# Infrastructure Working Group notes
:::success
Join Zoom Meeting
https://turing-uk.zoom.us/j/93589886899?pwd=L2hFZGIrNzV5SFB6SkNwVXVjaVJvQT09
Meeting ID: 935 8988 6899
Passcode: 692305
:::
### Code of conduct
_The Turing Way_ Code of conduct applies to this call.
* [Take a moment to read this](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
* For any question or concern please reach out to Malvika and Anne (msharan@turing.ac.uk, asteele@turing.ac.uk).
### Guide
[TOC]
----
## 08-06-23 Infrastructure Working Group Meeting 5
### Check-in
**What are you most excited for in this transition to a Github Organisation?**
* Jim - Groups! Automatically assigning groups to issues/PRs/etc.
* Sarah
* Danny
*
### Agenda
:hourglass_flowing_sand: **Timing:**
---
**Check-in Question
| Duration | Activity |
| ---- | -------- |
| Start | 👋 Welcome |
| 05 mins | Check in |
| 30 mins | Review of Infrastructure task list |
| 15 mins | PR reviews (Book dash) |
| 10 mins | Final tasks for next meeting (13 July 2023)
### Preparing for *The Turing Way* Github Organisation
1. What is required in order to prepare for a Github Organisation?
2. Reviewing materials & posting on [Github issue](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/3213)
3. What might a timeline look like?
Notes:
- ALS: Advocating for a while. Got the okay! Want Infra WG to spearhead the process. Power & skills to make this transition.
- DG: Shouldn't this be a paid person's role? Seems more of a question of skills?
- ALS: Both power and skills?
- SG - Things may break
- [name=Sarah] Netlify probably, should be easy to fix.
- [name=Sarah] Not much else should break
- How to do this
- [name=Sarah] GitHub process to migrate repository to a new Org. **Everything** moves **except** permissions.
- [name=Sarah] Could use the API to extract permissions, add them back
- May be an opportunity to *check* if people need the permissions they have.
- Sometimes letting people complain when permissions are removed helps prune unnecessary permissions that had been granted previously.
- JM: Haven't migrated a repo before. May affect broken links, etc.
- SG: One member of each WG having admin rights
- DG: I agree with Jim: opportunity for permissions clean slate is a security bonus
- JM: Infra 'team' and Review 'team' are an ongoing list that can be added to the new repo, cleaning up?
- DG: Process for who gets to merge. Contextual people can merge. Person starting Issue/PR can merge involved in PR is all. What's to stop us from starting a github org right now?
- SG: We can create teams, create an organisation. We can add people to those teams. We can have a count down to the transfer.
- DG: Github good at redirecting.
- SG: Better to let people know. Automatic assignment to infra team for different things.
- DG: Arrange another meeting for folks on hand?
- JM: Code owners and required reviews? Cannot be merged until they look at it?
- Might be too restrictive for The Turing Way
- ALS/AAA: Get list of folks from each working group & their github handles
- DG: Can we make sure that next Infrastructure meeting is when it merges? Could we do it at a Collab Cafe?
- SG: Can we ask people to come to this meeting as a d
- ALS: Github issue?
- SG: A banner on the actual book! A countdown?
- DG: We want to be underwhelmed by this countdown?
- ALS: What invites are missing?
- DG: Anything else that needs to be discussed?
- SG: Redirects
- ALS: We'll need to split it later on?
- ALS: All the people who have made a PR, would they be in a group?
- JM: Is there a better way to do this?
Zulip bot links:
- https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing/zulipbot-usage.html
- https://github.com/zulip/zulipbot/
- https://pyvideo.org/search.html?q=zulipbot
### Planning the timeline
- Transfer in 1 month
- How do we communicate the shift of the repository?
- Setting up teams
- Hit transfer in next meeting
- Figuring out how to split later on
- Splitting repo in the future (much longer time line)
### Next steps:
- Write on the Github issue
- Permissions
- Onboarding and offboarding for these processing
- Management of the teams
- List of active contributors (AAA/ALS)
- Future work
- TTW url
- TTW website
- Paying people to work on infrastructure
- A full time role(?)
- Infrastructure research - guiding in priorities? Recommendations?
- Implementing findings?
- [Danny's PR](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/3218)
- Some REG time from folks(?)
- Should the person doing the recommendation also be doing the implementation?
