Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-09-21
16:12:28 bauzas this is absolutely empty
16:12:54 bauzas cores, please enjoy this new button until we discuss other ways to use it at the PTG
16:13:29 bauzas is there anyone wanting to have their changes be a priority for reviews ?
16:13:53 bauzas (that's your time, folks)
16:13:59 artom Wait, only cores can set the priority label?
16:14:15 bauzas with the current implementation, yes
16:14:31 bauzas I'm about to propose other possibilities at the PTG
16:14:41 bauzas (which reminds me I have to write something in the etherpad)
16:14:46 artom Can a non-core propose the label, or is the whole thing owned entirely by cores?
16:15:08 bauzas artom: dude, that's the whole discussion we had in the related doc change :)
16:15:14 gibi artom: this is the currently agreed process https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/792357 but sure we can discuss it on the PTG
16:15:18 dansmith surely it will be totally useless if not curated by a smaller group right?
16:15:32 artom Sorry, not opening pandora's box again, just catching up
16:15:34 bauzas I'm happy to see people offering alternatives :)
16:15:35 dansmith in bug trackers where everyone can set priority, people set their bugs to be "urgent" all the time
16:15:37 opendevreview Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova master: Update min supported service version for Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809932
16:15:42 dansmith I can't imagine it will be useful otherwise
16:15:46 opendevreview Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova master: Update min supported service version for Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809932
16:16:10 bauzas dansmith: I had an alternative proposal I left in the comments but we can discuss this at the PTG (and I'll propose a documentation change)
16:16:21 artom Essentially, for my own selfish needs, all I can do with the Priority label is query it, and look at those reviews in case my opinion on them is of any use to anyone, right?
16:16:21 dansmith ack
16:16:51 bauzas artom: for the moment, the idea is that cores make some review vows when setting the label
16:17:04 bauzas meaning they engage themselves to review this patch in question
16:17:04 gibi artom: if you help merging reviews in priority then cores will have more bandwidth to look at other reviews including yours :D
16:17:35 bauzas but I'm not sure we should continue this conversation now, we have some agenda left
16:17:42 bauzas (and a stretched time)
16:18:07 artom Understood.
16:18:45 bauzas moving on
16:18:55 bauzas #topic PTG Planning
16:19:01 bauzas every info is in the PTG etherpad #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-yoga-ptg
16:19:14 bauzas If you see a need for a specific cross project section then please let me know (gibi or bauzas)
16:19:18 bauzas gibi: I jinxed you :p
16:19:42 bauzas at least we can see regular updates from sean-k-mooney :)
16:20:05 gibi I expect more and more topics as we close to the PTG date
16:20:16 gibi I think the current list is normal given we have a month still
16:20:25 bauzas absolutely right
16:20:26 gibi (a bit less of a month
16:20:27 gibi )
16:20:31 bauzas I'm not afraid of having extra time
16:20:36 gibi me neither
16:21:15 bauzas but I'd say, take this month as an opportunity to start designing your features, so you can raise your questions at the PTG
16:21:36 bauzas anyway, moving on
16:21:42 bauzas #topic Stable Branches
16:21:58 bauzas (that could last a bit)
16:22:00 bauzas nova's stable/ussuri and stable/train are blocked (due to latest virtualenv uses latest setuptools which removed use_2to3)
16:22:07 bauzas the future proof solution would be to pin virtualenv during tox install for stable branches, otherwise new errors can appear with every new release of setuptools, virtualenv, etc
16:22:12 bauzas until we decide about the right solution we can maybe set lower-constraints job as non-voting ( https://review.opendev.org/809955 )
16:22:16 bauzas probably placement branches have the same errors
16:22:21 bauzas elodilles: floor is yours
16:22:30 gibi bauzas: yes, this is the same error
16:22:35 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Add missing __init__.py in nova/db/api https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810192
16:22:47 gibi it affects a lot of projects that still uses decorator 3.4 as dep
16:22:56 gibi nova affected from ussuri backwards
16:23:02 gibi placement affected all the way to master
16:23:08 gibi (master fix landed)
16:23:09 lyarwood ah I missed this review sorry
16:23:11 bauzas super awesome
16:23:31 sean-k-mooney we may want to consider droping that dep at some point
16:23:38 bauzas we actually have a longer explanation in the open discussion section
16:23:55 bauzas let's just hold this discussion until that point
16:24:10 sean-k-mooney although we are unlikely to hit the same issue again
16:24:12 bauzas (which we will have 30 mins for)
16:24:20 bauzas #topic Sub/related team Highlights
16:24:37 bauzas Libvirt (bauzas)
16:24:45 lyarwood bauzas: happy to take over the libvirt part now you're PTL btw
16:24:56 bauzas lyarwood: awesome
16:24:58 bauzas I was asking for it
16:25:03 lyarwood bauzas: not that I have anything for today but we have a few things this cycle
16:25:07 bauzas any stuff to raise ?
16:25:08 bauzas kk
16:25:27 bauzas #info lyarwood to chair the libvirt subteam by now
16:25:43 bauzas lyarwood: thanks for offering your name
16:25:55 artom Don't take it in vain now
16:26:03 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:26:10 bauzas one last paperwork bit
16:26:14 bauzas (gibi): release liaison role
16:26:22 gibi so
16:26:38 gibi bauzas: is now the PTL and the release liaison as well
16:26:42 gibi which is suboptimal
16:26:52 bauzas which means I'm also a bottleneck now
16:26:53 gibi do we have a volunteer to take that role over?
16:27:11 gibi it is not hard, you will get cc-d to release proposal patches to check and approve
16:27:19 bauzas tbc, the release liaison role is about reviewing patches from the release team
16:27:46 bauzas until either the PTL or the release liaison approves the patch, it can't land
16:28:03 sean-k-mooney i mean i can do it if no one else wants too i really dont mind
16:28:06 bauzas example https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/808706
16:28:44 sean-k-mooney i keep an eye on the os-vif ones anyway but someone on the stable team might make more sense
16:28:52 bauzas sean-k-mooney: appreciated
16:29:19 bauzas I'll make the changes in the appropriate repo so you'd get automatically CC'd
16:29:29 gibi sean-k-mooney: thank you
16:29:53 sean-k-mooney no worries
16:29:58 elodilles well, as I also a release core and also propose nova releases lately it would be weird to propose and approve my own patches and then +W o:)
16:30:36 bauzas elodilles: heh, depending whether you're schizophrenic, this could work
16:30:47 elodilles :D
16:31:17 bauzas ok, moving on
16:31:22 bauzas sean-k-mooney: thanks again
16:31:38 bauzas now the big discussion
16:31:47 bauzas pasting the whole section
16:31:49 bauzas (gibi): gathering opinions about the current lower-constraints failure.
16:31:56 bauzas bottom line: on stable branches we are installing tox which installs virtualenv which bundles setuptools unconstrained. This now leads to that we cannot install decorator 3.4.0 on stable any more as it depends on "user_2to3" from setuptools but the recent setuptools 58.0 removed support for that.

Earlier   Later