Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-cyborg - 2020-03-04
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 chenke brinzhang
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.
03:10:37 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
03:24:55 brinzhang And we should add that links to the commit message, that reviewer can get more info
03:25:27 chenke Ok. I will update message
03:26:34 brinzhang Sundar, chenker, Yumeng: ok, we can continue next topic
03:26:36 Sundar brinzhang: The above link is published already. I have said this to Nova developers in ML too, not sure when.
03:26:54 chenke ok
03:27:12 Sundar For example, Sean mooney and others are testing Nova with Cyborg v2. No expectation of v1 support.
03:27:39 Sundar #topic PTG
03:28:33 Sundar To reinforce what I said: 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.
03:29:02 Sundar Does anybody disagree?
03:29:31 xinranwang We can create a ether pad
03:29:52 xinranwang To list the goals
03:31:11 Sundar Ok, so everybody agrees to this ^, right?
03:31:19 Yumeng agree. etherpad, zoom are always good.
03:31:31 brinzhang agree, wWe can publish content on etherpad regularly
03:31:47 brinzhang send that info to ML
03:32:07 s_shogo agree.
03:32:22 Sundar #agree V release planning process above ^
03:32:33 Sundar Thanks, all
03:32:55 Sundar Any other topic before I move to Nova and related stuff?
03:33:17 Yumeng ^^
03:33:24 Yumeng Sundar, xinranwang, chenke: I will abandon this:https://review.opendev.org/#/c/709286/3
03:33:33 Yumeng but we still need to update the valid controlpath_id_type values herehttps://github.com/openstack/cyborg/blob/master/cyborg/objects/control_path.py#L26, do you agree?
03:34:07 Yumeng we should remove "MDEV" in cureent valid values
03:34:25 Yumeng */from
03:34:43 chenke Agree
03:34:47 Yumeng https://github.com/openstack/cyborg/blob/master/cyborg/objects/control_path.py#L26
03:34:52 Sundar Yumeng: agree
03:35:00 Sundar to both
03:35:14 Yumeng ok. great! will do.
03:35:38 brinzhang agree
03:36:13 xinranwang Agree

Earlier   Later