,
>
> We moved our meeting time to 14:00UTC on Wednesdays, but attendance
> has been low, and it is also the middle of the night for one of our
> cores.
>
> I would like to suggest we have an office hours style meeting, with
> one in the UTC evening
Greetings,
Tomorrow the CI team will be hosting its weekly Community Meeting. We
welcome any/all to join. The meeting is a place to discuss any concerns /
questions / issues from the community regarding CI.
It will (as usual) be held immediately following the general #tripleo
meeting on BlueJean
Hi Louie,
Thanks for bring this up.
I add this topic to today's meeting agenda.
--- Regards,
Sampath
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 5:15 AM, Kwan, Louie
wrote:
> Submitted the following review on January 17, 2018,
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534958/
>
> Would like to know who else could be
Hi team,
Sorry for this long overdue summary. During the Dublin PTG as a WG we held
two successful discussion sessions on Mon and Tues, and below are the
conclusions for this year's planning as far as I could recall. Please feel
free to provide further feedback :)
- Passport Program v2
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 07:24:58PM -0700, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> This patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/561377 is deploying Docker and
> Docker Registry v2 *before* containers deployment in the docker_steps.
> It's using the external_deploy_tasks interface that runs right after the
> host_p
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts teams are
> making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems to be working or
> not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding new techniques by
> experimenting within one team and then adapting the
On 2018-04-24 00:03:55 + (+), Kendall Nelson wrote:
> The poll for the TC Election is now open and will remain open
> until Apr 30, 2018 23:45 UTC.
[...]
In finest OpenStack scaling tradition, we seem to have overloaded
CIVS with the volume of ballots we wanted to send and so ended up
read
Hello Everyone!
The poll for the TC Election is now open and will remain open until Apr 30,
2018 23:45 UTC.
We are selecting 7 TC members, please rank all candidates in
your order of preference.
You are eligible to vote if you are a Foundation individual member[1] that
also has committed to one
One more I'll add which is touched on a little below. Contributors spawn from a
healthy Userbase/Operatorbase. If their needs are not met, then they go
elsewhere and the contributor base shrinks. OpenStack has created artificial
walls between the various Projects. It shows up, for example, as ho
Hi,
We are glad to present this week's priorities and subteam report for Ironic. As
usual, this is pulled directly from the Ironic whiteboard[0] and formatted.
This Week's Priorities (as of the weekly ironic meeting)
Weekly priorities
---
Excerpts from Andrey Pavlov's message of 2018-04-23 21:42:56 +0300:
> Hello Sean,
>
> EC2-api team always used manual tagging because I know only this procedure.
> I thought that it's more convenient for me cause I can manage
> commits/branches.
> But in fact I don't mind to switch to automatic sc
>
> 1. Fail in the API saying you can't rebuild with a new image with new
> required traits.
Pros: - Simple way to keep the new image off a host that doesn't support it.
> - Similar solution to volume-backed rebuild with a new image.
Cons: - Confusing user experience since they might be able
On 2018-04-23 16:56:28 -0500 (-0500), Sean McGinnis wrote:
[...]
> I think Howard had an excellent idea of the TC coming up with
> themes for each cycle. I think that could be used to create a good
> cadence or focus to make sure we are making progress in key areas.
>
> It struck me that we came u
> for the GET
> /resource_providers?in_tree=&required=, nested
> resource providers and allocation pose a problem see #3 above.
This *would* work as a quick up-front check as Jay described (if you get
no results from this, you know that at least one of your image traits
doesn't exist anywhere in t
Hi Renat, Can you explain me and Dougal how timeout policy should work with
retry policy?
I guess there is bug right now.
The behaviour is something like this https://ibb.co/hhm0eH
Example: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/563759/
Logs:
http://logs.openstack.org/59/563759/1/check/openstack-tox-
>
> If you think the TC should tend to be more active in driving change
> than it is today, please describe the changes (policy, culture,
> etc.) you think would need to be made to do that effectively (not
> which policies you want us to be more active on, but *how* to
> organize the TC to be more
Thanks for the detailed options Matt/eric/jay.
