Open Stack

Hello everyone,

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 2:14 PM Belmiro Moreira <
moreira.belmiro.email.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> the problem described in the "OpenStack User-facing APIs" is something
> that we face daily in our deployment. Different CLIs for different
> operations.
>
same for us, really frustrating, going around and see what is missing (what
options)


> I'm really interested in driving this action item.
>

I totally support your proposal!

Cristina

>
> Belmiro
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:38 PM Kendall Nelson <kennelson11 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Everyone!
>>
>> I hope you all had a productive and enjoyable PTG! While it’s still
>> reasonably fresh, I wanted to take a moment to summarize discussions and
>> actions that came out of TC discussions.
>>
>> If there is a particular action item you are interested in taking, please
>> reply on this thread!
>>
>> For the long version, check out the etherpad from the PTG[1].
>>
>> Tuesday
>>
>> ======
>>
>> Ussuri Retrospective
>>
>> ----------------------------
>>
>> As usual we accomplished a lot. Some of the things we accomplished were
>> around enumerating operating systems per release (again), removing python2
>> support, and adding the ideas repository. Towards the end of the release,
>> we had a lot of discussions around what to do with leaderless projects, the
>> role of PTLs, and what to do with projects that were missing PTL candidates
>> for the next release. We discussed office hours, their history and reason
>> for existence, and clarified how we can strengthen communication amongst
>> ourselves, the projects, and the larger community.
>>
>> TC Onboarding
>>
>> --------------------
>>
>> It was brought up that those elected most recently (and even new members
>> the election before) felt like there wasn’t enough onboarding into the TC.
>> Through discussion about what we can do to better support returning members
>> is to better document the daily, weekly and monthly tasks TC members are
>> supposed to be doing. Kendall Nelson proposed a patch to start adding more
>> detail to a guide for TC members already[2]. It was also proposed that we
>> have a sort of mentorship or shadow program for people interested in
>> joining the TC or new TC members by more experienced TC members. The
>> discussion about the shadow/mentorship program is to be continued.
>>
>> TC/UC Merge
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> Thierry gave an update on the merge of the committees. The simplified
>> version is that the current proposal is that UC members are picked from TC
>> members, the UC operates within the TC, and that we are already setup for
>> this given the number of TC members that have AUC status. None of this
>> requires a by-laws change. One next step that has already begun is the
>> merging of the openstack-users ML into openstack-discuss ML. Other next
>> steps are to decide when to do the actual transition (disbanding the
>> separate UC, probably at the next election?) and when to setup AUC’s to be
>> defined as extra-ATC’s to be included in the electorate for elections. For
>> more detail, check out the openstack-discuss ML thread[3].
>>
>> Wednesday
>>
>> =========
>>
>> Help Wanted List
>>
>> -----------------------
>>
>> We settled on a format for the job postings and have several on the list.
>> We talked about how often we want to look through, update or add to it. The
>> proposal is to do this yearly. We need to continue pushing on the board to
>> dedicate contributors at their companies to work on these items, and get
>> them to understand that it's an investment that will take longer than a
>> year in a lot of cases; interns are great, but not enough.
>>
>> TC Position on Foundation Member Community Contributions
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The discussion started with a state of things today - the expectations of
>> platinum members, the benefits the members get being on the board and why
>> they should donate contributor resources for these benefits, etc. A variety
>> of proposals were made: either enforce or remove the minimum contribution
>> level, give gold members the chance to have increased visibility (perhaps
>> giving them some of the platinum member advantages) if they supplement
>> their monetary contributions with contributor contributions, etc. The
>> #ACTION that was decided was for Mohammed to take these ideas to the board
>> and see what they think.
>>
>> OpenStack User-facing APIs
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Users are confused about the state of the user facing API’s; they’ve been
>> told to use the OpenStackClient(OSC) but upon use, they discover that there
>> are features missing that exist in the python-*clients. Partial
>> implementation in the OSC is worse than if the service only used their
>> specific CLI. Members of the OpenStackSDK joined discussions and explained
>> that many of the barriers that projects used to have behind implementing
>> certain commands have been resolved. The proposal is to create a pop up
