| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-04-17 | |||
| 10:33:09 | bauzas | stephenfin: sean-k-mooney: gibi: would you prefer I revert my merged changes actually ? | |
| 10:35:39 | stephenfin | bauzas: thanks, done | |
| 10:36:07 | gibi | bauzas: I prefer to have proper discussion on the PTG | |
| 10:36:23 | stephenfin | RE: changes, I don't see the point of reverting now, but I'd certainly hold off merging any skills yet. PTG is next week: let's wait until after that | |
| 10:36:32 | gibi | before sending an official looking message via a repo in the openstack namespec | |
| 10:36:37 | gibi | namespace | |
| 10:36:41 | bauzas | I'm like stephenfin here | |
| 10:37:04 | bauzas | I think we can stop merging anything but the AGENTS.md and the README.md | |
| 10:37:11 | stephenfin | maybe worth adding a note to the README(.md) that this is not an official project also | |
| 10:37:14 | bauzas | so then we can discuss about the skills | |
| 10:37:18 | bauzas | stephenfin: can do that | |
| 10:37:50 | bauzas | it would only become "official' once https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/984958 is accepted | |
| 10:38:07 | bauzas | (yet another chicken-and-egg issue) | |
| 10:41:16 | stephenfin | gibi: bauzas: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/agentic-workflows/+/985082 | |
| 10:45:01 | bauzas | stephenfin: +Wd both patches (and we need some kind of core policy :-) ) | |
| 10:45:42 | bauzas | for the moment, we bootstrap only README and AGENTS.md but for sure we will need to find a way to have consensus :) | |
| 10:45:43 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: you know im stilll reviewing the first pathch you merged right | |
| 10:45:56 | sean-k-mooney | in rst format | |
| 10:46:15 | sean-k-mooney | im not agianst movign to markdon but i woudl like time to actully leave my feedbac | |
| 10:46:36 | bauzas | doh sorry | |
| 10:48:34 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: fwiw, stephen removed some sections from the README so I guess it's more important to review the AGENTS.md file now | |
| 10:50:55 | sean-k-mooney | well the AGENT.md is hopelfully very short | |
| 10:51:07 | sean-k-mooney | but i was still on the readme ill look at that next | |
| 10:57:04 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: there is a rule about not having more than 500 lines for both skill.md and AGENTS.md :) | |
| 10:57:29 | sean-k-mooney | ok i dissagre on both :) | |
| 10:57:54 | sean-k-mooney | skills can be longer then AGENTS.md | |
| 10:58:13 | sean-k-mooney | becuase only frontmatter is loaded into the context window form a skill initally | |
| 10:58:29 | sean-k-mooney | so the overall leght is only an issue if the skill is actully used | |
| 10:58:44 | sean-k-mooney | where as AGENT.md is incldue in every tool call | |
| 10:58:55 | sean-k-mooney | so it need to be smaller | |
| 10:59:15 | sean-k-mooney | i dont want to perscibe an actual number right now | |
| 10:59:22 | sean-k-mooney | but those shoudl be trated differntly | |
| 10:59:46 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I'm just advocating based on the agentskills best practice :) https://agentskills.io/skill-creation/best-practices#structure-large-skills-with-progressive-disclosure | |
| 11:01:08 | bauzas | anyway, I don't want to be that prescreptive, fwiw the AGENTS.md is pretty small atm, and no skills won't be accepted before we officially agree on the direction | |
| 11:04:43 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/agentic-workflows/+/985021/1/README.rst has my initall comments | |
| 11:05:24 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: wether we use tox or not was goint to be one of the topic i watned to dicss by the way | |
| 11:05:53 | bauzas | I just wanted a small linter on check | |
| 11:05:55 | sean-k-mooney | if we expect to have python script and or unit test then it makes sesne | |
| 11:06:00 | bauzas | hence the use ot tox | |
| 11:06:08 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: and thanks for the reviews | |
| 11:06:10 | sean-k-mooney | if we dont then we may want to condier other options | |
| 11:07:03 | bauzas | the current is that we use a tox target in check and gate for checking the frontmatters using the 'agentskills validate' recommended tool | |
| 11:09:36 | bauzas | https://agentskills.io/specification#validation | |
| 11:10:43 | sean-k-mooney | yep i just saw but again we shoudl dicuss those ways of working first | |
| 11:24:54 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: can you re-ack https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/984918? | |
| 11:25:12 | stephenfin | and bauzas, ditto for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/984956/ (I'd to fix some typos and a comment from dan) | |
| 11:25:14 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: well, I don't see the controversy for the frontmatter linter | |
| 11:25:41 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: what's your concern with running a tox target with it ? that's an easy win to me | |
| 11:25:53 | sean-k-mooney | well the issue is mroe that you merged anything before the ptg into this repo | |
