Search results for "canceled meeting" - openstack-discuss

[all][tc] What's happening in Technical Committee: summary April 15th, 21: Reading: 10 min

by Ghanshyam Mann

Hello Everyone, Here is this week's summary of the Technical Committee activities. 1. TC Meetings: ============ * We cancelled this week's meeting. * Next TC weekly meeting will be on April 21st Thursday 15:00 UTC, feel free to add the topic on the agenda[1] by April 20th. 2. What we completed this week: ========================= * Added goal readiness checklist[2] * Retired openstack-health[3] * Retired tempest-lib[4] * Add Ganesha based Ceph NFS Charm[5] * PTG summary sent to ML[6] 3. Activities In progress: ================== TC Tracker for Zed cycle ------------------------------ * With the Zed cycle kickoff[7], I have started the Zed cycle TC tracker by listing all the items we discussed in PTG but we will add more during the cycle also if something important comes up[8] Open Reviews ----------------- * Seven open reviews for ongoing activities[9]. Drop the lower constraints maintenance ------------------------------------------------ This has been going on for many months, if I remember correctly it was first brought up in Dec 2021. During those discussions, we figured out that maintaining and testing the lower constraints has many challenges. TC discussed all those challenges in Zed PTG and agreed to drop lower-constraints.txt file and its testing but keep them in requirements.txt with our best effort. I proposed the TC resolution on this[10], feel free to feedback there if there is any strong objection in this direction. Also sent it on ML[11] Consistent and Secure Default RBAC -------------------------------------------- I summarized the RBAC PTG discussion[12], we did not finish the discussion over the open question and decided to continue it in RBAC meetings later. I will schedule the next meeting soon. If you have any other questions than the current one, please add them to the etherpad[13] Removing the TC tag framework ---------------------------------- In TC tag framework, every TC member used to assign a few projects to check their health, needs from TC etc. It was meant to improve the interaction between TC and PTLs and contact points for any projects when TC needs it. But it did not go that way and even many of us do not know if that still exists or not. With TC weekly meetings and PTG interaction sessions, we anyways are more contacted with leaders and discussed it in PTG and agreed to remove this framework. I have proposed the removal[14] 2021 User Survey TC Question Analysis ----------------------------------------------- Jay has summarized the TC's user survey in PTG and it is up in gerrit for review[15]. Feel free to check and provide feedback. Zed cycle Leaderless projects ---------------------------------- Zaqar PTL assigned is merged[16], with that only Adjutant project is leaderless/maintainer-less. We will check Adjutant's situation again on ML and hope Braden will be ready with their company side permission[17]. Fixing Zuul config error ---------------------------- Requesting projects with zuul config error to look into those and fix them which should not take much time[18]. Project updates ------------------- * Add the cinder-three-par charm to Openstack charms[19] 4. How to contact the TC: ==================== If you would like to discuss or give feedback to TC, you can reach out to us in multiple ways: 1. Email: you can send the email with tag [tc] on openstack-discuss ML[20]. 2. Weekly meeting: The Technical Committee conduct a weekly meeting every Thursday 15 UTC [21] 3. Ping us using 'tc-members' nickname on #openstack-tc IRC channel. [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/835102 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/836706 [4] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/836704 [5] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/835429 [6] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-April/028104.ht… [7] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-April/028206.ht… [8] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-tracker [9] https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+status:open [10] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/838004 [11] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-April/028199.ht… [12] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-April/028103.ht… [13] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/rbac-zed-ptg [14] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/837891 [15] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/836888 [16] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/831123 [17] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-March/027626.ht… [18] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/zuul-config-error-openstack [19] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/837781 [20] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-discuss [21] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Technical_Committee_Meeting -gmann

