[placement][ptl][tc] Call for Placement PTL position
Hello Everyone, With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position. We would like to know if anyone from Placement core team, Nova core team or PTL (as placement main consumer) of any other interested/related developer is interested to take the PTL position? [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/ussuri/ptl.html [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-09-05-14.00.log.html... -TC (gmann)
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
Thanks for being concerned about this, but it would have been useful if you included me (as the current PTL) and the rest of the Placement team in the discussion or at least confirmed plans with me before starting this seek-volunteers process. There are a few open questions we are still trying to resolve before we should jump to any decisions: * We are currently waiting to see if Tetsuro is available (he's been away for a few days). If he is, he'll be great, but we don't know yet if he can or wants to. * We've started, informally, discussing the option of pioneering the option of leaderless projects within Placement (we pioneer many other things there, may as well add that to the list) but without more discussion from the whole team (which can't happen because we don't have quorum of the actively involved people) and the TC it's premature. Leaderless would essentially mean consensually designating release liaisons and similar roles but no specific PTL. I think this is easily possible in a small in number, focused, and small feature-queue [1] group like Placement but would much harder in one of the larger groups like Nova. * We have several reluctant people who _can_ do it, but don't want to. Once we've explored the other ideas here and any others we can come up with, we can dredge one of those people up as a stand-in PTL, keeping the slot open. Because of [1] there's not much on the agenda for U. Since the Placement team is not planning to have an active presence at the PTG, nor planning to have much of a pre-PTG (as no one has stepped up with any feature ideas) we have some days or even weeks before it matters who the next PTL (if any) is, so if possible, let's not rush this. [1] It's been a design goal of mine from the start that Placement would quickly reach a position of stability and maturity that I liked to call "being done". By the end of Train we are expecting to be feature complete for any features that have been actively discussed in the recent past [2]. The main tasks in U will be responding to bug fixes and requests-for-explanations for the features that already exist (because people asked for them) but are not being used yet and getting the osc-placement client caught up. [2] The biggest thing that has been discussed as a "maybe we should do" for which there are no immediate plans is "resource provider sharding" or "one placement, many clouds". That's a thing we imagined people might ask for, but haven't yet, so there's little point doing it. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent
---- On Fri, 06 Sep 2019 01:20:39 +0900 Chris Dent <cdent+os@anticdent.org> wrote ----
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
Thanks for being concerned about this, but it would have been useful if you included me (as the current PTL) and the rest of the Placement team in the discussion or at least confirmed plans with me before starting this seek-volunteers process.
There are a few open questions we are still trying to resolve before we should jump to any decisions:
* We are currently waiting to see if Tetsuro is available (he's been away for a few days). If he is, he'll be great, but we don't know yet if he can or wants to.
Thanks Chris. we discussed it in yesterday TC meeting and there is no hurry or leaving placement team away from the discussion. You as Train PTL and other placement members are the only ones to decide and help to select the right candidate. I am also waiting to hear from Tetsuro about his planning.
* We've started, informally, discussing the option of pioneering the option of leaderless projects within Placement (we pioneer many other things there, may as well add that to the list) but without more discussion from the whole team (which can't happen because we don't have quorum of the actively involved people) and the TC it's premature. Leaderless would essentially mean consensually designating release liaisons and similar roles but no specific PTL. I think this is easily possible in a small in number, focused, and small feature-queue [1] group like Placement but would much harder in one of the larger groups like Nova.
This is an interesting idea and needs more discussions seems. I am not against of Leaderless project approach with right point of contacts for TC/release team etc but this is going to be the new process under current governance. Because there are other projects (winstackers and PowerVMStackers in U) are in the queue of being removed from governance because continuously lacking the leader since a couple of cycles. So if we go for Leaderless approach then, those projects should be removed based on general-in-active projects not because of no PTL. Anyways IMO, let's first check all possibility if anyone from placement team (or nova as it is an almost same team) can serve as PTL. If no then we discuss about your idea. -gmann
* We have several reluctant people who _can_ do it, but don't want to. Once we've explored the other ideas here and any others we can come up with, we can dredge one of those people up as a stand-in PTL, keeping the slot open. Because of [1] there's not much on the agenda for U.
