On 2025-02-10 18:59:07 +0000 (+0000), Sean Mooney wrote: [...]
it was a surprise to me tha twe had to opt in again for watcher 2025.2
so to me the way we have implemnted the liaison-assignment-duration section is not in keeping with the resolotion "rules as written"
in that its is not done by asking if the liasons are still valid on the mailing list
it was done by reseting watcher back to ptl model
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/11a7467147af5429703b36d312698...
and and readdopting the ptl model
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/8690a1ced8868d4bdd59f3c49d160...
with the rolecall votes ectra that requires in the governance repo.
this effectively creates a similar level of overhead as the election.
my personal recollection may be off but i thought one of the original motivation was to not require project to make change to the grovernace repo each cycle unless the the Liaison assignment needed to be modifed. [...]
Liaisons are tracked in the governance repository, so any adjustment to the list of liaisons for a project would require a change there. The (more recent) process of requesting liaisons to re-opt-in was introduced to solve the problem where DPL projects would set liaisons and then never update them, even when those individuals ceased to actively participate in the community for years. This becomes relevant when, for example, the VMT is getting no response from a security review team on a report of a suspected vulnerability and wants to escalate to the security liaison for the project. Allowing the TC to discover in advance that there is no active security liaison helps OpenStack side-step such situations before they become a bigger problem. There are a number of possible ways to go about it, but for now the workflow the TC has adopted is to propose a change reverting the project to the PTL model and then get its liaisons to -1 the change if they intend to continue serving in that role. If they all -1 then the change is abandoned; if only some -1 and others can't be reached then a different change is needed in order to replace the inactive liaisons with active volunteers. If no liaisons -1 the change prior to the start of PTL elections then the team reverts to PTL model, and if it subsequently gets no PTL nominations then the TC has good reason to consider the entire project inactive and proceed with its retirement. -- Jeremy Stanley