3 years, 1 month

[tc][forum] Summary for "community outreach when cultures, time zones, and languages differ" session

by Julia Kreger

Leading up to the Summit a number of us in the TC discussed how to improve outreach and thus communications outside of what we would consider our normal circles. The focus was how to better enable asynchronous communication. How do we share context? Ultimately we are talking about bridge building. The discussion went in many directions and we kind of started out discussing items that make our preferred communication methods a bit difficult. Thierry really focused us back to reality pointing out that "the earth is round". As the community has recognized before, time zones are absolutely a thing and that we shouldn't try and force people to be up at 3 AM to attend a meeting every week. As this discussion went on, a number of note worthy ideas began to surface. * Teams should likely reconsider meeting times periodically. Some teams have found success with alternating, but other teams have found that few attend the second time slot. * That it is easier to form a group of people in a specific time zone as they bring their established culture and don't have to integrate into another culture which is easier for them. The down side of this is that this leads to those people focusing on that specific project. * IRC is "super-addictive". ** The real time value of IRC is recognized, however on-boarding people into it can sometimes be a time consuming effort for some projects. ** Many, the TC included, have been trying to push more deep discussions to the mailing list or having someone summarize the outcome of conversations to the mailing list. ** IRC communication is often viewed as "too fast" of a discussion if your not a native speaker of the language being used in IRC. By the time you or software translates a statement, the discussion has moved on. * No matter what we do, there are two styles of communication that we need to be mindful of both asynchronous and synchronous communication. ** Some communities, such as the Linux kernel, have adopted fully asynchronous communication to handle the fact that the world is round. ** Projects have a tendency to use any communication method available. *** Some projects use etherpads for short term status on items, where others focus on its use for thought process preservation. *** Some projects try to drive such thought processes to an IRC discussion and then that often ends up as a discussion in gerrit. A point was eventually raised that meetings can still be useful, standing issues aside, as long as context is known in advance. The advance context does allow a team to determine in advance if a meeting is even required. Todo's and what can be done! * Simple reminders have apparently helped some meeting moderators keep people in attendance. * We reached consensus to encourage moderators to provide context in advance of meetings. This is in order to assist everyone to be more informed and hopefully shorten the exercise of trying to understand the issue as opposed to understand others impressions and reaching consensus. ** We also reached consensus that moderators should cancel a meeting if there is nothing on the agenda. * We want to encourage outreach messaging. This is not just the sub-communities making themselves known to the larger community, but raising awareness of "what is going on" or "what is new?" either in a project or portion of the community. Ultimately this falls into the category of "we do not know, what we do not know" and as such it is upon all of us to attempt to better communicate where we see gaps. As for specific action items, after re-reading the notes, I think that is up to us as a community to determine our next steps. We recorded no action items so I think further discussion may be needed. Perhaps all The etherpad can be found at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BER-tc-community-outreach. -Julia

6 years, 5 months

Re: [nova][ptg] PTG participation

by Sylvain Bauza

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 7:11 PM Sean Mooney <smooney(a)redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 17:36 +0000, Sean Mooney wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 18:17 +0100, Balázs Gibizer wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've just got the news from my employer that due to COVID19 I cannot > > > travel to Vancouver in June. > > > > From a redhat perspective i dont think a decision has been made on if we > should attend or not. > ill clarify that slightly in that we do have guidence that "Red Hatters > may not travel to attend external events or > conferences with 1000+ attendees, even within their home country." > > in the past when the ptg and summit were combinined and we had the > devsumit have ment that travel to the openstack even > would not be allowed. At its current size its kind of in a gray zone where > its is not banned as a public event but if it > was an internal event the number of redhat employee that would be > attending woudl be over the limit we have and the > physical event would be canceled and converted to a virtual only event. > > so its tbd if i will be attending too although i have not heard a > definitive No at this point but i also cant really > book tickets and flight yet either however the guidance we have been given > is to try and default to virtual attendance > were possible. > > > last time i spoke to my manager we were still waiting to see how thing > progress with the assumtion we would attend > > but we might want to plan for a virtual PTG (via video conference, > etherpad and email) in the event many cant travel > > or > > that things escalate to a point where the PTG event could be canceled. > > > > i dont think the foundation has indicated that that is likely to happen > but im sure they are monitoring > > things closely as our employers will be so having a plan b might now be > a bad thing in either case. > > if there isnt a diverse quoram physically at the ptg it would limit our > ability to make desisions as happend to > > some extent in china. it would be still good to get operator feedback > but they may also be under similar travel > > restrictions. > > > > I personnally have concerns with virtual events that are large like our PTG : - which timezone should we use for the virtual PTG ? Anyway, Asia, Europe or North America folks could have problems with one. - some folks (like me) have bandwidth issues in their (home) offices. They could be having problems when trying to discuss - how can we be sure that all of us can discuss by a virtual meeting ? Not saying it won't work, but discussions could take more time. Anyway, I'm sad for you, gibi. I'm not -2 about a virtual PTG, I just want to make sure we think about the above concerns before agreeing with any virtual PTG. > > cheers, > > > gibi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

