#opendaylight-meeting: tsc

Meeting started by phrobb at 18:00:21 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. Roll Call - TSC members please #info in (phrobb, 18:00:37)
    1. edwarnicke (edwarnicke, 18:01:20)
    2. alagalah (proxy jmedved) (alagalah, 18:01:40)
    3. kwatsen (kwatsen, 18:01:43)
    4. https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/TSC:Main <— Today's agenda (phrobb, 18:02:24)
    5. mohnish anumala (mohnish, 18:02:30)
    6. abhijitkumbhare (proxy Chris Price) (abhijitkumbhare, 18:02:37)
    7. dlenrow (dlenrow, 18:03:35)
    8. colindixon (phrobb, 18:03:47)
    9. https://meetings.opendaylight.org/opendaylight-meeting/2015/tsc/opendaylight-meeting-tsc.2015-01-08-18.00.html link to minutes of last week’s meeting (tbachman, 18:04:13)
    10. colindixon started conversation for version bumping (tbachman, 18:05:24)
    11. ACTION: colindixon will track how VTN and controller are interacting on possible AD-SAL deprecation (tbachman, 18:05:51)

  2. Agenda bashing and action item roundup (phrobb, 18:06:06)
    1. colindixon sent mail encouraging projects to get projects tracking what happens in the TSC (tbachman, 18:06:20)
    2. hideyuki says they don’t have any problems with AD-SAL deprecation so far (tbachman, 18:06:51)
    3. edwarnicke asks if we agreed on a time for having the cross-project neutron discussions (tbachman, 18:07:21)
    4. colindixon says he sent an email asking to get this sorted, but doesn’t want to dictate the time (tbachman, 18:07:39)
    5. regXboi for roll call (running late) (regXboi, 18:07:53)
    6. zxiiro submitted patches to projects to rename soar jobs (tbachman, 18:08:13)
    7. https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/TSC:Main#Agenda Agenda for today's call (dfarrell07, 18:08:13)
    8. zxiiro investigated ways to maintain the history if we rename the projects; sent email on this (tbachman, 18:08:42)
    9. colindixon added Java 8 to TSC topics for this week (tbachman, 18:09:15)
    10. sdean778 submitted bugzilla enhancement requests and email to controller-dev listing changes they want from MD-SAL/controller on their project plan (tbachman, 18:09:52)
    11. dlenrow posted slides for the intent project to the mailing list (tbachman, 18:11:41)

  3. Updates (tbachman, 18:12:22)
    1. phrobb asks for papers for ODL summit (tbachman, 18:12:47)
    2. phrobb is looking at venues on 14th/15th or 15th/16th of April for milestone sync (tbachman, 18:13:13)
    3. phrobb says they want to do a technical event in India around the week of April 18th, with 1/2 day tutorial and lightning talks to allow the community in India to coalesce (tbachman, 18:14:39)
    4. phrobb looking at tech event in India in April, to allow ODL tech community in India to come together (dfarrell07, 18:14:46)
    5. phrobb says Anil helping out on the India event (abhijitkumbhare, 18:15:28)
    6. ONS is week of June 14th; ODL will have presence (tbachman, 18:15:33)

  4. System Integration/Test (tbachman, 18:15:52)
    1. LuisGomez sent mail to community requesting input on priorities for testing (tbachman, 18:16:03)

  5. Lithium and Stable/Helium Release Updates (tbachman, 18:16:29)
    1. zxiiro is looking into getting the auto-release build going (tbachman, 18:16:49)
    2. colindixon says he belives we’re doing the build for SR2 on Monday 1/19 using the old auto-release tools; those needing updates in SR2, they need to be in the branch by Monday (tbachman, 18:18:01)