Since the Placement team is not planning to have an active presence at the PTG, nor planning to have much of a pre-PTG (as no one has stepped up with any feature ideas) we have some days or even weeks before it matters who the next PTL (if any) is, so if possible, let's not rush this.
[1] It's been a design goal of mine from the start that Placement would quickly reach a position of stability and maturity that I liked to call "being done". By the end of Train we are expecting to be feature complete for any features that have been actively discussed in the recent past [2]. The main tasks in U will be responding to bug fixes and requests-for-explanations for the features that already exist (because people asked for them) but are not being used yet and getting the osc-placement client caught up.
[2] The biggest thing that has been discussed as a "maybe we should do" for which there are no immediate plans is "resource provider sharding" or "one placement, many clouds". That's a thing we imagined people might ask for, but haven't yet, so there's little point doing it.
-- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:20 PM, Chris Dent <cdent+os@anticdent.org> wrote: On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position. Thanks for being concerned about this, but it would have been useful if you included me (as the current PTL) and the rest of the Placement team in the discussion or at least confirmed plans with me before starting this seek-volunteers process. There are a few open questions we are still trying to resolve before we should jump to any decisions: * We are currently waiting to see if Tetsuro is available (he's been away for a few days). If he is, he'll be great, but we don't know yet if he can or wants to. * We've started, informally, discussing the option of pioneering the option of leaderless projects within Placement (we pioneer many other things there, may as well add that to the list) but without more discussion from the whole team (which can't happen because we don't have quorum of the actively involved people) and the TC it's premature. Leaderless would essentially mean consensually designating release liaisons and similar roles but no specific PTL. I think this is easily possible in a small in number, focused, and small feature-queue [1] group like Placement but would much harder in one of the larger groups like Nova. * We have several reluctant people who _can_ do it, but don't want to. Once we've explored the other ideas here and any others we can come up with, we can dredge one of those people up as a stand-in PTL, keeping the slot open. Because of [1] there's not much on the agenda for U. I guess I'm one of the reluctant people. I think technically I can do it but I don't want to commit to work when I don't see that I will have enough time to do it well. For me this is all about priorities and the amount of work I'm already commited to at the moment. Still I'm open to get tasks delegated to me, like doing the project update in Sanghai. Cheers, gibi Since the Placement team is not planning to have an active presence at the PTG, nor planning to have much of a pre-PTG (as no one has stepped up with any feature ideas) we have some days or even weeks before it matters who the next PTL (if any) is, so if possible, let's not rush this. [1] It's been a design goal of mine from the start that Placement would quickly reach a position of stability and maturity that I liked to call "being done". By the end of Train we are expecting to be feature complete for any features that have been actively discussed in the recent past [2]. The main tasks in U will be responding to bug fixes and requests-for-explanations for the features that already exist (because people asked for them) but are not being used yet and getting the osc-placement client caught up. [2] The biggest thing that has been discussed as a "maybe we should do" for which there are no immediate plans is "resource provider sharding" or "one placement, many clouds". That's a thing we imagined people might ask for, but haven't yet, so there's little point doing it. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 8:04 AM Balázs Gibizer <balazs.gibizer@est.tech> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:20 PM, Chris Dent <cdent+os@anticdent.org> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
Thanks for being concerned about this, but it would have been useful if you included me (as the current PTL) and the rest of the Placement team in the discussion or at least confirmed plans with me before starting this seek-volunteers process. There are a few open questions we are still trying to resolve before we should jump to any decisions: * We are currently waiting to see if Tetsuro is available (he's been away for a few days). If he is, he'll be great, but we don't know yet if he can or wants to. * We've started, informally, discussing the option of pioneering the option of leaderless projects within Placement (we pioneer many other things there, may as well add that to the list) but without more discussion from the whole team (which can't happen because we don't have quorum of the actively involved people) and the TC it's premature. Leaderless would essentially mean consensually designating release liaisons and similar roles but no specific PTL. I think this is easily possible in a small in number, focused, and small feature-queue [1] group like Placement but would much harder in one of the larger groups like Nova. * We have several reluctant people who _can_ do it, but don't want to. Once we've explored the other ideas here and any others we can come up with, we can dredge one of those people up as a stand-in PTL, keeping the slot open. Because of [1] there's not much on the agenda for U.
