Difference between revisions of "Meetings/TroveMeeting"
< Meetings
(→Trove Meeting, Jan 20, 2016) |
m (→Trove Meeting, Jan 20, 2016) |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
*** https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Python3 | *** https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Python3 | ||
** What is the intention relative to Python 3 in the Mitaka timeframe? | ** What is the intention relative to Python 3 in the Mitaka timeframe? | ||
| − | ** Do we want it, these changes, and the voting CI? | + | *** There has been no cross-project spec on this, and Python 3 was a stretch goal for Mitaka (per conversations in Tokyo). |
| + | *** Other projects have support for Python 3 but they aren't "done". | ||
| + | ** Do we want it, these changes, and the voting CI in the Mitaka timeframe? | ||
** Will a trove-specs spec be submitted? Is one needed or is this self-explanatory and one is not needed? | ** Will a trove-specs spec be submitted? Is one needed or is this self-explanatory and one is not needed? | ||
** I have asked the question in some of the reviews but got no answer so am asking it here at the trove meeting. | ** I have asked the question in some of the reviews but got no answer so am asking it here at the trove meeting. | ||
Revision as of 11:39, 19 January 2016
Weekly Trove Team Meeting
We have weekly team meetings on Wednesdays at 18:00 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt
Want to add an agenda item? Please append your item to the upcoming weekly agenda while keeping in mind:
Guidelines for Writing Clear Agenda Items
An agenda item should have a clearly defined objective.
- [owner/author/interested-party] Good: Review #xxxxx has comments on foobar.py from multiple folks and there seems to be a lack of consensus on how to solve problem ‘y’. Let’s quickly rehash the merits of both approaches in 2-5 minutes and call for a vote. Goal: choose an approach and move forward on implementation.
- Bad: Discuss blueprint ‘xyz’
- Bad: Revisit blueprint ‘abc’ that we talked about last week to get answers on remaining disagreements.
When referring to previous conversations or competing viewpoints, be sure to summarize them.
Please make sure to include your own name in the first line of the agenda item, or the name of the person who will be presenting the subject/leading the discussion.
Trove Meeting, Jan 20, 2016
- [cp16net] Trove pulse update
- Trove Mid Cycle Meetup (Feb 9-11)
- Python 3 support in Trove
- Several changes (5 in all) are now showing up for review as part of a project to include Python 3 support for Trove
- I also see this page which indicates that Trove is one of the few projects not ready with Python 3
- What is the intention relative to Python 3 in the Mitaka timeframe?
- There has been no cross-project spec on this, and Python 3 was a stretch goal for Mitaka (per conversations in Tokyo).
- Other projects have support for Python 3 but they aren't "done".
- Do we want it, these changes, and the voting CI in the Mitaka timeframe?
- Will a trove-specs spec be submitted? Is one needed or is this self-explanatory and one is not needed?
- I have asked the question in some of the reviews but got no answer so am asking it here at the trove meeting.
- Open Discussion