>> team and that they start with fully migrating Nova, documenting the process
>> and collecting any other unresolved blocking issues with the hope that one
>> day we can set the migration of the remaining projects as a community goal.
>> Supplementally, a new idea was proposed-  enforcing new functionality to
>> services is only added to the SDK (and optionally the OSC) and not the
>> project’s specific CLI to stop increasing the disparity between the two.
>> The #ACTION here is to start the pop up team, if you are interested, please
>> reply! Additionally, if you disagree with this kind of enforcement, please
>> contact the TC as soon as possible and explain your concerns.
>>
>> PTL Role in OpenStack today & Leaderless Projects
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This was a veeeeeeeerrrry long conversation that went in circles a few
>> times. The very short version is that we, the TC, are willing to let
>> project teams decide for themselves if they want to have a more
>> deconstructed kind of PTL role by breaking it into someone responsible for
>> releases and someone responsible for security issues. This new format also
>> comes with setting the expectation that for things like project updates and
>> signing up for PTG time, if someone on the team doesn’t actively take that
>> on, the default assumption is that the project won’t participate. The
>> #ACTION we need someone to take on is to write a resolution about how this
>> will work and how it can be done. Ideally, this would be done before the
>> next technical election, so that teams can choose it at that point. If you
>> are interested in taking on the writing of this resolution, please speak up!
>>
>> Cross Project Work
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> -Pop Up Teams-
>>
>> The two teams we have right now are Encryption and Secure Consistent
>> Policy Groups. Both are making slow progress and will continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Reducing Community Goals Per Cycle-
>>
>> Historically we have had two goals per cycle, but for smaller teams this
>> can be a HUGE lift. The #ACTION is to clearly outline the documentation for
>> the goal proposal and selection process to clarify that selecting only one
>> goal is fine. No one has claimed this action item yet.
>>
>> -Victoria Goal Finalization-
>>
>> Currently, we have three proposals and one accepted goal. If we are going
>> to select a second goal, it needs to be done ASAP as Victoria development
>> has already begun. All TC members should review the last proposal
>> requesting selection[4].
>>
>> -Wallaby Cycle Goal Discussion Kick Off-
>>
>> Firstly, there is a #ACTION that one or two TC members are needed to
>> guide the W goal selection. If you are interested, please reply to this
>> thread! There were a few proposed goals for VIctoria that didn’t make it
>> that could be the starting point for W discussions, in particular, the
>> rootwrap goal which would be good for operators. The OpenStackCLI might be
>> another goal to propose for Wallaby.
>>
>> Detecting Unmaintained Projects Early
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The TC liaisons program had been created a few releases ago, but the
>> initial load on TC members was large. We discussed bringing this program
>> back and making the project health checks happen twice a release, either
>> the start or end of the release and once in the middle. TC liaisons will
>> look at  previously proposed releases,  release activity of the team, the
>> state of tempest plugins, if regular meetings are happening, if there are
>> patches in progress and how busy the project’s IRC channel is to make a
>> determination. Since more than one liaison will be assigned to each
>> project, those liaisons can divvy up the work how they see fit. The other
>> aspect that still needs to be decided is where the health checks will be
>> recorded- in a wiki? In a meeting and meeting logs? That decision is still
>> to be continued. The current #ACTION currently unassigned is that we need
>> to assign liaisons for the Victoria cycle and decide when to do the first
>> health check.
>>
>> Friday
>>
>> =====
>>
>> Reducing Systems and Friction to Drive Change
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This was another conversation that went in circles a bit before realizing
>> that we should make a list of the more specific problems we want to address
>> and then brainstorm solutions for them. The list we created (including
>> things already being worked) are as follows:
>>
>>    -
>>
>>    TC separate from UC (solution in progress)
>>    -
>>
>>    Stable releases being approved by a separate team (solution in
>>    progress)
>>    -
>>
>>    Making repository creation faster (especially for established project
>>    teams)
>>    -
>>
>>    Create a process blueprint for project team mergers
>>    -
>>
>>    Requirements Team being one person
>>    -
>>
>>    Stable Team
>>    -
>>
>>    Consolidate the agent experience
>>    -
>>
>>    Figure out how to improve project <--> openstack client/sdk
>>    interaction.
>>
>> If you feel compelled to pick one of these things up and start proposing
