Hello Stackers, Here’s a summary of the OpenStack Technical Committee’s discussions at the 2025.2 “Flamingo” Virtual PTG held April 7–11, 2025. Find detailed notes in our discussion etherpad [1] and recordings on YouTube [2]. Feedback is welcome on this mailing list or in OFTC’s `#openstack-tc` IRC channel, perhaps during our weekly meetings [3]. == Topic: TC Retrospective == Discussion: - We reviewed the TC’s effectiveness in addressing issues raised during the cycle, including leadership gaps, licensing concerns, project guide updates, and communication practices. - Fewer teams were leaderless following the 2025.2 election cycle—thanks to better outreach and clearer election guidance. - There was consensus that the TC guideline discouraging bare “recheck” comments and the need to address persistent gate issues is now better understood. - Licensing FAQs [4] appear outdated. We noted that the TC can escalate licensing questions to the OpenInfra Foundation’s Legal team and should monitor the `legal-discuss` list more actively. - Teams encouraging non-core contributors to become PTLs was praised as a way to grow the contributor base through mentorship. Action Items: - Update the Project Team Guide, removing obsolete sections (e.g., sprint design/process). - Update licensing references across the Project Team Guide and TC governance site. - Encourage public communication, regular meetings, and the use of team-specific IRC or Matrix channels. == Topic: Goals Retrospective == Discussion: - We reviewed the status of ongoing community-wide goals, including progress, blockers, and next steps. - Migrate CI Jobs to Ubuntu Noble [5] - The goal is complete. Teams should now remove OS version pins in their repositories. - Eventlet Migration [6] - Refer to Hervé’s PTG summary [7] for updates. - Privsep Migration [8] - Progress is slow; some minor activity exists in Gerrit, but tracking doesn’t reflect it. - The Oslo team will de-prioritize removing eventlet from `oslo-rootwrap`, as it’s expected to be retired. - Clear guidance on secure, performant `privsep` usage is needed. - FIPS Compliance [9] - CentOS Stream 10 requires x86_64-v3, unsupported by our nodepool providers. - This hardware/runtime mismatch complicates long-term testing with CS9 or Ubuntu LTS. - Alternatives discussed: Debian, Rocky Linux (but Rocky may inherit CS10's hardware constraints). - Red Hat is evaluating a `paramiko` replacement this cycle. - Consistent and Secure RBAC [10] - Progress tracked [here](https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-goal-tracking#L14). - Phase 1 (personas + drop system scope): 16 projects complete. - Phase 2 (service role): 3 projects. - Phase 3 (manager role): 3 projects. - Ghanshyam Mann (gmann) continues to chair bi-weekly IRC meetings. Action Items: - Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez (ralonsoh) to send a status update on `privsep` and flag possible `rootwrap` deprecation. - Ade lee (ade_lee) to update FIPS goal status. - SRBAC liaisons must attend bi-weekly meetings and track project progress. - Publish guidance on secure, performant `privsep` usage. == Topic: Revisiting “Unmaintained” Branches == Discussion: - The TC discussed the burden and ambiguity around maintaining aging branches. - Project teams often lack resources or interest to maintain older branches; the Release team has pursued mass EOL as a workaround. - We agreed to reduce scope and prioritize core goals (e.g., eventlet removal, CI stability) rather than preserve old branches without active interest. - TC supports giving `openstack-unmaintained-core` full responsibility for EOL decisions. We may seek volunteers earlier in the branch lifecycle. - Broken jobs in unmaintained branches flood Zuul; fixing in-repo configs may not be viable. OpenDev may opt to ignore failing jobs externally. - There’s an unregistered, unlogged `#openstack-unmaintained` IRC channel on OFTC. Action Items: - Document responsibilities of unmaintained branch liaisons and `openstack-unmaintained-core`. - Propose a new process: `openstack-unmaintained-core` sets deadlines per cycle to solicit maintainers for aging branches. If no one steps up, proceed to EOL. == Topic: TC and Community Leaders Forum == Discussion: - Governance proposal under review to expand the scope of the VMT to cover all OpenStack project teams [11]. - The TC must ensure teams prioritize security. Poor handling of vulnerabilities harms community trust and ethical responsibility. - Ideas were proposed to support the VMT, including a pool of core security contacts from contributing organizations. - Projects were reminded to review community goals and prioritize them. Adding goal timelines and cross-project prioritization was suggested. - Teams should use Stackalytics and Bitergia dashboards to track activity and identify areas needing improvement (e.g., review velocity, core participation). Action Items: - Teams must audit their Launchpad “Bug Sharing” settings and confirm their `coresec` groups contain responsible, active contributors. - PTLs and Security Liaisons should ensure they can manage the `coresec` group or delegate access. - Audit deliverables against [Security Process Requirements][12]. - Benchmark project health using Stackalytics/Bitergia. Reinforce OpenStack code review best practices [13][14]. == Topic: Finding Contributors in Some Projects is Hard == Discussion: - QA, Requirements, and Release Management teams remain understaffed. - Despite upstream investment opportunities for 2025 [15], contributor interest is low. - This is a “Tragedy of the Commons” issue: shared work without clear ownership is often deprioritized. - PTG scheduling didn’t support sufficient cross-project collaboration. - The TC was encouraged to reset perfectionist expectations—approve good-enough changes, and avoid expanding review scope unnecessarily. Action Items: - Explore QA Liaisons: trusted contributors mentored into maintaining QA repos. - Avoid nitpicking or scope creep during code reviews. - Promote and participate in the contributor survey [16]. - Document expectations and best practices in the Project Team Guide. == Topic: Splintered Conversations & Communication Barriers == Discussion: - Operators report more engagement on Reddit, Kubernetes Slack, Discord, etc., than on `openstack-discuss` or OFTC IRC. - Some organizations block Matrix due to regulatory compliance, requiring platforms with retention policies. - The OpenInfra Board will not mandate platforms—projects must choose what suits them. - IRC onboarding is hard for newcomers. - Zuul contributors reported smooth onboarding to Matrix. Its e2e encryption may make it more acceptable for compliance-sensitive orgs. - The conversation continued in the `os-operators` PTG, where there was interest in trying Matrix and Meetpad for better engagement. Action Items: - Explore use of a hosted Matrix homeserver by OpenDev as a short-term workaround for those unable to use IRC. That's a wrap! It was great fun seeing you all at the PTG. I look forward to working on these AIs with you! Thanks, On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) OpenStack TC Chair [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.51cb4e74dd9980932d32e9a9f4e8a0ce (OS TC PTG Etherpad) [2] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLhwOhbQKWT7XYzqrx21j1uizxNxnbDf5Q (OS TC PTG Recordings) [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee (OS TC Weekly Meetings) [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LegalIssuesFAQ (OpenStack Licensing FAQs) [5] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/completed/2025.1/migrate-ci-jobs-t... (Migrate to Noble goal) [6] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/remove-eventlet.html (Eventlet removal goal) [7] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... (Eventlet PTG Summary) [8] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/migrate-to-privsep.html (Privsep migration goal) [9] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/fips.html (FIPS compliance goal) [10] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/consistent-and-secure-rba... (SRBAC goal) [11] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/944817 (TC VMT Resolution) [12] https://security.openstack.org/repos-overseen.html#requirements (Security requirements for OpenStack Projects) [13] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/review-the-openstack-way.html (Code Reviews in the OpenStack Way) [14] https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/quasiblog/code-review-antipatte... (Code Review Antipatterns) [15] https://governance.openstack.org/tc//reference/upstream-investment-opportuni... (OpenStack Investment Opportunities) [16] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... (Bridging the Gap)