  6. infrastructure (tbachman, 18:18:05)
    1. tykeal says odlforge is taking a bit more time as his workload has been “dynamic”; still hopeful to have it done by the end of the month, but there’s the possibility that more puppet modules are needed to do this in a clean fashion (tbachman, 18:18:52)
    2. zxiiro submitted patches to all of the projects for sonar (tbachman, 18:19:25)
    3. dlenrow asks if we’re still having a hackfest at the Linux event on Feb 18th (tbachman, 18:20:10)
    4. also a discussion started about sonar reports for all branches if they are useful or not https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/discuss/2015-January/004285.html (zxiiro, 18:20:27)
    5. phrobb says there’s no hackfest scheduled; still looking into a 1/2-day track on a discussion across projects (openstack, OPNFV, etc.) (tbachman, 18:20:34)
    6. edwarnicke says there’s discussion on the lists about moving the AD-SAL to port 8282 from port 8080, and asks if this should be discussed by the TSC (tbachman, 18:21:49)
    7. dlenrow would like to make sure that the intent project is schedule for a creation review for next week’s TSC, and is also okay’d for an exception to be included in the Lithium simultaneous release (tbachman, 18:22:38)

  7. Committer Promotions (tbachman, 18:22:47)
    1. https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/discuss/2015-January/004261.html - conversation about moving adsal to port 8282 and the stock jetty to port 8080 (edwarnicke, 18:22:52)
    2. plugin2oc had a committer promotion, but there’s no members of the project on the TSC call (tbachman, 18:23:08)
    3. committer promotion deferred to next week (tbachman, 18:23:20)
    4. colindixon asks "should we discuss 1 topic for 30 minutes, or spend 10 minutes as an intro to each topic" (phrobb, 18:24:11)
    5. https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/tsc/2015-January/002429.html email from colindixon on topics that could be discussed by teh TSC (tbachman, 18:25:07)
    6. - topics - Helim Lifetime, Use Cases, and Future Release Mechanics (phrobb, 18:25:16)
    7. regXboi says we Helium lifetime should be discussed now and a decision should be made (tbachman, 18:25:30)

