| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-03-03 | |||
| 04:34:40 | Sundar | I think Dan is wrong with that advice | |
| 04:37:15 | Sundar | Here's my diff; http://paste.openstack.org/show/790226/ | |
| 04:37:20 | Sundar | You can also try it | |
| 04:37:30 | Sundar | chenke: ^ | |
| 06:29:18 | chenke | The paste diff result failed? right? | |
| 06:35:43 | Sundar | Yes, chenke | |
| 06:35:54 | chenke | Ok. | |
| 06:36:18 | chenke | That's strange. | |
| 06:37:51 | chenke | It's means self.compute._build_resources will not raise an exception? | |
| 06:57:29 | chenke | Sundar are you here? | |
| 06:57:31 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Remove useless interfaces in agent https://review.opendev.org/710911 | |
| 07:00:55 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Remove useless interfaces in agent https://review.opendev.org/710911 | |
| 07:07:17 | Sundar | Yes, I am here, chenke | |
| 07:07:27 | chenke | Cool | |
| 07:07:37 | chenke | It's means self.compute._build_resources will not raise an exception? | |
| 07:07:38 | Sundar | Just saw your message above | |
| 07:07:52 | chenke | NP | |
| 07:08:15 | Sundar | Yes, for a context manager decorated function, we need to invoke the exception inside the with body, to trigger the eception path inside the function | |
| 07:08:54 | chenke | Oh. Cool. | |
| 07:09:23 | chenke | The latest patch seems UT passed. | |
| 07:09:38 | chenke | I will give +1 after dan's review. | |
| 07:12:56 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Remove useless interfaces in agent https://review.opendev.org/710911 | |
| 07:14:48 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/cyborg master: move setting to devstack/settings https://review.opendev.org/708770 | |
| 07:18:00 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Remove useless interfaces in agent https://review.opendev.org/710911 | |
| 07:26:57 | Sundar | Sure. Thanks, chenke. | |
| 07:27:17 | chenke | :) | |
| 07:34:15 | Sundar | Going to sleep now. Talk to you later. Have a good day. Bye! | |
| 17:10:30 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/cyborg master: WIP add cyborg multinode job https://review.opendev.org/709641 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-03-04 | |||
| 13:18:09 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Optimize deployble object module https://review.opendev.org/711222 | |
| 13:27:19 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Fix minor error in extarq job https://review.opendev.org/711225 | |
| 13:39:25 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: (WIP) Remove V1 API and related codes https://review.opendev.org/711232 | |
| 13:45:07 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: (WIP) Remove V1 API and related codes https://review.opendev.org/711232 | |
| 14:14:33 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Fix minor error in extarq job https://review.opendev.org/711225 | |
| #openstack-cyborg - 2020-03-05 | |||
| 01:44:11 | openstackgerrit | chenker proposed openstack/cyborg master: Remove V1 API and related codes https://review.opendev.org/711232 | |
| 02:52:49 | brinzhang | Sundar: ask a question https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711225/2/cyborg/objects/extarq/ext_arq_job.py@39 | |
| 02:53:12 | Sundar | brinzhang: Ok, looking at it | |
| 02:53:43 | brinzhang | Sundar: "if getattr(self.bind, "is_job", False) and need_job is not False:" if need_job=False, is it what would you want? | |
| 02:53:50 | Sundar | What is the question? | |
| 02:54:24 | brinzhang | Sundar: check_extra_job(context, deployable) this just only return True or False? or there is other volue? | |
| 02:55:04 | brinzhang | Dou you accept current changes? | |
| 02:55:15 | brinzhang | s/Dou/Do | |
| 02:56:22 | brinzhang | "need_job is not False" has the different value when need_job init None or False | |
| 02:58:32 | Sundar | IMHO, need_job should be boolean (True/False). The check should be: "if need_job: ..." | |
| 02:59:07 | Sundar | Having a possible value of None just complicates other code that has to check for None. | |
| 02:59:39 | brinzhang | agree | |
| 03:00:00 | Sundar | So, I agree with this change. | |
| 03:00:19 | brinzhang | so "if getattr(self.bind, "is_job", False) and need_job is not False:" should change to "if getattr(self.bind, "is_job", False) and need_job:" | |
| 03:01:18 | Sundar | Yes, agree | |