- Communication Plan -
- Slack: @channel message announcing
- Github organistaion
- Inviting people to next meeting
-
---
# Archive of Notes
## 08-06-23 Infrastructure Working Group Meeting 5
Time: Thursday, 8 June, 16:00 pm
Attendees: Jim, Alex, Danny & Anne
**What are your priorities and interests for being part of the Infrastructure team?**
* [name=Jim] (Probably can't join the call ☹️) Making everything work really well and being able to explain it.
* [name=Alex] (Joined super late) as Anne and I were in a Turing way meeting. Support the team
* [name=Danny] Making it easy for others to contribute and use the guides
* [name=Anne] Helping to formalise and handover power to folks here!
### Review of Infrastructure task:
The following is a work in progress and the discussion today will allow us to improve it and feed into our Governance review
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lDnbSU0_jYB-qVpOj7mMAynvvMERwxpFAeWbq7FoHaM/edit#gid=699453517
### PR Reviews
- [name=Jim] I have two from the book dash that I would like some input on
- https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/pull/3093 --- Is finished and approved by Sarah but it does change how the contributors record is updated so I wanted to have some authoritative sign off (from Malvika?)
- https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/pull/3102 --- Starting on infrastructure documentation using the above PR as an example. (Would be good to add the broken link issue workflow here)
#### Anne presented the Governance infrastucture document
Sarah:
Recommended to have an audit role (could be a .5 fte) to research which tools *The Turing Way*, the feature of each of them, who is using it (which working group) and how they are relying on it. Do a research about other available tools that could be replaced with. The person producing this report should not be responsible for the implementation
Alex:
Suggested that maybe Arya, as the GSoC Student could support us with it.
Sarah:
The student could help to prototype this role and evidence why it is needed with a student. To gather evidence and a first set of recommendation
### Structures from the Working Group
S: looking at what is doing at Netlify and Jupyter book
G: Documentation, leave a the knowledge in place in case anyone from the working group leaves. (Very urgent priority)
Copy notes from this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18DvwnQ88Bwo_5QVHNdGBrKf2gQH1-1wqzTrDvGSQ874/edit#
Urgent needs:
- Need for personnel that is dedicated specifically to open source ecosystem research (can also be involved in operational work). Perhaps a RAM or REG?
- Combination of product manager, “technical enough”, and open source strategy (community guidance, what are contributors/users trying to achieve?)
- Not expected to implement
- Generate reports on status of ecosystem, provides “stick or switch” recommendations for certain tools, based on ongoing assessment of needs of users and other WGs
- Documenting and updating existing infrastructure on regular basis
- Status: Currently being drafted by various WG & community members
- Running Jupyter locally (issue #)
- Infrastructure group documentation (issue #)
- Resources & loose structures to enable decision-making (organisational vs operational)
- Types: package updates, feature management (like IT services for entire community), upstream as a service
- Status: Getting references from team and community. Core delivery team can draft an example around how this structure might work. Possibility of Open Source Infrastructure role within the team?
- References:
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md
https://mybinder-sre.readthedocs.io/en/latest/operation_guide/common_problems.html
https://jupyterhub-team-compass.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#we-sail-together
- Github Organisation (long term - but growing need)
Teams can be created for each type of work
Will help with clarifying roles within the team
## 11-05-23 Infrastructure Working Group Meeting 4
Time: Thursday, 11 May, 16:00 pm
Attendees: Bastian, Jim and Alex.
There was no agenda as we have agreed that this was a prep meeting for the ones starting on the 2nd Thursday of the month.
- We spoke about how we could support in structuring the infrastructure working group.
- Jim will be at the Book Dash (in May) and that was a good opportunity for him to work on the infrastructure team documentation. He wanted to speak to Malvika to answer some technical questions
- We spoke about the possibility of TTW having an Infrastructure custodian who can focus and guide all the technicalities of the space. This person should have authority to make decisions and make it evident for other contributors.
- Are the Collaborations Cafes the right space for the infrastructure team to work. Is it a focus time to go through PR?
- Is is possible to bring more resources to the infrastructure team to be able to invest in more automations and structure?
