Versions Compared

Version Old Version 2 New Version Current
Changes made by

Ben Sternthal

Ben Sternthal

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Attendees: 

Image RemovedImage Added


Agenda Item
 Notes
 Background Docs & LinksOwnerNotes / Actions / Next Steps
Updates on Release 1.9
  • #15164: td-agent version pinning
  • #15217: NMS yarn test (unit test) failing
  • #15222: Summarizing the current state of CI Issues.
  • Discuss DevOps workflows for patch-level semvers if we move from 1.9 to 1.9.0 label. Can we have smaller + more frequent releases?

Sikander-Wavelabs

Lucas reached out to yogesh, for C++ changes and new feature changes to look into security POV for 1.9, 

  • Jordan → propose mid august for 1.9 release date, discuss when we have quorum of TSC members
  • Jordan→ Ubuntu, need to plan upgrade, bring to features group
    • Max → suggest we do a survey related to Docker
    Survey:
  • Which deployment are you using, Debian or Docker?
    • What do you expect in 1.9?
  • Max → ensure features group changes go through TSC vote (folks agreed)

  • Customers still using 1.6/debian
  • Som → is it possible/feasable to make 1.9 docker only?
  • Lucas → suggest debian for 1.9 and docker after


    • Som
    • Yogesh
    → testing tool
    • →
    Action, resurrect tool/lab request process
  • Lucas → suggest start thinking about 1.10 and 1.10 is docker and performance testing
  • Max → not looking or thinking about docker is the equivalent of dropping it, not supporting docker in this release is essentially a vote against 
  • Lucas → connect5g can not live without docker
  • CI/CD pipeline for docker does not exist. 
    • Jordan → we need to have docker, do we build CI/CD for 1.9 or for 1.10
    • Discuss in engineering / features meeting

    • Updates 7-10

    Yogesh →
    • Refactoring reviewdog-workflow.yml approved. Lucas to move the issue from the security repo to the public repo. (https://github.com/magma/magma/issues/15192)
      https://github.com/magma/security/issues/147
    • Shubham to document two bounty proposals: upgrade Kubernetes; create CI job to scan Docker images for vulnerabilities using trivy

    • Som to create a page in the LF wiki on the bounty program.

      • Som will coordiate with Ben once bounty program proposal has been fully greenlit
    • Need draft Quickstart for anyone who wants to recommend a bug bounty program (process & timeline) - Jordan will start doc, Ben add in budget info.

    Updates 7-10

    • blockers for 1.9 are done, security issues remain, undecided if all in scope for 1.9
    • Yogesh → Devops activity tracker link.
    • Yogesh → Link for modules tracking
    • Kader ->create feature proposals. Yogesh will breakdown #15254 into smaller proposals (< 15 man days if possible)
    • Jordan →create list of features and their status (e.g development, stable, experimental)
    Bug Bounty Program

    Notes From July 17

    • Lucas → what security issues are in scope for 1.9? Suggest going through open issues on Wed to decide in/out of scope.
    Bug Bounty Program




    Suggested Action → 

      • TSC Vote On:

        • 5k pilot budget from Community Management (6325)
  • Complexity levels and payout

    • Simple
      $100-$250
      Medium
      $250-$1000
      Complex
      $1,000-$1500
      Very Complex
      $1,500-$3,000

      • Action → Ben setup vote electronically and will close voting in 1 week.
    Proposal to move Magma to LF Connectivity

    Request for comments on a proposal to move Magma to Linux Foundation for connectivity to facilitate more symbiotic

    commnity growth

    community growth:

    1. Draft Proposal
    2. FAQ
    3. Questions Doc

    Som Sikdar 

  • Folder with draft proposal 
  • Linux Foundation for Connectivity website
    • Schedule outreach meeting for this week for additional discussion

    • Discuss and address any outstanding questions related to move.

    Notes From July 17

    • Discussion ensued about LFC, no major questions or issues are outstanding. 
    • Will create #magma-lfc slack channel for questions
    Slack contains a lot of questions, but no answersin the #general chat, several questions were asked recently. But no codeowner engaged or even pointed them to a different platform like github discussions or ticketsMaximilian Huber 
    Outreach Report

    No working meeting last week. Latest updates in MagmaOutreach-meeting-6.8.2023 - Google Docs

    Upcoming town hall meeting planner - July, 2023 - Town Hall planner

    Secured Town Hall keynote speaker

    Som Sikdar 
  • Action items and next steps are captured in document
    •  Pick topics and date for next town hall

    Updates 7-10

  • Develop aggressive comms plan as part of town hall planning
    • July townhall skipped, will target mid-august

    Other:

    • eBPF 
    		General discussion on interest in eBPF project (migration from OVS)@Pravin Shelar
    Shubham Tatvamasi , Suresh (Wavelabs), Som are interested
    @pbshelar@fb.com will start the document. Contact him over slack if you are interested in participating.

    Updates 7-10

    Pravin →  "

    Hello, I have created channel for eBPF and asked for adding developers that are interested in contributing, But I did not get any response yet.

    " #magma-ebpf

    Branch protectionTo enable the CI dashboard fix to go into production ASAP, Max had to suspend branch protection rules in order to enable force merging. Let's discuss when and how to take this step in the future.
    Lucas Gonze 
      • Revisit due to slack discussion
      • TSC Will Vote On The Following
        • Force merging is off by default
        • Only Linux Foundation, IE Benjamin Sternthal, is allowed to set it to on.
        • LF may only enable it by vote of the TSC.
        • Lucas proposed change → Requires two TSC members to vote on approval
      • Max → unclear on what goals we are tying to accomplish
      • Vote will be recorded here. 
    OpenSSF Best Practices Badge update
    Lucas Gonze 
    • Review progress and future steps


    Move To LFX Platform For Meetings

    LFX has a tool that allows us to manage zoom meetings. I'd like to transition the TSC meeting to that tool by end of the month. Highlights:

    • You will get a new invite (note I will just invite current TSC folks and folks who regularly attend)
    • Meeting will still be on shared calendar.
    • Meeting can still be public
    • Meeting will be auto-recorded
    • The only change, you may have to login with your LFX id
    		Ben Sternthal 
    Should we require admin approval prior to allowing new people in slack?If we continue to have disruptive folks in slack, one option is to require admin approval for joining. The admin could at least check if the email address is from a throwaway account.Ben Sternthal Hold off on discussion for now, this is just one person who is not  currently being disruptive. 
    Review Latest Q&A In Github, Review Slack For Candidate Github Topics

    Ben Sternthal 


    Recording:https://zoom.us/rec/share/Y-tzWqd9WuBv86pl6NWkou3zispVUdmjTJapwJFcpzZ5QEm3PVPTE4Xfy_6s1Ln-.lkQfzO4_YZ23QBJ-