| 03:01:31 | chenke | need_job or need_job is not False both ok. | |
| 03:01:57 | brinzhang | And I think we need add some UT for this, now the change dont run some UT | |
| 03:01:58 | Sundar | chenke: Sure. But shorter is better. | |
| 03:02:18 | Sundar | Looks like we have quite a few people. So, let's get started. | |
| 03:02:25 | chenke | Ok. | |
| 03:02:31 | Sundar | #startmeeting openstack-cyborg | |
| 03:02:32 | openstack | Meeting started Thu Mar 5 03:02:31 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is Sundar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 03:02:33 | openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 03:02:35 | openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_cyborg' | |
| 03:02:47 | Sundar | #topic Agenda | |
| 03:02:55 | chenke | #info chenke | |
| 03:03:04 | Sundar | #info Sundar | |
| 03:03:14 | Li_Liu | #info Li_Liu | |
| 03:03:29 | brinzhang | #info brinzhang | |
| 03:03:36 | Yumeng | #info Yumeng | |
| 03:04:10 | xinranwang | #info xinranwang | |
| 03:04:26 | Sundar | What do people have to discuss today? | |
| 03:05:18 | brinzhang | About remove v1 API | |
| 03:05:19 | brinzhang | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711232/ | |
| 03:05:22 | Sundar | BTW, the time for PTG reservation is up. I didn't hear confirmation that even 3 people plan to go to Vancouver, SO I haven't confirmed anything. | |
| 03:07:27 | shaohe_feng | encourage developers to access the PTG | |
| 03:07:31 | shaohe_feng | if possible. | |
| 03:09:59 | chenke | V1's API is now worthless, and v2 can also be seen. v2's deployable api, Shogo is also doing it, I think it can be removed. Even if the v1 api is retained, the call may not necessarily be as expected. https://review.opendev.org/#/c/698190/ | |
| 03:10:04 | Sundar | To have focused discussion on V release goals and plans, we could either do it in IRC and etherpads or in openstack-discuss ML. If we do a Zoom call. or WeChat discussion, they should be posted on IRC or ML. Otherwise, other projects will not have know what we do. | |
| 03:10:04 | chenke | brinzhang | |
| 03:10:37 | Sundar | brnzhang, chenke: Agree v1 API can be removed. | |
| 03:10:47 | Sundar | brinzhang: ^ | |
| 03:10:52 | chenke | OK | |
| 03:11:16 | brinzhang | Sundar, but in v2 we dont have the deployable, right? | |
| 03:11:44 | brinzhang | if we remove now, I think it's too early to do this. | |
| 03:11:52 | chenke | https://review.opendev.org/#/c/698190/ | |
| 03:12:59 | brinzhang | IMO, we should done all things in v2, then to deal with the v1 | |
| 03:13:01 | Sundar | brinzhang: There is a deployable object in v2, but it means something else than the v1 deployable. | |
| 03:13:28 | Sundar | I think we plan to have APIs for patching deployables in v2. | |
| 03:14:00 | brinzhang | Sundar: sure | |
| 03:14:32 | brinzhang | If all agree to remove now, I am ok too. | |
| 03:15:15 | Sundar | brinzhang: I think it is better to remove api/controllers/v1/deployables.py and add api/controllers/v2/deployables.py | |
| 03:15:53 | chenke | shogo is doing this | |
| 03:16:04 | brinzhang | Sundar: I also agree, but I just think it's earlier | |
| 03:16:30 | Sundar | brinzhang: I see. What should we wait for, before we remove the v1 API? | |
| 03:16:46 | brinzhang | I think so | |
| 03:17:59 | chenke | do you use v1? | |
| 03:19:22 | brinzhang | chenke, Sundar: Need a process here, right? | |
| 03:19:38 | Yumeng | brinzhang: Brin, if I didn't remember it wrong, we've made an agreement Train version that we make an deprecation anounce and remove the code in U release. | |
| 03:21:05 | brinzhang | Yumeng, Ah, if so, I think I missed this message, ignore my comments | |
| 03:21:24 | Yumeng | But I forgot where the discussion was happen. | |
| 03:21:30 | Sundar | Yes, we followed the process of deprecating in Stein itself and reinforced the deprecation in Train. | |
| 03:21:53 | Yumeng | yes, it's safe to remove now. Don't worry. | |
| 03:22:17 | Sundar | Yumeng: We have discussed this in IRC before (I need to look up when). But our API docs clearly say v1 is deprecated, both in Stein and Train. | |
| 03:23:37 | Yumeng | ok. good that we have announcement! | |
| 03:24:18 | brinzhang | Sundar: that should an ML or etherpad to recore this aggrement, otherwise will have different opinion | |
| 03:24:47 | Sundar | https://docs.openstack.org/cyborg/stein/admin/api.html | |