18:59:56 #startmeeting Ansible Community Meeting 18:59:56 Meeting started Wed Jan 11 18:59:56 2023 UTC. 18:59:56 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 18:59:56 The chair is felixfontein. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 18:59:56 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:59:56 The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_community_meeting' 18:59:56 #topic Agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/679 19:00:02 acozine, andersson007_, anwesha, baptistemm, bcoca, briantist, cidrblock, cyberpear, cybette, dericcrago, dmsimard, felixfontein, geerlingguy, gotmax, gundalow, gwmngilfen, ikhan_, jillr, jtanner, lmodemal, mariolenz[m], markuman, maxamillion, misc, nitzmahone, oranod, resmo, russoz, samccann, thaumos, zbr: The Ansible community meeting is starting now! 19:00:07 The ping list is stored at https://kutt.it/meeting-people. Feel free to add or remove yourself. 19:00:10 #info Agenda: https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/679 / Topics: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics 19:00:13 #topic Updates 19:00:32 hello all 19:00:37 Hello everyone 19:00:38 o/ 19:00:45 #chair oranod anwesha[m] mariolenz[m] 19:00:45 Current chairs: anwesha[m] felixfontein mariolenz[m] oranod 19:02:30 hmm, I don't have any updates :) 19:02:44 .hello2 19:02:45 maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' 19:03:03 o/ 19:03:07 #chair maxamillion andersson007___ 19:03:07 Current chairs: andersson007___ anwesha[m] felixfontein mariolenz[m] maxamillion oranod 19:04:19 #info cyberark.pas seems to have some activity again (https://github.com/cyberark/ansible-security-automation-collection/commits/master) 19:04:34 that's cool to hear 19:04:44 yes. better late than never :) 19:04:49 yep 19:05:14 seems kickouts cause some activity 19:05:26 I guess it's worth to discuss whether to stop the exclusion process (i.e. announce removal from Ansible 8 in the upcoming Ansible 7.2.0 release) or not 19:05:30 thanks mariolenz[m] 19:05:39 for revitalizing cyperark 19:06:00 I wish it would happen without a looming kickout... 19:06:08 i wish that too 19:06:32 oh, while we're at it: 19:06:38 +1 mariolenz for reviving the collection! 19:06:41 #info There is a vote on removing community.fortios from Ansible: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/discussions/179 19:07:24 felixfontein: thanks for reminding! 19:07:27 IMO that one is a no-brainer, that collection has basically been dead since it was created. the only reason it exists was to move these modules (that depend on the fortios collection) out of community.general so that community.general doesn't need to depend on the fortios collection just for these modules... 19:07:47 right now there are only 4 SC votes, so we need some more :) 19:08:18 mariolenz[m]: you yourself didn't vote btw :) 19:08:26 5 19:08:29 can non-SC folks vote? :) 19:08:40 yep, sure 19:08:50 they can:) 19:08:53 andersson007___: it says "4 comments" here, and I only count 4 votes 19:09:24 mariolenz[m]: a certain amount of SC votes is needed for quorum (and in the end its the SC votes that decide), but anyone can (and is encouraged to!) vote 19:09:26 ah, yes, mariolenz[m] didn't vote:) 19:09:37 counted his +1 while scanning:) 19:09:50 the quorum is 7 afaik 19:10:04 Steering committee 19:11:27 I guess we should reconsider adding google.cloud, and instead kick community.google out (which is similar to community.fortios) 19:11:43 s/reconsider adding/consider readding/ 19:12:40 (community.google exists for a similar reason as community.fortios) 19:13:06 yep, we should 19:13:17 i thought it was excluded 19:13:23 c.google 19:13:33 (though apparently it has no dependency on c.google) 19:13:46 nope, we excluded only google.cloud, but not c.google... 19:14:02 which I think is an oversight 19:14:08 let me create a vote for that 19:14:13 sorry, added a plus 1 to vote 19:14:57 #info dellemc.powerflex will get included in Ansible if there is no objection until tomorrow (https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/177) 19:15:01 @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting 19:15:01 felixfontein: ah, ok 19:15:19 I've done a lot of work identifying and removing unmaintained collections from the community package last year. At one point, I was fed up with finding out the wording I've used last time for the Bullhorn announcements and wrote some shell scripts to generate them. 19:15:37 Long story short, I told andersson007_ about this and threatened to publish them. Well, he thought it a good idea so here they are: https://github.com/mariolenz/my-ansible-community-scripts 19:15:59 btw, we should follow up on the Ansible 8 roadmap: https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/176 19:16:12 maybe we should put the scripts to community-topics? 