### Actions:
- Alex agreed to talk to Malvika about this points
# 20-04-23 Infrastructure Working Group Meeting 3
# Agenda
**Time**: Thursdat, 20 April, 16:00 UTC+1 ([in your timezone](https://arewemeetingyet.com/london/2023-03-29/16:00))
**Chair**: Anne
**Scribe**: Otter.ai (from Sarah)
| Duration | Activity |
| ---- | -------- |
| 10 mins | 👋 Welcome + Introductions |
| 5 mins | Review Developing Principles & Ways of Working|
| 20 mins | Review PR |
| 20 mins |Documentation|
| 5 mins | Action items & Next steps |
## Welcome back + Introductions
Attendees: Sarah, Brigitta, Anne and Ale
### Meeting discussions
Sarah
- Redirection of files around
- Link checks
PR Working group
- How are we using this meeting?
- Fundamental work needs to happen offstream
- The Turing
- Jim (how do good meetings look like):
Project Tracker
Quick overview of issues.
Higher level of prioritation. High level of conversation. Quick refresh of people opinions.
- Anne (Open Roadmap)
Propose to have someone from Translation to guide us on how to organise the group
Translation and Location notes: https://hackmd.io/HQQQMlwvTIOtX5nHH9R4eg
- Sarah (on inviting someone from the Translation group)
Sounds like a good idea.
Documenting what we have might be a good idea.
- Brigitta: on building the roadmap.
## Planning the documentation
- Prepare templates and sessions for a Collaboration Space
## Roadmap
- Jim and Sarah are not certain that this might be a solution for this WG.
**Next meetings will be the 2nd Thursday of the month from 4:00 pm to 5:00 pm**
May will be a month full of Conferences for the
Collaborations Workshops
SciPy / mid July: Send stickers and cards to Brigitta
# 29-03-23 Infrastructure Working Group Meeting 2
:::success
Join Zoom Meeting
https://turing-uk.zoom.us/j/91535808129?pwd=bko5RkJ3SmFOYkQ4YjRHOWdERGJvdz09
Meeting ID: 915 3580 8129
Passcode: 739877
:::
### Code of conduct
_The Turing Way_ Code of conduct applies to this call.
* [Take a moment to read this](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
* For any question or concern please reach out to Malvika and Anne (msharan@turing.ac.uk, asteele@turing.ac.uk).
# Agenda
**Time**: Wednesday, 29 March, 16:00 UTC+1 ([in your timezone](https://arewemeetingyet.com/london/2023-03-29/16:00))
**Chair**: Anne
**Scribe**: Otter.ai (from Sarah)
| Duration | Activity |
| ---- | -------- |
| 10 mins | 👋 Welcome + Introductions |
| 5 mins | Review of WG Proposal! |
| 20 mins | Review of last year |
| 20 mins | Developing Principles & Ways of Working |
| 5 mins | Action items & Next steps |
## Welcome back + Introductions
Time: 0:00-0:05
(Please add your name and you can respond to the questions verbally during the introduction.)
**Name (optional: pronouns) + How did you start getting involved with open source infrastructure (with The Turing Way or otherwise?)?**
* [name=Danny] (he/him) - I think I saw things that bugged me in the formatting of the Turing Way, and saw that they were fixed in a new version, and the rest is history! 😅
* [name=Brigitta] (she/her) - I started to contribute to open source as a GSoC student, gravitated towards the infrastructure parts over the years. During the pandemic joined one or two book dashes, and naturally ended up enjoying fixing infrastructure for TTW more than writing content.
* [name=Anne] (she/her) -
* [name=Jim] (he/him) - Wanting to self-host and manage multiple Raspberry Pis in a sensible way
* [name=Bastian] (he/him) - Some self-hosting blogs and stuff and then wanting to run openSNP.org
* [name=Sarah] (she/her) From the beginning of the Turing Way, working with Project Binder and JupyterHub, deploying "traditional" compute-based infrastructure
## Review: What we've done so far
Time: 00:10 - 00:55
[Anne]
Notes:
- Instructions for building locally: https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/pull/2922
- Worked with Outreachy interns to test documentation, which was great!
- Planning documentation for infrastructure maintainers: https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/2809
- What has worked, what hasn't?
- Flagging infrastructure work for Book Dash: https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/2988
- Reviewing core principles from last year
- Availability & Commitment: has anything changed?
- [name=Jim] In principle, no change. In practice, I'm probably going to have less 'Turing time' to use for TTW.
- [name=Sarah] Low availability. I feel like I am in a position to be consulted and provide designs for solutions to problems, but I probably don't have time for implementations.
- [name=Brigitta] ad-hoc, availability for PR review is definitely there (I need to receive a direct github notification about it), less commitment for implementing new ideas
- [name=Bastian] No prior availability reported :wink:
- [name=Anne] There's a lot more that I wanted to do with everyone, but am being pulled in a couple of different directions! I could commit to a regular set time.