| 11:26:11 | bauzas | none of that is skills | |
| 11:26:19 | sean-k-mooney | i dont think you shoudl have merge anything | |
| 11:26:21 | sean-k-mooney | at all | |
| 11:26:45 | sean-k-mooney | as i said creating the reviews is totlaly fine | |
| 11:27:22 | stephenfin | It's done. Let's keep reviewing now and gather thoughts for the PTG | |
| 11:27:35 | sean-k-mooney | yep that what im focusing on | |
| 11:27:53 | bauzas | again I apologize, I didn't wanted to force anything but trying to just have a boostrap that people can review | |
| 11:28:34 | bauzas | I'm cool with reverting for example the tox patch but I found this was not really controversial | |
| 11:29:36 | stephenfin | I'll repeat 😄 It's done. Let's keep reviewing now and gather thoughts for the PTG. There's a lot more people that are going to have opinions on this than us | |
| 11:29:38 | sean-k-mooney | its not the content of hte patch that was the issue it was the lack fo time to provide feedback | |
| 11:49:35 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I think, the easiest if you want is for me to revert https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/agentic-workflows/+/985027 which was at the top | |
| 11:50:07 | bauzas | and then I'll revert the revert so we can discuss about the AGENTS.md in the new gerrit patch if that's simplied | |
| 11:50:26 | sean-k-mooney | lets not jump right to that | |
| 11:50:39 | bauzas | now the README.md is pretty small | |
| 11:50:46 | sean-k-mooney | as steph said its merged but there are large part of it that i want to review in detail and refine | |
| 11:50:49 | bauzas | so I guess we definitely need to discuss about te structure | |
| 11:51:09 | sean-k-mooney | yes i have a very diffent vission from you of how this repo should be stucureed | |
| 11:51:28 | sean-k-mooney | adn how the code-review skill shoudl work | |
| 11:51:55 | sean-k-mooney | for exampels i do not think we shoudl have any personas in the repo | |
| 11:52:28 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: so if you don't me to revert, please provide a new change for changing what you want | |
| 11:52:47 | sean-k-mooney | i will but im still reviewing all the open chnages | |
| 11:52:57 | sean-k-mooney | to do what stephen suggested | |
| 11:53:05 | sean-k-mooney | which is building a set of topic to dicusss | |
| 12:21:09 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: stephenfin: want me to create another IRC channel for the project ? I don't want to hit the nova channel to be a lot of discussions for the project and ralonsoh could be join as well | |
| 12:21:31 | stephenfin | probably premature before next week | |
| 12:21:32 | sean-k-mooney | am we can | |
| 12:21:46 | sean-k-mooney | but ya lets wait | |
| 12:25:10 | sean-k-mooney | i mean we can create it if you want but i porably have already spent more tiem on this then i should have since i have things to prepare before the ptg | |
| 12:27:09 | bauzas | I just joined #openstack-agentic-workflows so you can join too, but agreed, I wouldn't add it in openstack/project-config until next week | |
| 12:27:45 | bauzas | I'd rather prefer us to discuss there | |
| 12:38:08 | ralonsoh | bauzas, I'm ok with this. We can also, if needed, create a weekly meeting | |
| 12:38:16 | ralonsoh | but that could be discussed in the PTG, in any case | |
| 12:38:23 | ralonsoh | but yes, the channel would be perfect | |
| 12:39:27 | gibi | is this agentic-workflows something that should be a TC driven cross project goal? I think so. But then we need to agree on what is in scope of that goal and propose that in the governance repo | |
| 12:39:53 | bauzas | gibi: see https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/984958 | |
| 12:40:10 | bauzas | that wouldn't be a TC goal, rather a TaCT SIG new project | |
| 12:40:30 | gibi | ack | |
| 12:40:45 | bauzas | ralonsoh: you can join the channel as I did, we can discuss there until we officially add it in project-config | |
| 12:41:03 | gibi | but that patch does not seems to define the scope | |
| 12:41:18 | bauzas | gibi: there is no real scope per say | |
| 12:41:39 | bauzas | scope is about adding skills and subagents related to OpenStack | |
| 12:41:41 | gibi | and is that good that we are going in without some scope definition? | |
| 12:42:00 | gibi | how do we check if we are going to the right direction, or when we are done? | |
| 12:42:02 | ralonsoh | #join project-config | |
| 12:42:03 | bauzas | but the project doesn't have scope about how to use it by upstream | |
| 12:42:08 | ralonsoh | arggggg | |
| 12:42:21 | bauzas | ralonsoh: nah, join #openstack-agentic-workflows | |
| 12:42:29 | ralonsoh | yeah hehehe | |
| 12:42:34 | gibi | scope also helps judging contributions about is it in scope? is it out of scope? | |
| 12:45:16 | bauzas | gibi: there aren't yet conventions about judging contributions for it atm, but there are already some guidelines from agentskills about evaluating skills that I'd like us to do https://agentskills.io/skill-creation/evaluating-skills | |
| 12:47:22 | gibi | OK so one of the implicit scope / goal item is to apply https://agentskills.io/skill-creation/evaluating-skills going forward. | |