5 years, 2 months

[cinder][PTG] Cinder 2023.2 (Bobcat) Virtual PTG

by Rajat Dhasmana

Hello Argonauts, We will be conducting cinder virtual PTG for 2023.2 (Bobcat) cycle from 28th March to 31st March, 2023. I've prepared the PTG etherpad[1] with topics day wise. I haven't kept the schedule time bound since some discussions take less and some take more time and in both cases reaching a conclusion is important. There are some events that need to be done on their respective time are as follows: *1) Operator Hour: *We encourage operators to join and tell us about the pain points of cinder so we can improve upon it. Date: Wednesday, 29 March, 2023 Time: 1400-1500 UTC Link: https://bluejeans.com/556681290 *2) Glance Cross Project* Date: Thursday, 30 March, 2023 Time: 1430-1500 UTC Link: https://bluejeans.com/556681290 *3) Nova Cross Project* Date: Thursday, 30 March, 2023 Time: 1600-1700 UTC Link: https://zoom.us/j/96494117185?pwd=NGhya0NpeWppMEc1OUNKdlFPbDNYdz09 (Diablo room) The general information about the PTG is as follows: Date: 28th March to 31st March, 2023 Time: 1300-1700 UTC everyday Link to PTG: https://bluejeans.com/556681290 You can also follow the schedule at https://ptg.opendev.org/ptg.html Note that we have allocated 4 hours each day but it also depends on the number and duration of topics as to how long the PTG will run. If you want to be reminded about a particular topic, please add your IRC nick in the *Courtesy ping list *mentioned after every topic. If you still have topics, please add them to the Planning etherpad[2] and I will see if we can accommodate that into our current schedule. Lastly, we will be cancelling our cinder upstream meeting (Wednesday, 29 March, 1400-1500 UTC) since it overlaps with the PTG. If you still have topics please bring it to the PTG. See you all at the PTG! [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/bobcat-ptg-cinder [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/bobcat-ptg-cinder-planning Thanks Rajat Dhasmana

2 years, 2 months

Re: [ironic] Mid-cycle call times

by Julia Kreger

I think so yes. I guess so yes. I will follow-up with notes after the meeting and cover any announcements at the start of the call. And as for until the last person gets too tired to argue.... indeed. :) -Julia On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 4:23 AM Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > Thanks Julia! > > I guess we're canceling the weekly meeting because of the overlap? > > On 1/18/19 12:49 PM, Julia Kreger wrote: > > Greetings everyone! > > > > I've created a fairly simple schedule: > > > > January 21st 2:00 - 4:00 UTC > > > > 2:00 PM UTC - Discuss current status > > 2:30 PM UTC - Revising current plans and reprioritizing as necessary > > 3:30 PM UTC - Making Ironic more container friendly. > > 3:30pm - until the last person gets too tired to argue :D > > > > > January 22nd 2:00 - 4:00 UTC > > > > 2:00 PM UTC - Boot Management for in-band inspection > > 2:30 PM UTC - SmartNIC configuration support > > 3:00 PM UTC - Disucss any other items that arose during the earlier discussions. > > 3:30 PM UTC - Bug and RFE Triaging > > > > If there are no objections, we can use my bluejeans[1] account to discuss. > > Please see our planning/discussion etherpad[2]. > > > > Thanks! I look forward to chatting with everyone soon. > > > > -Julia > > > > [1]: https://bluejeans.com/u/jkreger > > [2]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-stein-midcycle > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:00 PM Julia Kreger > > <juliaashleykreger(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Greetings everyone, > >> > >> It seems the most popular times are January 21st and 22nd between 2 PM > >> and 6 PM UTC. > >> > >> Please add any topics for discussion to the etherpad[1] as soon as > >> possible. I will propose a schedule and agenda in the next day or two. > >> > >> -Julia > >> > >> [1]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-stein-midcycle > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:10 AM Julia Kreger <juliaashleykreger(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Greetings everyone! > >>> > >>> It seems we have coalesced around January 21st and 22nd. I have posted > >>> a poll[1] with time windows in two hour blocks so we can reach a > >>> consensus on when we should meet. > >>> > >>> Please vote for your available time windows so we can find the best > >>> overlap for everyone. Additionally, if there are any topics or items > >>> that you feel would be a good use of the time, please feel free to add > >>> them to the planning etherpad[2]. > >> [trim] > > > >