- [name=Danny] Unclear currently - I'm in the process of wrapping up my postdoc and deciding what comes next, and I'm currently planning my life only several days ahead at a time!
- Github organisation, github teams
- We got the ok! :thumbsup:
- ALS: How can we host a conversations about this transition in public?
- SG: Github teams -> each WG can be a team. Separating event planning from maintenance issues.
- BS: Hard to find issues that you can find in 10-15 minutes that I have. Labels is one thing. Project board can be helpful and directly being pinged on pull requests. Balance of pinging group & pinging individuals...
- SG: We can ping each other... but can people outside the WG know how to do it.
- JM: Can you assign a team to a PR or request a review from a team?
- ALS: We have slack channel... but should that happen in this context?
- What would be needed to flag a working group?
- SG: Currently is through ATI, but will need github organisation
- BS: First hurdle is to get the organisation
- JM: We'll just do what makes sense and worry about improving it later! Teams on Github had be a tree structure, can have sub-team of infrastructure maintainers.
- SG: Downside of pinging a team can be that no one is responsible...
- ALS: How can we be a buffer during this process?
- JM: Tagging, people who play that triage role... Sounds a bit risky, you have to have a lot of knowledge about who everyone is.
- SG: Pull request reminder bot... burden the robot!
- How can we start planning for a github organisation in 6 months?
- JM: We can do this?
- SG: Will dig into how the reminder bot is done
- BS: Getting org wide anything requires the hacking, not the other way around
-
- Communication: platform, cadence, method
- Infrastructure reminders on Slack channel
- BS: Every other week a summary of what is going on?
- JM: Monthly, weekly summary,
- BST: i would feel like having a bot do automated reminders in a separate channel can easily lead to notification fatigue (and a same vague responsibility)
- Github team: Can only add Turing folks to the Github team...
- Openess: sharing with TTW communinity
- Membership: who should be in this group?
- ALS: Maybe pause on thinking about this?
- 1) Github teams
- Now:
- AAA & ALS: can see on Turing level
- JM: Can people be added as 'Outside Collaborators'? Jim tested it and it was not possible.
- Organisation: We'll need our own team.
- 2) Notifications
- Github email digests
- Slack channel
- 3) Accountability + Scheduling
- Meeting structures
- Book Dash & Collab Cafe
- Planning in the long term for a sprint of some sort?
- Once a quarter?
- Slack channel
## Next steps
Time: 00:55-01:00
- Scheduling a monthly meeting
- AAA: Start with scheduling one month check-in
-
- Schedule time
- Schedule monthly meeting
- Github organisation
-
:::info
Previous meeting notes: 10-11-22
https://hackmd.io/_aY35tIaTpWKeYotoMcYRQ
:::
## Summary
-
------
## Review previous structure: What do we work on?
Time: 00:30 - 00:45
### 1. Reviewing ongoing tasks
[Taken from Github Issue](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/2690)
> * Day to day: package updates, managing bug reports
> * Longer-term: managing automation requests from working groups, developing strategy for tech adoption, onboarding new infrastructure maintainers, self-directed projects
> * Preparation required: developing documentation (for internal use, to be added to the Community Handbook)
Notes:
- What is this missing?
-
-
### 2. Reviewing timeline
[Taken from Github Issue](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/2690)
> 1. Phase 1: Documentation
> 2. Phase 2: Testing and Developing System
> 3. Phase 3: Expanding system & maintainers group
Notes:
- Are these the logical steps to take?
-
-
### 3. Planning for Phase 1
[Taken from Github Issue](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/issues/2690)
> Answering questions like 'Who is doing what?' and 'What do people need to know when they join?', these phase is focused on documenting existing processes to develop, update, and maintain TTW as it is currently. This can form the framework for something like an SRE guide for TTW maintainers, including resources like a Q&A, and information about its platform building tools
Notes:
- Action Points:
- ALS - Making issue of what should go in documentation?
- SG - Sending otter.ai transcript
### Next Steps
Time: 00:55 - 01:00
-
-
----
## References
* List of members:
*
* Link to transcript:
* https://hackmd.io/@turingway/Hk5Ywl2Bo
# 10.11.22 Infrastructure Working Group Kick-off
Contained here: https://hackmd.io/@turingway/ttw-infra-kick-off