19:16:21 hi 19:16:21 acozine created a PR for a proposal: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/79598 19:16:40 I added some comments, but I guess they got lost in the holiday time :) 19:16:43 #chair jtanner 19:16:43 Current chairs: andersson007___ anwesha[m] felixfontein jtanner mariolenz[m] maxamillion oranod 19:17:13 #info Please take a look at the proposed roadmap for Ansible 8: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/79598 (https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/176) 19:17:30 sgtm, will try tomorrow 19:17:45 thanks :) 19:17:53 o/ 19:18:08 #chair acozine 19:18:08 Current chairs: acozine andersson007___ anwesha[m] felixfontein jtanner mariolenz[m] maxamillion oranod 19:18:11 sorry I'm late 19:18:18 thanks acozine for the roadmap proposal! 19:19:44 it's too bad we don't have a way to add an "unmaintained" badge on galaxy or something to that effect 19:19:54 if nobody has a suggestion for a topic, I'd suggest we talk about anwesha[m]'s topic on release blockers for Ansible 19:19:57 jtanner: indeed! 19:20:10 #topic Central Location for Release Blockers, and defining what they are 19:20:15 #info https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/178 19:20:41 jtanner: I suppose we could open PRs against READMEs on GitHub with some kind of Badge of Shame, but most folks won't look there. 19:20:49 felixfontein: I'll try to remember and open a PR to include dellemc.powerflex tomorrow. 19:20:58 mariolenz[m]: thanks! 19:21:08 acozine: also they would need to get merged first... 19:21:17 heh, true 19:21:19 mariolenz[m]: +1 19:21:20 sometimes i wonder if people are finding collections through the galaxy UI anyway and if putting things there even matters 19:21:22 * acozine forgot her sweater, BRB 19:22:24 i put some thoughts in the topic 19:22:32 jtanner: that's a very good question... the last time I wanted to know whether a collection exists for some product/service I think I simply searched the web for "ansible xxx collection" 19:22:50 andersson007___: thanks! 19:23:03 what do folks think about having release blockers as issues in the ansible-build-data repo? 19:23:19 the badge or other info showing that stuff is unmaintained should imo suggest info that folks are welcome to pick it up 19:23:31 felixfontein: sgtm 19:23:44 to have them as issues in there 19:24:01 + milestones from me 19:24:08 hmm let's talk about the unmaintained badge later, and first focus on this topic at least for a few mins :) 19:24:15 sure 19:24:18 milestones sound goot to me as well 19:24:57 milestones seem reasonable 19:25:11 and if for whatever reason that doesn't work, then we can pivot later :) 19:25:24 true. so far we never had blockers, or at least none that I can remember 19:25:45 but if we have some, putting them there seems to be the most obvious place to me 19:25:55 I guess the main thing we should do is document this 19:26:04 README? 19:26:07 the hard part (IMO) is defining what a release blocker actually is :) 19:26:12 yep, README sounds good 19:26:24 we have some info there already about WF 19:26:32 I like the definition andersson007___ suggested in the issue 19:26:32 about milistones etc. afaik 19:27:52 anyone wants to volunteer to update the README? ;) 19:28:04 i could:) 19:28:11 that would be awesome :) 19:28:32 if folks have more suggestions/ideas/opinions, please add them in https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/178 19:28:36 Can we a have clear definition about what is a release blocker? 19:28:57 anwesha[m]: I have no idea how such a definition should look like 19:29:20 at least if I interpret 'clear' as from a mathematician's point of view :) 19:29:22 Since we are updating the README if may be we want to add that. 19:29:32 felixfontein: Fedora has a whole process for this that is well defined, along with criteria https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ 19:29:52 anwesha[m]: i'll add something like https://github.com/ansible-community/community-topics/issues/178#issuecomment-1371891621 19:29:54 I'm sure other projects do too, I'm just most familiar with Fedora's 19:30:01 @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting 19:30:19 maxamillion: ah, thanks for the link, i'll take a look tomorrow 19:30:30 felixfontein: errrr ... this was the link I meant to drop, that other one is good too though https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process 19:30:40 andersson007___: ^^^^ 19:30:41 maybe will give some ideas on how it can be improved 19:30:43 certainly :) 19:30:47 maxamillion: ok, thanks 19:31:26 i'll create a draft PR which we can discuss in the next meeting 19:31:27 from my POV these are not clear definitions either, but they are better than what we have right now 19:31:28 if needed 19:31:33 cool, thanks! 