6 years, 4 months

Re: [nova] riscv64 emulation support

by Sean Mooney

On 11/12/2024 15:31, James Page wrote: > Hi Nova Team > > We've had some initial support for enabling RISCV64 support in Nova in > a review for sometime which I refreshed this week: > > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/889137 > > Sean suggested that this really needs a blueprint and discussion at > the next Nova meeting (which I can't make) so proposing discussion via > ML instead: > > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/riscv64-emulation-support i recorded my general support for this in the blueprint too but since i wont be aroudn eitehr for the next team meeting assuming its not canceled need week im +1 on addign the new architecture. we did add the trait to os-traits https://github.com/openstack/os-traits/blob/master/os_traits/compute/arch.p… as part of the previous blueprint but the emulation support was not read for riscv at the time so i see this as a minimal extension to the existing support. hopefully others agree. > > I'm also going to look at the nova-emulation job to see if that can be > extended to cover RISCV64 as well - there are a few nuances with > dependent packages (opensbi) in Ubuntu 24.04 but I think we can come > up with something workable for testing. adding addtional packages to the job should be fine provided they are available in the distro. the only concern i would have would be if we needed to compile something to make it work as that could cause other conflicts in the job. i.e. if we had to comple qemu that could be an issue, if we have to install extra packages in that one specific job to provide the uefi firmware ectra that should be fine. when its workign we will need to extend the job to download a riscv image to use for the emulation testing. cirros does not actully provider one https://download.cirros-cloud.net/0.6.3/ so if we want to test this end to end we will need a similar small stand in image. ubuntu might work if there is a image that can boot with 192mb of ram or ideally less. alpine does not seam to have a sutible image to use either so that might be the tricker dep to resolve. without a test image we can at least see that the traits are repoted but it wont add much value over the unit/funcitonal tests. i assume ye have a test image that is being used to develop the functionality? > > Review and comments are appreciated. > > Thanks > > James

5 months, 3 weeks

Re: [nova][ptg][ops] Nova at the vPTG (+ skipping next weekly meeting)