Just few of my thoughts,
For #1, we can make the explanation very clear that we rejected the request
because the original traits specified in the original image and the new
traits specified in the new image do not match and hence rebuild is not
suppo
On 04/23/2018 03:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
We seem to be at a bit of an impasse in this spec amendment [1] so I
want to try and summarize the alternative solutions as I see them.
The overall goal of the blueprint is to allow defining traits via image
properties, like flavor extra specs. Tho
Thanks everyone for your positive feedback.
I've updated Gerrit!
Welcome Marius and thanks again for your hard work!
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 4:55 AM, James Slagle
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Emilien Macchi
> wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > As you probably know mcornea on IRC, Mariu
+1
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 5:55 AM, James Slagle wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> As you probably know mcornea on IRC, Marius Cornea has been contributing on
>> TripleO for a while, specially on the upgrade bits.
>> Part of the quality team, he'
Following the discussion on IRC, here's what I think you need to do:
- Assuming the set of traits from your new image is called image_traits...
- Use GET /allocations/{instance_uuid} and pull out the set of all RP
UUIDs. Let's call this instance_rp_uuids.
- Use the SchedulerReportClient.get_provi
>
> Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of
> companies and individuals contributing to OpenStack. At the same
> time we have started seeing contributions from other companies and
> individuals. To some degree this contraction and shift in contributor
> base is a natural
On 4/23/2018 3:26 PM, Eric Fried wrote:
No, the question you're really asking in this case is, "Do the resource
providers in this tree contain (or not contain) these traits?" Which to
me, translates directly to:
GET /resource_providers?in_tree=$rp_uuid&required={$TRAIT|!$TRAIT, ...}
...which
On 23/04/18 10:06, Doug Hellmann wrote:
[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
ongoing election.]
Over the last year we have seen some
Looking over the things in the runways queue [1], excluding the zVM
driver (because I'm not sure what the status is on that thread), the
next in line is blueprint list-show-all-server-migration-types [2].
I know this has been approved since Pike, but I wanted to raise some
questions again [3]
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
> ongoing election.]
>
> Over the las
Semantically, GET /allocation_candidates where we don't actually want to
allocate anything (i.e. we don't want to use the returned candidates) is
goofy, and talking about what the result would look like when there's no
`resources` is going to spider into some weird questions.
Like what does the re
Submitted the following review on January 17, 2018,
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534958/
Would like to know who else could be on the reviewer list ? or anything else is
needed for the next step?
Also, I am planning to attend our coming Masakari Weekly meeting, April 24,
0400 UTC in #opens
Submitted the following review on April 19,
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/562768/
Would like to know who else could be on the reviewer list and anything else for
the next step?
Thanks.
Louie
__
OpenStack Development Mai
On 2018-04-23 21:45, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> See below for logs from a failed xstatic release job. It appears something is
> not set up right with this job.
>
> "can't open file 'xstatic_check_version.py': [Errno 2] No such file or
> directory"
>
> I missed it initially, but this release did not a
Hi Training Team,
It is a friendly reminder that we will have a conference call on Zoom today at
2200 UTC as opposed to the weekly meeting to better sync up before the training
in Vancouver.
You can find the call details here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-upstream-institute-meeti
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Dan Sneddon wrote:
> We could add the ControlPlaneDefaultRoute and ControlPlaneSubnetCidr to
> network_data.yaml, but this would involve some duplication of configuration
> data, since those are currently defined in undercloud.conf. A more robust
> solution might
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Harald Jensås wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote:
>> To make it clear, what you want to prevent is the need to add more
>> keys in network_data.yaml?