19:32:17 andersson007___: thank you 19:32:19 ok, any more comments on this topic (for this meeting)? 19:32:31 the community is always welcome 19:32:45 :) 19:32:49 :) 19:32:57 #topic How to mark collections as unmaintained 19:33:14 (I think we had this topic already multiple times over the last years) 19:33:20 andersson007___: Stressing on the point community here :) 19:33:42 jtanner: I think the big problem with having such a label on Galaxy is: who can actually set that label? 19:33:53 anwesha[m]: yep 19:34:06 i think it'd have to be controlled by community leadership / steering / etc 19:34:08 there will be quite a few unmaintained collections where there's nobody left who can / wants to do that, even if it would be possible 19:34:10 felixfontein: we maybe 19:34:22 who arranges exclusion 19:34:35 we could add anything related to the WF 19:34:44 i.e. to the checklist 19:34:46 the question is whether we should have that power (or who should have that power in general) 19:34:49 we're thinking of this in terms of collections that are or were included in the Ansible package, but a lot of content on Galaxy has never been in Ansible . . . do we mark those collections too? 19:35:03 maybe 19:35:05 removing from Ansible is a very different thing than declaring something unmaintained on Galaxy 19:35:11 acozine: fair point 19:35:14 acozine: indeed! 19:35:15 galaxy shouldn't be a sand trap of busted stuff 19:35:42 i'm not sure if galaxy will work for included collections 19:35:43 i feel like the effort made to assess ansible's collections could benefit those on galaxy too 19:35:46 jtanner: hmm, that's usually what non-curated public package repos end up being 19:36:03 I mean, look at npm or pypi, you will find tons of unmaintained stuff 19:36:09 don't we keep a list of included collections somewhere as metadata for the docs build? 19:36:10 perhaps. i'm just thinking out loud 19:36:20 maybe we could use that as a place to mark unmaintained stuff? 19:36:34 can there be working appearing when collection is used? 19:36:50 saying that it's gonna be removed, feel free to pick it up if you want 19:36:52 working? 19:37:02 or some kind of dead person switch, you get an email that if you don't press a button in the next three months, your collection will be marked as unmaintained... with some reminders 19:37:04 warning sorry 19:37:15 though that requires some contact email 19:37:51 do you mean the warning? 19:37:52 acozine: the docs build uses the collections that are in Ansible itself 19:38:33 we could use our team's public email, or there can be a link to the collection's repo 19:38:51 felixfontein: where does it pull the list from, then? I can't remember. 19:39:04 acozine: the ansible-build-data repo 19:39:25 the docsite has exactly the collections listed that are in the corresponding Ansible release 19:39:37 ah, thanks felixfontein 19:39:50 so we could have a marker in ansible-build-data, perhaps 19:40:08 but yeah, what we could do is show some 'unmaintained' indicator on the docsite, for collections we decided are unmaintained and will be removed fom Ansible 19:40:08 or list a "last updated" date there, or something 19:40:32 right now that information is only shown in the Ansible changelog (and added there manually) 19:40:34 docsite indicator sgtm 19:40:42 with contact info 19:41:14 and something like "click here if you want to maintain it" 19:41:28 that only works if we have access to the collection repo 19:41:35 (like for community.google and community.fortios) 19:41:43 but doesn't work for collections like cyberark.pas 19:41:43 felixfontein: fair point too 19:42:34 another question is raising: should we encourage people to move repos to ansible-collections ? 19:43:16 I'm not sure about all the collections on galaxy, but I think it would be a good idea to have some 'the community considers this collection unmaintained' info on the docsite. 