by Sean Mooney

On Thu, 2023-03-23 at 13:50 +0000, Sofia Enriquez wrote: > Hi Sylvain, > > I hope you're doing well. Apologies for the delay in responding to your > previous message. I wanted to suggest a cross-project topic with Cinder > that involves adding support for NFS encryption. > > To complement the work on Cinder[3], I've proposed two patches [1][2] and > would appreciate any feedback you may have. I believe it would be > beneficial to discuss my approach during the PTG, but I'm open to > discussing it during a weekly meeting as well. i have seen those patches come in over the last while but since you did not create a nova bluepirnt or spec i was assuming that you were waiting for the ptg to talk about them. i have not atcully reviewed them but we can defeintly discuss it next week if the changes are small we can proably proceed with a specless bluepirnt but if they have any api impact or upgrade consideration or move operatoion considertioant we will need an actul spec even if its short. > > I've looked at the etherpad and am considering the first slot on Wednesday > or the last slot on Thursday or Friday. > > Please let me know your thoughts. > > Thank you, > Sofia > > [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/854030 > [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/870012 > [3] https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp%252Fnfs-volume-encryption > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 9:46 AM Sylvain Bauza <sbauza(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > > > As a reminder, the Nova community will discuss at the vPTG. You can see > > the topics we'll talk in https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bobcat-ptg > > > > Our agenda will be from Tuesday to Friday, everyday between 1300UTC and > > 1700UTC. Connection details are in the etherpad above, but you can also use > > PTGbot website : https://ptg.opendev.org/ptg.html (we'll use the diablo > > room for all the discussions) > > > > You can't stick around for 4 hours x 4 days ? Heh, no worries ! > > If you (as an operator or a developer) want to engage with us (and we'd > > love this honestly), you have two possibilities : > > - either you prefer to listen (and talk) to some topics you've seen in > > the agenda, and then add your IRC nick (details how to use IRC are > > explained by [1]) on the topics you want. Once we start to discuss about > > those topics, I'll ping the courtesy ping list of each topic on > > #openstack-nova. Just make sure you're around in the IRC channel. > > - or you prefer to engage with us about some pain points or some feature > > requests, and then the right time is the Nova Operator Hour that will be on > > *Tuesday 1500UTC*. We have a specific etherpad for this session : > > https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/march2023-ptg-operator-hour-nova where you > > can preemptively add your thoughts or concerns. > > > > Anyway, we are eager to meet you all ! > > > > Oh, last point, given we will be at the vPTG, next week's weekly meeting > > on Tuesday is CANCELLED. But I guess you'll see it either way if you lurk > > the #openstack-nova channel ;-) > > > > See you next week ! > > -Sylvain > > > > [1] > > https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-March/032853.h… > > > > > > >