>> solutions or add to the list, please do!
>>
>> Monitoring in OpenStack (Ceilometer + Telemetry + Gnocchi State)
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This conversation is also ongoing, but essentially we talked about the
>> state of things right now- largely they are not well maintained and there
>> is added complexity with Ceilometers being partially dependent on Gnocchi.
>> There are a couple of ideas to look into like using oslo.metrics for the
>> interface between all the tools or using Ceilometer without Gnocchi if we
>> can clean up those dependencies. No specific action items here, just please
>> share your thoughts if you have them.
>>
>> Ideas Repo Next Steps
>>
>> -------------------------------
>>
>> Out of the Ussuri retrospective, it was brought up that we probably
>> needed to talk a little more about what we wanted for this repo.
>> Essentially we just want it to be a place to collect ideas into without
>> worrying about the how. It should be a place to document ideas we have had
>> (old and new) and keep all the discussion in one place as opposed to
>> historic email threads, meetings logs, other IRC logs, etc. We decided it
>> would be good to periodically go through this repo, likely as a forum
>> session at a summit to see if there is any updating that could happen or
>> promotion of ideas to community goals, etc.
>>
>> ‘tc:approved-release’ Tag
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>> This topic was proposed by the Manila team from a discussion they had
>> earlier in the week. We talked about the history of the tag and how usage
>> of tags has evolved. At this point, the proposal is to remove the tag as
>> anything in the releases repo is essentially tc-approved. Ghanshyam has
>> volunteered to document this and do the removal. The board also needs to be
>> notified of this and to look at projects.yaml in the governance repo as the
>> source of truth for TC approved projects. The unassigned #ACTION item is to
>> review remaining tags and see if there are others that need to be
>> modified/removed/added to  drive common behavior across OpenSack
>> components.
>>
>> Board Proposals
>>
>> ----------------------
>>
>> This was a pretty quick summary of all discussions we had that had any
>> impact on the board and largely decided who would mention them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Session Feedback
>>
>> ------------------------
>>
>> This was also a pretty quick topic compared to many of the others, we
>> talked about how things went across all our discussions (largely we called
>> the PTG a success) logistically. We tried to make good use of the raising
>> hands feature which mostly worked, but it lacks context and its possible
>> that the conversation has moved on by the time it’s your turn (if you even
>> remember what you want to say).
>>
>> OpenStack 2.0: k8s Native
>>
>> -----------------------------------
>>
>> This topic was brought up at the end of our time so we didn’t have time
>> to discuss it really. Basically Mohammed wanted to start the conversation
>> about adding k8s as a base service[5] and what we would do if a project
>> proposed required k8s. Adding services that work with k8s could open a door
>> to new innovation in OpenStack. Obviously this topic will need to be
>> discussed further as we barely got started before we had to wrap things up.
>>
>>
>> So.
>>
>>
>> The tldr;
>>
>>
>> Here are the #ACTION items we need owners for:
>>
>>    -
>>
>>    Start the User Facing API Pop Up Team
>>    -
>>
>>    Write a resolution about how the deconstructed PTL roles will work
>>    -
>>
>>    Update Goal Selection docs to explain that one or more goals is fine;
>>    it doesn’t have to be more than one
>>    -
>>
>>    Two volunteers to start the W goal selection process
>>    -
>>
>>    Assign two TC liaisons per project
>>    -
>>
>>     Review Tags to make sure they are still good for driving common
>>    behavior across all openstack projects
>>
>>
>> Here are the things EVERYONE needs to do:
>>
>>    -
>>
>>    Review last goal proposal so that we can decide to accept or reject
>>    it for the V release[4]
>>    -
>>
>>    Add systems that are barriers to progress in openstack to the
>>    Reducing Systems and Friction list
>>    -
>>
>>    Continue conversations you find important
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks everyone for your hard work and great conversations :)
>>
>> Enjoy the attached (photoshopped) team photo :)
>>
>> -Kendall (diablo_rojo)
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] TC PTG Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-victoria-ptg
>>
>> [2] TC Guide Patch: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/732983/
>>
>> [3] UC TC Merge Thread:
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-May/014736.html
>>
>>
>> [4] Proposed V Goal: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731213/
>>
>> [5] Base Service Description:
>> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/base-services.html
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200806/db1ff4d3/attachment-0001.html>