[TC] [PTG] Victoria vPTG Summary of Conversations and Action Items

Kendall Nelson kennelson11 at gmail.com
Fri Jun 12 19:06:08 UTC 2020

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].



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].



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.



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

   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

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.


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:

[4] Proposed V Goal: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/731213/

[5] Base Service Description:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200612/a596fd08/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TC_v3.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3911635 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200612/a596fd08/attachment-0001.png>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list