I guess I'm one of the reluctant people. I think technically I can do it but I don't want to commit to work when I don't see that I will have enough time to do it well. For me this is all about priorities and the amount of work I'm already commited to at the moment. Still I'm open to get tasks delegated to me, like doing the project update in Sanghai.
If it's okay with you, would you like to share what are some of the priorities and work that you feel is placed on a PTL which makes you reluctant? PS, by no means I am trying to push for you to be PTL if you're not currently interested, but I want to hear some of the community thoughts about this (and feel free to reply privately)
Cheers, gibi
Since the Placement team is not planning to have an active presence at the PTG, nor planning to have much of a pre-PTG (as no one has stepped up with any feature ideas) we have some days or even weeks before it matters who the next PTL (if any) is, so if possible, let's not rush this. [1] It's been a design goal of mine from the start that Placement would quickly reach a position of stability and maturity that I liked to call "being done". By the end of Train we are expecting to be feature complete for any features that have been actively discussed in the recent past [2]. The main tasks in U will be responding to bug fixes and requests-for-explanations for the features that already exist (because people asked for them) but are not being used yet and getting the osc-placement client caught up. [2] The biggest thing that has been discussed as a "maybe we should do" for which there are no immediate plans is "resource provider sharding" or "one placement, many clouds". That's a thing we imagined people might ask for, but haven't yet, so there's little point doing it. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent
-- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser@vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com
---- On Fri, 06 Sep 2019 22:34:41 +0900 Mohammed Naser <mnaser@vexxhost.com> wrote ----
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 8:04 AM Balázs Gibizer <balazs.gibizer@est.tech> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:20 PM, Chris Dent <cdent+os@anticdent.org> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
Thanks for being concerned about this, but it would have been useful if you included me (as the current PTL) and the rest of the Placement team in the discussion or at least confirmed plans with me before starting this seek-volunteers process. There are a few open questions we are still trying to resolve before we should jump to any decisions: * We are currently waiting to see if Tetsuro is available (he's been away for a few days). If he is, he'll be great, but we don't know yet if he can or wants to. * We've started, informally, discussing the option of pioneering the option of leaderless projects within Placement (we pioneer many other things there, may as well add that to the list) but without more discussion from the whole team (which can't happen because we don't have quorum of the actively involved people) and the TC it's premature. Leaderless would essentially mean consensually designating release liaisons and similar roles but no specific PTL. I think this is easily possible in a small in number, focused, and small feature-queue [1] group like Placement but would much harder in one of the larger groups like Nova. * We have several reluctant people who _can_ do it, but don't want to. Once we've explored the other ideas here and any others we can come up with, we can dredge one of those people up as a stand-in PTL, keeping the slot open. Because of [1] there's not much on the agenda for U.
I guess I'm one of the reluctant people. I think technically I can do it but I don't want to commit to work when I don't see that I will have enough time to do it well. For me this is all about priorities and the amount of work I'm already commited to at the moment. Still I'm open to get tasks delegated to me, like doing the project update in Sanghai.
If it's okay with you, would you like to share what are some of the priorities and work that you feel is placed on a PTL which makes you reluctant?