>>
>> As those had to be provided at some point, I wonder if tripleo can't
>> find a w
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:32:40PM +, Kendall Nelson wrote:
> Hey Dougal,
>
> I think I had said May 2nd in my initial email asking about attendance. If
> you can get an answer out of your team by then I would greatly appreciate
> it! If you need more time please let me know by then (May 2nd)
We seem to be at a bit of an impasse in this spec amendment [1] so I
want to try and summarize the alternative solutions as I see them.
The overall goal of the blueprint is to allow defining traits via image
properties, like flavor extra specs. Those image-defined traits are used
to filter hos
See below for logs from a failed xstatic release job. It appears something is
not set up right with this job.
"can't open file 'xstatic_check_version.py': [Errno 2] No such file or
directory"
I missed it initially, but this release did not actually contain any functional
change, so I think it is
Hey Dougal,
I think I had said May 2nd in my initial email asking about attendance. If
you can get an answer out of your team by then I would greatly appreciate
it! If you need more time please let me know by then (May 2nd) instead.
-Kendall (diablo_rojo)
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 8:17 AM Dougal M
On 2018-04-23 16:28:13 + (+), Tim Bell wrote:
> One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from
> lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource
> opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projects,
> government funded projects) and there is a latency in
Hello Sean,
EC2-api team always used manual tagging because I know only this procedure.
I thought that it's more convenient for me cause I can manage
commits/branches.
But in fact I don't mind to switch to automatic scheme.
If somethig else is needed from please let me know.
Regards,
Andrey Pavlo
On 4/23/2018 1:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
Some of us also urged existing leaders in various projects to record
videos encouraging contributors to get more involved by demystifying
processes like code review or bug triage. This could be as simple as
signing up for an available lightning talk slo
On 23/04/18 09:27, Doug Hellmann wrote:
[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
ongoing election.]
We frequently have discussions about
2018-04-24 1:26 GMT+08:00 Doug Hellmann :
>
> Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-24 00:54:14 +0800:
> > ** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to
> > OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source
projects?To
> > fully understand the map of OpenStack s
On 2018-04-23 13:18:22 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
[...]
> I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts
> teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems
> to be working or not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding
> new techniques by experime
On 23/04/18 14:27, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
> ongoing election.]
>
> We frequently have discussi
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Harald Jensås wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Harald Jensås
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Hi, thanks for sending this. Responses inline.
> >
> > > When configuring TripleO deployments with nodes
2018-04-23 22:43 GMT+08:00 Doug Hellmann :
>
> Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-22 16:50:51 +0800:
> > Thanks, Doug, for raising this campaign question
> >
> >
> > Here are my answers:
> >
> >
> > ***How you would evaluate a project's application in general
> >
> > First I would work thr
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2018-04-23 12:35:07 -0500:
> On 4/23/2018 12:18 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts
> > teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems
> > to be working or not. In the past we've
*IMO TC should be more active as possible. Since we try to use this
position to make policies, we should also consider hard how we can
broadcast those policies to each developer to provide guidelines and to get
possible feedbacks.To reach out current/potential technical contributors,
to sell this t
On 4/23/2018 12:18 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts
teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems
to be working or not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding
new techniques by experimenting within one team and t
On 23/04/18 18:14, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 17:23:20 +0100:
>> On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100:
On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Graham Ha
Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-24 00:54:14 +0800:
> ** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to
> OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source projects?To
> fully understand the map of OpenStack services is a huge challenge,
> especially for new jo
On 2018-04-23 13:14:59 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
[...]
> I hope that no one considers any of this "noise," so thank you for
> highlighting that point.
Oh, yes I didn't mean to imply that any of the responses so far have
been noise, but I was walking a thin line on it being a hollow sort
Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 17:50:31 +0100:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Tim Bell wrote:
>
> > One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from
> > lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource
> > opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projec
On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Harald Jensås
> wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi, thanks for sending this. Responses inline.
>
> > When configuring TripleO deployments with nodes on routed ctlplane
> > networks we need to pass some per-network prope
Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2018-04-23 17:02:07 +:
> On 2018-04-23 12:02:14 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote:
> [...]