2 years, 2 months

Re: FW: 2020 OSF Events & coronavirus

by Mark Collier

I wanted to make sure everyone saw this update I just posted to the OSF foundation mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2020-March/002854.html The main thing we need now are volunteers to help us plan a virtual PTG (see link in thread above), and it sounds like many people on this thread are already thinking about ways to help :) I also agree with Julia and others who said it's important to clearly define the purpose of each gathering, as we think through the best way to organize them virtually. By working together we can make the first ever virtual PTG event a success. Mark On Wednesday, March 18, 2020 7:16am, "Sean Mooney" <smooney(a)redhat.com> said: > On Tue, 2020-03-17 at 08:18 -0700, Julia Kreger wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> I think we need to consider teasing out the reasoning behind events a >> little more. When we look at summits, they are largely events to >> broadcast outward our work and provide vendors an avenue to express >> their new features and functionality, and generate sales leads. >> >> Where as the events likely need to be teased apart a little more. What >> we've traditionally referred to as a summit is largely rooted in >> broadcasting outward what we as a community are working on and the >> direction where we are going, while providing a time and space for >> vendors to to show off their solutions and offerings. To me, this >> largely seems like a coordinated outreach and marketing Blitz. And >> this is not one of JUST vendors, but of project teams as well for they >> need to convey what they have been working on and their focus as a >> community. >> >> If we look the PTG and Forum sorts of events that we have had, they >> provide more an avenue for collaboration and discussion. That could be >> as simple as a rough list of topics, and a few predefined "hallways" >> where random discussion can occur. In a sense, the hallway becomes the >> un-conference if we empower and enable it. > of the two types of events i think the second e.g. PTG/Forum is the one that > we as a comunity would be most impacted by if it was not to go ahead either > physically or virtually. > > the summit/marketplace may impact sales to a degree but for those of us > that work at a company/vendor that makes money form openstack we have large sales > and marketing teams anyway so the sales lead perspective while valid is not > really > that critical to the same degree as losing the opportunity to collaborate and > cross > pollinate ideas between different aspect of the comunity. > > it is very true that a lot of conversation happen in the hallway but those > conversatoin > can happen on irc or video calls too but the barrier to entry is obviously higher > to start them. > >> >> Anyway, before we jump into ideas and implementation scenarios, we >> need to have a clear motivation behind each "event" that the community >> and it's partners can rally behind, and I suspect that will only come >> from the OSF events team as well as track chairs/organizers. >> >> -Julia >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 3:56 AM Sagi Shnaidman <sshnaidm(a)redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, all >> > I think the Openstack community has more virtual collaboration experience than >> any other community and maybe it's a >> > good chance for us to establish an efficient way to make a virtual summit. I'm >> not alone thinking virtual >> > summits/webinars/whatever are much less efficient than in-person meetings and >> hanging out together. But in current >> > circumstances, it doesn't seem like an option, so why not try brainstorm about >> how we still can do a virtual summit >> > and get most of it? >> > >> > Main issues with virtual meetings that I can see are: >> > >> > - topics discussions in a big group of people, while virtual meetings often >> less convenient and sometimes are >> > tough[1] >> > - the important things happen also *between* sessions, not during them >> > - what would replace booths (and swags of course)? >> > - PTG project rooms which are used both for internal discussions and >> collaboration between various projects >> > - informal mingling >> > >> > I'm not sure all of these and other issues can be easily replaced virtually, >> but who knows, maybe we can still make >> > it work. Like maybe constant open video sessions which mimic rooms and booths, >> some of the discussions moved to >> > dedicated IRC channels. >> > On the flip side, the offline summit had restrictions as well, so we can do >> things in a virtual summit we couldn't >> > (or couldn't do so much) in offline ones. Maybe more presenters will have a >> chance to make sessions since we are not >> > so limited in time online and all sessions can be recorded as well. And we >> don't need a projector in every PTG room >> > now :) >> > I'd propose creating a page where people can put their ideas on how to make >> good things we have in the offline >> > summit to be virtual or add something new, which couldn't be done in the >> offline summit. Since we created recently >> > "Ideas for OpenStack" page[2], maybe it's a good candidate to hold these ideas >> in. >> > Just reminding that Openstack is not the only project that cancels offline >> meetings and efficient virtual >> > collaboration is a very hot topic right now all over the world. I think the >> Openstack community has all the >> > resources to contribute from its experience to many other projects and >> companies and be leading in this area. >> > WDYT? >> > >> > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYu_bGbZiiQ >> > [2] https://governance.openstack.org/ideas/index.html >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:13 PM <Arkady.Kanevsky(a)dell.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Agree that going virtual makes most sense given current status >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > From: Emilien Macchi <emilien(a)redhat.com> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 5:46 PM >> > > To: Mark Collier >> > > Cc: openstack-discuss; Jonathan Bryce >> > > Subject: Re: FW: 2020 OSF Events & coronavirus >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] >> > > >> > > Hi Mark, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks for the transparency, as usual. I have a few thoughts, please read >> inline. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 4:04 PM Mark Collier <mark(a)openstack.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > upcoming event in Vancouver is no exception. The OpenDev tracks >> > > > each morning will be programmed by volunteers from the community, and the >> project >> > > > teams will be organizing their own conversations as well each afternoon >> M-W, and >> > > > all day Thursday. >> > > > >> > > > But the larger question is here: should the show go on? >> > > > >> > > > The short answer is that as of now, the Vancouver and Berlin events are >> still >> > > > scheduled to happen in June (8-11) and October (19-23), respectively. >> > > > >> > > > However, we are willing to cancel or approach the events in a different way >> (i.e. >> > > > virtual) if the facts indicate that is the best path, and we know the facts >> are >> > > > changing rapidly. One of the most critical inputs we need is to hear from >> each of >> > > > you. We know that many of you rely on the twice-annual events to get >> together and >> > > > make rapid progress on the software, which is one reason we are not making >> any >> > > > decisions in haste. We also know that many of you may be unable or >> unwilling to >> > > > travel in June, and that is critical information to hear as we get closer >> to the >> > > > event so that we can make the most informed decision. >> > > >> > > >> > > I believe that we, as a community should show the example and our strengths >> by cancelling the Vancouver event and >> > > organize a virtual event like some other big events are doing. >> > > >> > > There is an opportunity for the OSF to show leadership in Software >> communities and acknowledge the risk of spread >> > > during that meeting; not only for the people attending it but for also those >> in contact with these people later. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > I'm not a doctor nor I know much about the virus; but I'm not interested to >> travel and take the risk to 1) catch >> > > the virus and 2) spread it at home and in my country; and as a community >> member, I feel like our responsibility is >> > > also to maintain ourselves healthy. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > In my opinion, the sooner we cancel, the better we can focus on organizing >> the virtual meetings, and also we can >> > > influence more communities to take that kind of decisions. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks Mark for starting that discussion, it's a perfect sign of how healthy >> is our community; and hopefully it >> > > will continue to be. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > >> > > Emilien Macchi >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards >> > Sagi Shnaidman >> >> > >