PS, by no means I am trying to push for you to be PTL if you're not currently interested, but I want to hear some of the community thoughts about this (and feel free to reply privately)
This is really important point. I can agree about PTL responsibility for big and very high traffic of work (review + feature request + discussions etc) are more time consuming but for other projects it should not be so bad. My personal experience as QA PTL (where you have lot of responsibility during release time, stable branches for devstack and other QA tools, stable testing job etc) is really good and does not consume my mush time (when I separated my PTL time and QA core developer time). Listing the items, responsibility which making PTL job very hard will be great way to improve it. -gmann
Cheers, gibi
Since the Placement team is not planning to have an active presence at the PTG, nor planning to have much of a pre-PTG (as no one has stepped up with any feature ideas) we have some days or even weeks before it matters who the next PTL (if any) is, so if possible, let's not rush this. [1] It's been a design goal of mine from the start that Placement would quickly reach a position of stability and maturity that I liked to call "being done". By the end of Train we are expecting to be feature complete for any features that have been actively discussed in the recent past [2]. The main tasks in U will be responding to bug fixes and requests-for-explanations for the features that already exist (because people asked for them) but are not being used yet and getting the osc-placement client caught up. [2] The biggest thing that has been discussed as a "maybe we should do" for which there are no immediate plans is "resource provider sharding" or "one placement, many clouds". That's a thing we imagined people might ask for, but haven't yet, so there's little point doing it. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent
-- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser@vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:34 PM, Mohammed Naser <mnaser@vexxhost.com> wrote: On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 8:04 AM Balázs Gibizer <balazs.gibizer@est.tech<mailto:balazs.gibizer@est.tech>> wrote: I guess I'm one of the reluctant people. I think technically I can do it but I don't want to commit to work when I don't see that I will have enough time to do it well. For me this is all about priorities and the amount of work I'm already commited to at the moment. Still I'm open to get tasks delegated to me, like doing the project update in Sanghai. If it's okay with you, would you like to share what are some of the priorities and work that you feel is placed on a PTL which makes you reluctant? PS, by no means I am trying to push for you to be PTL if you're not currently interested, but I want to hear some of the community thoughts about this (and feel free to reply privately) I preceive the PTL role as a person who oversees the project and follows the status of the ongoing features and high severity bugs. A person who organizes Forum and PTG discussions and ensures that the results are documented. A person who tries to improve the overal collaboration in the given project. And I guess there are things on the PTL's plate that I'm not even aware of. This needs time and it needs commitment to have that time available during the whole cycle. I'm in a situation where I constantly feel the lack of time to do my current commitments (e.g. be a good Nova core, be a good Placement core, finish the feature I promised both to the community and internally to my employer.) I think it won't be fair from me to commit to the PTL role when I already see I would not have time to do it properly. On the personal side I guess I also affraid of not having enough skill to delegeta the above PTL related tasks to others. Based on the above my constructive suggestion is to try out that the Placement core team together try to fulfill the PTL's role. I know that for the TC it creates some extra pain as there would be no single point of contact for the Placement project. Cheers, gibi
Sorry for the late response. I was on a business trip in Southeast Asia, and needed time to get internal permission, but finally I’d like to announce my candidacy for the PTL role of Placement for the Ussuri cycle. I’ve been involved with Placement since Queens cycle. I helped to develop new features, to keep refactoring for better performance, and to help other projects to use it (like Blazar to meet NFV requirements using placement). In the U cycle, having new features on server side, I’d like to focus on client side: * Improve usability of osc-placement and catch up the latest microversion * Commonize client code that helps other projects to use placement easily and intuitively That would help us to get more projects to use it and to get more use cases, such as reservations for ironic standalone nodes. Thanks! 2019年9月6日(金) 0:26 Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com>:
Hello Everyone,
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
We would like to know if anyone from Placement core team, Nova core team or PTL (as placement main consumer) of any other interested/related developer is interested to take the PTL position?
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/ussuri/ptl.html [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-09-05-14.00.log.html...
-TC (gmann)
---- On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:23:59 +0900 Tetsuro Nakamura <tnakamura.openstack@gmail.com> wrote ----
Sorry for the late response. I was on a business trip in Southeast Asia, and needed time to get internal permission, but finally I’d like to announce my candidacy for the PTL role of Placement for the Ussuri cycle. I’ve been involved with Placement since Queens cycle. I helped to develop new features, to keep refactoring for better performance, and to help other projects to use it (like Blazar to meet NFV requirements using placement). In the U cycle, having new features on server side, I’d like to focus on client side: * Improve usability of osc-placement and catch up the latest microversion * Commonize client code that helps other projects to use placement easily and intuitively That would help us to get more projects to use it and to get more use cases, such as reservations for ironic standalone nodes. Thanks!
Thanks Tetsuro. I have proposed the governance patch for that- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/681226/ -gmann
2019年9月6日(金) 0:26 Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com>: Hello Everyone,
With Ussuri Cycle PTL election completed, we left with Placement project as leaderless[1]. In today TC meeting[2], we discussed the few possibilities and decided to reach out to the eligible candidates to serve the PTL position.
We would like to know if anyone from Placement core team, Nova core team or PTL (as placement main consumer) of any other interested/related developer is interested to take the PTL position?
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/ussuri/ptl.html [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2019/tc.2019-09-05-14.00.log.html...
-TC (gmann)
participants (5)
-
Balázs Gibizer
-
Chris Dent
-
Ghanshyam Mann
-
Mohammed Naser
-
Tetsuro Nakamura