> > The main thing I will be looking out for in those cases is that
> > the project followed the Four Opens *from the beginning*. Projects
> > that start from a co
Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 17:23:20 +0100:
> On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100:
> >> On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:
>
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 12:09:42 +0100:
I'd like to see us work harder to refine the long term goals we are
trying to satisfy with the projects that make up OpenStack. This
will require us to continue the never-ending discussion
On 2018-04-23 12:02:14 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote:
[...]
> The main thing I will be looking out for in those cases is that
> the project followed the Four Opens *from the beginning*. Projects
> that start from a code dump are much less likely to attract other
> contributors in my view. Open S
*Thanks, Doug for bringing out this campaign questionI think we have a
start now with providing a decent map to show services in OpenStack and
fill in with projects. What we should have and will be nice is to ask
projects to search through the map (with a brief introduction of services)
when they'r
** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to
OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source projects?To
fully understand the map of OpenStack services is a huge challenge,
especially for new join developers. And for project teams, might not
provide new contributor
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Tim Bell wrote:
One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from
lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource
opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projects,
government funded projects) and there is a latency in current
system to onb
On 23/04/18 09:50, Doug Hellmann wrote:
[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
ongoing election.]
In the course of evaluating new proje
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote:
What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to OpenStack
more difficult than contributing to other open source projects?
Size, isolation, and perfectionism.
Size in at least three dimensions:
* the entire community
* individual projects
Hi Folks,
Some of the Oslo libraries have a tox test that does the above [0].
This ensures that our requirements.txt file is kept current with the
code.
This test uses a tool called pip_check_reqs [1]. Unfortunately this
tool is not compatible with pip version 10, and it appears as if the
github
One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from lightbulb moment
to code commit. Many of the academic resource opportunities are short term
(e.g. PhDs, student projects, government funded projects) and there is a
latency in current system to onboard, get the appropriate recognitio
On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100:
>> On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:
7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Without letting th
On 23/04/18 14:50, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
> ongoing election.]
>
> In the course of evaluating
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2018-04-22 15:10:40 +0200:
>> For the product fit, there is also a lot of room for interpretation. For
>> me it boils down to whether "OpenStack" (the product) is better with
>> that project "in" rather than with that project "out". S
Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100:
> On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:
> >> 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >>
> >>> Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a disc
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of
> companies and individuals contributing to OpenStack. At the same
> time we have started seeing contributions from other companies and
> individuals. To some degree this contraction and shift in contributor
>
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Where do you draw the line at "gratuitous"?
What benefits and drawbacks do you see in supporting multiple tools
with similar features?
How would our community be different, in positive and negative ways,
if we were more strict about avoiding such overl
On 20/04/18 17:26, Doug Hellmann wrote:
[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
ongoing election.]
Thanks Doug, I think this is a reall
100% on board with this, I think it was really productive!
Sam
On 23/04/2018, 15:44, "Jim Rollenhagen"
mailto:j...@jimrollenhagen.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Michael Turek
mailto:mjtu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
Hey everyone!
We had a bug day about two weeks ago and it we
> >
> > I think one of the important things is if it fits in to furthering what is
> > "OpenStack", as far as whether it is a service or functionality that is
> > needed
> > and useful for those running an OpenStack cloud. This is one of the parts
> > that
> > may be more on the subjective side.
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote:
We frequently have discussions about whether the TC is active enough,
in terms of driving new policies, technology choices, and other
issues that affect the entire community.
Another good question. Like all the others I wish they had come a
bit earlier
On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:
>> 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>
>>> Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a discussion
>>> of Adjutant's case, please talk a little about how you would evalu
On 23/04/18 15:06, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
> ongoing election.]
>
> Over the last year we have
On 2018-04-23 15:36:32 +0100 (+0100), Graham Hayes wrote:
> I think as an add on to this, would to ask the board to talk to members
> and see what contributions they have made to the technical side of
> OpenStack.