  8. "Helium Lifetime" (phrobb, 18:25:36)
    1. colindixon asks how long we should support helium (tbachman, 18:25:49)
    2. colindixon says given the number of member companies that are shipping code on top of it, it seems like our current strategy isn’t sufficient; do we need to support helium for a longer period, and if so, how much longer; do we need more releases? (tbachman, 18:26:37)
    3. colindixon says we could continue to ship releases until beryllium is released (tbachman, 18:26:58)
    4. regXboi says he’d support Helium with SR’s until LIthium is released, and after that support security patches only until Beryllium; and after Beryllium, users are “on their own" (tbachman, 18:27:31)
    5. alagalah asks if the structure of the releases going forward would affect things like Lithium’s lifespan or Beryllium’s lifespan (tbachman, 18:28:15)
    6. regXboi says support release X with 6 week SRs until X+1, release X with security releases only until X+2 and after X+2 you are on your own (regXboi, 18:29:54)
    7. tykeal asks if there would ever be an idea of an LTS release? (tbachman, 18:30:35)
    8. colindixon says he thinks it’s a good idea, but he’s not sure which release we want to do that with yet (tbachman, 18:30:48)
    9. colindixon asks if anyone on the TSC disagrees witht he policy to promise security patches for the previous 2 releases, starting with Helium (tbachman, 18:32:10)
    10. regXboi says that as we go along, we can amend that (e.g. starting in Boron, we’re going to support it for 3 releases, or 3 years, etc.) (tbachman, 18:32:35)
    11. rovarga_ notes that if we start with Helium, then we’re changing the committment for the projects that joined Helium (tbachman, 18:35:33)
    12. colindixon says we should consider starting this policy starting with Beryllium (tbachman, 18:37:33)
    13. rovarga_ says it might be a good idea to consult the projects on this first to see where they stand (tbachman, 18:37:49)
    14. colindixon says he feels the security updates make sense regardless (tbachman, 18:38:21)
    15. AGREED: ODL will ship security releases for two releases back (phrobb, 18:39:13)
    16. regXboi says it would be good to set up a condorcet vote for the project leads on security updates (tbachman, 18:39:54)
    17. colindixon asks if there are any projects that were in Helium that aren’t in Lithium (tbachman, 18:40:11)
    18. phrobb says possibly — packetcable is still in question (tbachman, 18:40:33)
    19. ACTION: phrobb to find out if there are any projects in Helium that aren’t in Lithium, and look into setting up a condorcet vote on the policy of shipping security releases (as applies to Helium) (tbachman, 18:41:23)
    20. zxiiro says for eclipse that after a release is cut, they maintain up to one branch prior except for 3.9 to 4.2 where they maintained two releases (tbachman, 18:42:29)
    21. zxiiro says that security patches are done in a simultaneous release including a new bundle that was created; they use pt repositories, which are self-contained repositories of jar files, and when eclipse is pointed to the repository, it gets all the jar files for the simultaneous release (tbachman, 18:44:05)
    22. colindixon asks how far back they do security updates (tbachman, 18:44:15)
    23. zxiiro says the only do one release behind (for security updates) (tbachman, 18:44:28)
    24. colindixon asks if projects want to support 0/2, 1/2, or 2/2 prior releases (release/securityupdate) (tbachman, 18:47:12)
    25. the vote phrobb is setting has 3 options. 1) only support to SRs after release, 2) support bug/security until next major release, 3) or bug/security fixes until the next two releases are shipped (phrobb, 18:47:22)
    26. abhijitkumbhare asks what bug fixes in the next major release means; do we have to back-port all of them to stable-helium? (tbachman, 18:48:41)
    27. colindixon says that probably should be up to projects, but a best-effort to do back-ports might be what this means (tbachman, 18:49:00)
    28. phrobb notes we are making the statement that even if a project doesn’t have any fixes to put in, they’re still obligated to run their tests (tbachman, 18:49:53)
    29. colindixon says we can only strongly encourage (i.e. can’t tell projects what to do here) (tbachman, 18:50:07)
    30. rovarga_ asks if that means there will be a Helium release coinciding with a Lithium release? (tbachman, 18:50:25)
    31. LuisGomez asks if we can include the question of how often we have to do a service release (tbachman, 18:52:16)
    32. colindixon says it would be roughly every 6 weeks (tbachman, 18:52:28)
    33. phrobb asks if would be reasonable to in the 2nd year drop it to quarterly releases (tbachman, 18:52:46)
    34. colindixon says lets go with no more than 6 weeks for now, and see what projects say (tbachman, 18:53:03)
    35. LuisGomez says that today when we do a service release, there are a bunch of projects without automation, which means a bunch of manual testing for a service release (tbachman, 18:53:55)
    36. LuisGomez that will change given the new release requirements in Lithium (tbachman, 18:54:14)
    37. ACTION: colindixon to make sure we have a plan on how to do service updates than what was done in Helium (tbachman, 18:54:38)
    38. ACTION: colindixon to add plan for service updates than what we did for the Li release plan (phrobb, 18:54:43)

  9. cookies (tbachman, 18:57:41)
    1. http://thedecoratedcookie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/wm.rainbowparty_cookies2.jpg happy cookies for 1 hour TSC :) (tykeal, 18:58:01)


Meeting ended at 18:58:29 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. colindixon will track how VTN and controller are interacting on possible AD-SAL deprecation
  2. phrobb to find out if there are any projects in Helium that aren’t in Lithium, and look into setting up a condorcet vote on the policy of shipping security releases (as applies to Helium)
  3. colindixon to make sure we have a plan on how to do service updates than what was done in Helium
  4. colindixon to add plan for service updates than what we did for the Li release plan


Action items, by person

  1. phrobb
    1. phrobb to find out if there are any projects in Helium that aren’t in Lithium, and look into setting up a condorcet vote on the policy of shipping security releases (as applies to Helium)
  2. UNASSIGNED
    1. colindixon will track how VTN and controller are interacting on possible AD-SAL deprecation
    2. colindixon to make sure we have a plan on how to do service updates than what was done in Helium
    3. colindixon to add plan for service updates than what we did for the Li release plan


People present (lines said)

  1. tbachman (107)
  2. phrobb (18)
  3. rovarga_ (12)
  4. odl_meetbot (11)
  5. alagalah (11)
  6. dfarrell07 (9)
  7. edwarnicke (8)
  8. regXboi (7)
  9. tykeal (7)
  10. dlenrow (2)
  11. abhijitkumbhare (2)
  12. dneary (2)
  13. zxiiro (1)
  14. mohnish (1)
  15. kwatsen (1)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.