19:43:21 I guess the main disadvantage is that CI for other repos in that collection gets slower every time a new repo is added :) 19:43:36 felixfontein: fair point 19:44:15 i think from an economics standpoint, people should not move their to the ansible-collection org ... unless the CI budget is unlimited 19:44:19 also we cannot add new maintainers if we don't have access to a repo 19:44:32 right now we have a 'dead CI hour' at around 6:00 UTC, since many GHA based collections in gh.com/ansible-collections have their nightly CI run exactly then 19:44:57 if you create a PR roughtly in 6-7 UTC, you basically have to wait for a long time until CI runs 19:45:01 @cybette:ansible.im cyb-clock chimes every 15 minutes during the community meeting 19:45:58 felixfontein: can't this be significantly improved by adding `--changed` to GHA in all the collections? 19:46:16 i mean to `ansible-test` in GHA 19:46:26 andersson007___: --changed doesn't work for nightly runs 19:46:34 ah, yes 19:46:41 resp. the idea for nightly runs is to run all tests :) 19:46:46 * andersson007___ woke up at 4 a.m today 19:47:00 wow, that's early! 19:47:20 * andersson007___ is feeling it 19:47:47 sorry for dumb questions today:) 19:47:59 no problem :) 19:48:21 also there are no dumb questions. there are only things you shouldn't have asked ;) 19:48:25 (just joking) 19:48:30 hehe 19:48:55 can there be a file listing unmaintained collections? 19:49:17 which doc generation system will use to put labels? 19:49:54 andersson007___: I would use the collection meta for that (https://github.com/ansible-community/ansible-build-data/blob/main/8/collection-meta.yaml) 19:50:11 felixfontein: also sgtm 19:51:15 and you can easily grep stuff there to get the list if needed 19:51:24 and in general it feels like a good place 19:51:30 I created an issue for that in antsibull-docs: https://github.com/ansible-community/antsibull-docs/issues/93 19:51:31 suitable 19:51:38 felixfontein: thanks! 19:52:06 * felixfontein thinks of removed_in_version and make antsibull fail when it finds a collection in the current release that is supposed to be removed :) 19:52:37 #topic open floor 19:52:50 for the last few minutes of the meeting, does anyone want to talk about something else? 19:52:58 * andersson007___ thinks it's a good idea 19:53:23 * andersson007___ thinks it shouldn't be lost 19:54:03 just to repeat my previous update: we pushed the roles UI out to the "production" version of galaxy-beta 19:54:04 once we have some deprecation info in collection-meta, I'll more or less automatically will add that ;) 19:54:14 jtanner: cool! 19:54:28 sounds great 19:54:31 jtanner: link? 19:54:50 https://beta-galaxy.ansible.com/ 19:54:56 thanks! 19:55:00 jtanner: will galaxy-beta render collection docs (similar to AH)? or will it just show README and basic content like community Galaxy? 19:55:13 lol, now the site won't load for me 19:55:24 okay , there it goes 19:55:30 #info The roles UI is now available on the 'production' galaxy-beta: https://beta-galaxy.ansible.com/ 19:55:48 after I allowed it to use JavaScript it loads for me ;) 19:56:04 should this be announced via bullhorn? 19:56:38 in case there's interest in broader audience's feedback 19:56:54 felixfontein: it's expected to display the rendered docs, just as they do on console.redhat.com ... there is however an issue with how we're syncing the collections from galaxy.ansible.com in that the sync process doesn't include the docs. We have an api and a script that will rebuild the docs though 19:57:22 jtanner: ah, that's nice! 19:57:37 collections that are "published/uploaded/etc" to the system directly will have the docs built as part of the import process 19:58:16 I was planning to take a closer look at the docs rendering process in galaxy_ng anyway 19:58:35 (to create a PR to support semantic markup) 19:59:04 oooh, that's awesome! 20:00:06 https://beta-galaxy-dev.ansible.com/ui/repo/community/community/zabbix/docs/ ... note the bug 20:00:11 we do intend to fix it 20:00:15 maxamillion: for the context, we encourage the community to discuss and vote in the topics:) Folks who do it regularly will probably be offered to become SC members;) 20:00:31 andersson007___: rgr that 20:00:59 is there a "chair limit" on SC memebers or does it just keep growning and shrinking based on current active contributors? 20:01:12 we also have the issue that gotmax[m] pointed out with the published vs community repo thing. we still have to figure out how to fix that 20:01:13 maxamillion: no limit:) 20:01:20 rgr that 20:02:13 ok, time to end the meeting, the hour is over! 20:02:16 #endmeeting