>
> This should not just be Number of commits / reviews / bugs etc but
> also the mo
Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 15:36:32 +0100:
> On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >
> >> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that
> >> meeting ?
> >
> > The topics:
> >
> > 1. What are we to do, a
Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:
> 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
> > Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a discussion
> > of Adjutant's case, please talk a little about how you would evaluate
> > a project's application in general.
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Where do you draw the line at "gratuitous"?
The way I interpret "gratuitous" here is: is the new project using a
technically-different approach to the same problem, or is it just
another group working at the same problem in the same way ? Is the new
project just a way to avo
Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 12:09:42 +0100:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
> > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> > understand their positions before consid
Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2018-04-22 21:01:46 -0500:
> >
> > We are discussing adding at least one new project this cycle, and
> > the specific case of Adjutant has brought up questions about the
> > criteria we use for evaluating new projects when they apply to
> > become official.
Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2018-04-22 15:10:40 +0200:
> Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> > understand their positions before considering how to vote in
big +1 to Graham's suggestion
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Graham Hayes wrote:
> On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >
> >> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that
> >> meeting ?
> >
> > The topics:
> >
> > 1. Wha
I think it actually relies upon the new team to actively reaching out to
the existing team. The new team cannot be lazy and wait for something
happen for them, they have to keep reaching out and believe me the core
developers from the existing official project will lend a hand in the end :)
For Cy
Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-22 16:50:51 +0800:
> Thanks, Doug, for raising this campaign question
>
>
> Here are my answers:
>
>
> ***How you would evaluate a project's application in general
>
> First I would work through the requirements ([1]) to evaluate projects.
> Since mo
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Michael Turek
wrote:
> Hey everyone!
>
> We had a bug day about two weeks ago and it went pretty well! At last
> week's IRC meeting the idea of having one every month was thrown around.
>
> What does everyone think about having Bug Day the first Thursday of every
I don't have specific ideas now, but it would be great to have TC publish
something like a new direction outlook per cycle or per year, to summarize
that these x,y,z new areas are what the OpenStack Technical Committee
considers worth exploring for new directions and we will sponsor projects
that w
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [...]
> Please describe one case where we were either active or reactive
> and how that was shown to be the right choice over time.
I think that the work on documenting our key principles was proactive,
and it really helped to set expectations for new people in our community
Excerpts from Zhipeng Huang's message of 2018-04-21 07:06:30 +0800:
> As the one who just lead a new project into governance last year, I think I
> could take a first stab at it.
>
> For me the current requirements in general works fine, as I emphasized in
> my recent blog [0], the four opens are
On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
>> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that
>> meeting ?
>
> The topics:
>
> 1. What are we to do, as a community, when external pressures for
> results are not matched by contribution
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 09:16:03AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> Hello searchlighters,
>
> The Rocky 1 milestone was last Thursday, and there has been no release request
> was submitted for the searchlight deliverables [1].
>
> I remember some discussion at the last Denver PTG about searchlight a
Excerpts from Zhipeng Huang's message of 2018-04-23 21:50:15 +0800:
> In general I would prefer TC take an active role regarding exploring new
> use cases and technology directions leverage the existing OpenStack
> infrastructure. I would against TC being too active on project level
> governance.
Culture wise, being too IRC-centric is definitely not helping, from my own
experience getting new Cyborg developer joining our weekly meeting from
China. Well we could always argue it is part of a open source/hacker
culture and preferable to commercial solutions that have the constant risk
of sudde
Hello searchlighters,
The Rocky 1 milestone was last Thursday, and there has been no release request
was submitted for the searchlight deliverables [1].
I remember some discussion at the last Denver PTG about searchlight and that it
is basically considered "code complete" at this point until any
[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
ongoing election.]
Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of
companies and
I think this depends on the nature of the project.
For deployment tools, as we also have witnessed in OPNFV, it tends to have
multiple solutions. So it is normal to have multiple such projects although
they are solving the same problem generally speaking.
For projects that has a clear definition
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
