Chenker, Sean: Could you please post an update to the governance repository? For your convenience, here is - a recent example of a PTL appointment patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/928881 - a recent example of a team adopting DPL: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/926154 On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 1:05 PM Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> wrote:
---- On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:48:54 -0700 Goutham Pacha Ravi wrote ---
On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 11:07 PM 陈克 joykechen@163.com> wrote:
Hello, I (chenker/chen.ke14@zte.com.cn) can continue to maintain watcher, please help register, thank you. I'm sorry for the recent lack of a reply, the main reason is that the content of the work has been adjusted recently, and there is a other high priority thing in response to the temporary response
Thank you chenker! I'm glad to hear from you and Sean.
Since there's interest to revive the project from new OpenStack maintainers, can I suggest you help onboard them to the project? The TC would like to resolve the lack of PTL for this project in the upcoming cycle. During the Dalmatian/2024.2 release cycle, Dan Smith (dansmith), Ghanshyam Mann (gmann) and Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) volunteered to fix CI jobs on watcher repositories. They didn't intend to take over the maintenance of the project.
I suggest revising the core maintainers team if you're willing, and select a governance model for the project. We assume that every project will use the PTL model [5] by default. However, the "Distributed Project Leadership" model may be beneficial to officially delegate some project maintainer responsibilities across a group of individuals [6]. You will need to opt-into the DPL model explicitly like it was done during the Dalmatian release cycle [7]. The DPL model is better for a project when an individual maintainer doesn't have the time/resources to be the project PTL.
++, my suggestion is to try the DPL model in 2025.1 cycle and see how it goes. Based on the situation in 2025.2 and the team's decision, either DPL can be continued, or you can go with PTL.
-gmann
I'd be happy to help answer any questions. I am hoping we can resolve this "leaderless" situation soon; and definitely hoping that the "watcher" project continues to be developed.
[5] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/ptl.html [6] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/distributed-project-leadership... [7] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/923583
---- Replied Message ---- From smooney@redhat.com Date 09/22/2024 04:27 To Goutham Pacha Ravigouthampravi@gmail.com>、OpenStack Discussopenstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> Cc chen.ke14@zte.com.cn Subject Re: [tc][watcher] No leaders for project team, heading to retirement On Sat, 2024-09-21 at 15:20 -0400, Goutham Pacha Ravi wrote:
Hello Stackers,
The "watcher" project [1] did not have any volunteers to lead the project in the 2025.1 election cycle. In the past few years, the project's team has slowly disbanded and there have been no significant changes proposed/merged in the project's repositories [2]. We noticed that there were three deployers that noted their use of Watcher in production in the past user survey [3]. It's possible that the project failed to gather any significant adoption, and hence there's less interest in contributing to, and maintaining the project.
I'm sending this notification pursuant to the OpenStack governance recommendations [4] to retire project teams. We can mark a project team "inactive", however, an "inactive" project must have some contributors aiming to build-back a maintainers team around it - and it must pick a project team lead, or adopt a distributed project leadership model by nominating liaisons. Since there are no PTL nominees, we think marking this project "inactive" serves no purpose. im on pto for the next week but when i come back i will be moving to a new team that will still be working on openstack looking at some new usecases.
One of the projects we were evaluating was watcher to address those is watcher.
i may be willing to take on the PTL position or form a distirbuted team but i need to actually talk to my new team about if that is the direction we want to take. Watcher has a lot of the infrastructure that would be useful for workload management and sla enforcement but much of the knowledge of how the project works has been lost. So one of the questions we need to reflect on is does the benefit of the exisitng infrastrucrue out weigh the technial debt. e.g. start from scratch adding only the functionaltiy we need in a new project vs revive watcher and address thing like removing eventlet ectra.
If marking it inactive but not strating the requirement is an option that would give us time over the 2025.1 cycle
if we were to pursue using watcher obviously having maintainers of it would be something we would want to adresss this cycle.
if we end up deciding that watcher is not something we can commit to investing in or no one else steps forward then we could retire it at the end of the cycle instead of the start.
Is there any objection to retiring the "openstack/watcher" project (and associated deliverables: python-watcherclient, watcher-dashboard and watcher-tempest-plugin)? Once the project is retired, configuration management and deployment projects can drop their integrations as well.
Thanks, On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi
[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Watcher [2] https://review.opendev.org/q/(project:%5Eopenstack/watcher.*+OR+project:open...) [3] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/user_survey/analysis-2023.html [4] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/dropping-projects.html