5 years, 2 months

Re: [tacker] Recent FT errors

by Yasufumi Ogawa

On 2022/09/15 17:29, ueha.ayumu(a)fujitsu.com wrote: > Hi Yasufumi, > > I think waiting patches don't depend on these tests > because these tests are for legacy implementation of Tacker. Thanks for the reply quickly. I've realized that. So, could you update your patch for canceling these tests if no other one opposite to the temporary fix? Yasufumi > > -----Original Message----- > > Ayumu, > > On 2022/09/15 17:15, ueha.ayumu(a)fujitsu.com wrote: >> Hi Yasufumi, >> >> Thanks for your suggestion! I agree with you. >> >>> we can make the new tests non-voting >> I think it is better to make the old tests (legacy and lib-master) >> non-voting too, because the old tests has also failed recently. >> What do you think? > I'd agree if waiting patches don't depend on these tests. > >> >> Best regards, >> Ueha >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o(a)gmail.com> >> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 5:00 PM >> To: openstack-discuss <openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org> >> Subject: [tacker] Recent FT errors >> >> Hi tacker team, >> >> We've several unexpected failures on functional tests since last week or so. It might be because of new tests introduced in the recent some updates, and some lackness of resources on zuul tests we usually meet the same situation at the end of release possibly. >> >> Thanks to ueha to propose a patch [1] as a remedy for the issue, but it doesn't work for now unfortunately. For plan B, we can make the new tests non-voting for a while because it's not related to all reamined patches being reviewed now actually. We can revert it and focus on to fix the problem after RC1 is released. What do you think? >> >> [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker/+/857551 >> >> Yasufumi >>

2 years, 8 months

Re: [OpenStack-I18n] Re: [i18n] i18n SIG PTG Schedule & Key Topics for Discussion

by Ian Y. Choi

Hi all, Just updating the Friday slot to accommodate the Europe time zone today. * October 25th : 07:00 ~ 08:00 UTC (updated) - at havana-FriA4 ( please see more info on https://ptg.opendev.org/ptg.html ). Thank you all, /Ian On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 12:05 AM Seongsoo Cho <ppiyakk2(a)printf.kr> wrote: > > Hi i18n SIG Team > > I am sharing the updated schedule. > > • October 23rd: 13:00 - 15:00 UTC > • October 24th: 13:00 - 15:00 UTC (cancelled) > * October 25th : 05:00 ~ 07:00 UTC (added) > > Best Regards > Seongsoo > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 11:13 PM Seongsoo Cho <ppiyakk2(a)printf.kr> wrote: >> >> Hi i18n SIG Team >> >> I’m pleased to announce the i18n SIG schedule for the upcoming PTG. Here are the details: >> >> Dates: >> >> • October 23rd: 13:00 - 15:00 UTC >> • October 24th: 13:00 - 15:00 UTC >> >> We encourage you to check the meeting minutes and contribute to the discussion by accessing the following Etherpad: >> https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/oct2024-ptg-i18n >> >> Key Discussion Topics: >> >> 1. Weblate Migration: We will discuss the progress and steps needed for migrating to Weblate. >> 2. Enhancing Translation Engagement: We’ll focus on strategies to improve the engagement and translation rates for OpenStack projects. Potential ideas, such as incorporating LLM (Large Language Models), will also be explored. >> >> We look forward to your participation and contributions to these discussions. >> >> Best Regards >> Seongsoo >> >> -- >> Seongsoo Cho >> OpenStack Korea User Group / Community Leader >> IRC #seongsoocho > > > > -- > Seongsoo Cho > OpenStack Korea User Group / Community Leader > IRC #seongsoocho > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-I18n mailing list -- openstack-i18n(a)lists.openstack.org > To unsubscribe send an email to openstack-i18n-leave(a)lists.openstack.org

7 months, 1 week

openstack-discuss search results for query "canceled meeting"