| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-04-25 | |||
| 10:20:09 | vbel | commit b40d949b3137473227949b597b2a61da41752ee5 explicitly prohibits any swap volume of supspended/stopped/resized/soft-deleted | |
| 10:21:13 | Uggla | gibi, sean-k-mooney thanks | |
| 10:23:26 | sean-k-mooney | vbel: in some cases i coudl see it being a problem depenidn on if the connection mechanisuem changes | |
| 10:23:32 | sean-k-mooney | stopped i think shoudl be ok | |
| 10:23:50 | sean-k-mooney | im kind of suprised we allow live retype but not stopped | |
| 10:24:15 | sean-k-mooney | when you say resized do you mena resize_verify? | |
| 10:24:20 | sean-k-mooney | resized is nto a vm state | |
| 10:25:27 | sean-k-mooney | wehn we stop the vm i think the volume goes into reserved | |
| 10:25:37 | sean-k-mooney | which is likely why we cant retype then | |
| 10:25:46 | sean-k-mooney | same for suspend i suspect | |
| 12:34:47 | gibi | artom__: I'm +2 on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/839091 now with a hint for an extra assert if you ever have to respin this | |
| 13:00:26 | elodilles | bauzas sean-k-mooney: just a heads up, victoria-em deadline is in 2 days & there's no new merged patches in stable/victoria (except the l-c job drop patch, but that is CI-only)... so I think we could just approve the transition patch as there is hardly any time to merge and release from stable/victoria | |
| 13:01:07 | bauzas | wfm | |
| 13:03:59 | gibi | bauzas: the neutron side of this bugfix now merged, could you look at the nova side? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/829248 sean-k-mooney is already +2 on it | |
| 13:04:25 | bauzas | ouch. | |
| 13:04:37 | bauzas | gibi: going first to the coffee machine then :p | |
| 13:04:52 | gibi | make a strong one :) | |
| 13:05:16 | elodilles | bauzas: thanks, then please review the victoria-em patch o:) this one >>> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/837953 | |
| 13:05:58 | kashyap | bauzas: gibi: I'm trying decaf (I know, I know) in the afternoons | |
| 13:06:14 | kashyap | Some days it works, other days not so. | |
| 13:06:28 | gibi | I just finished my cold brew so no more coffein to me today | |
| 13:06:29 | bauzas | kashyap: surely it can work for some people, but not me :) | |
| 13:06:53 | kashyap | gibi: I should learn to make cold brews, the for the reminder | |
| 13:06:57 | bauzas | I mean, I can pee for sure if I try decaf | |
| 13:07:28 | gibi | kashyap: sadly it was from a coffee shop, I also only plan to learn how to make a good cold one at home | |
| 13:07:28 | bauzas | but then, I won't have the same for a coffee :) | |
| 13:08:08 | kashyap | gibi: If you haven't tried yet, get an AeroPress! It's the "most successful gadget in my home" award - at a paltry $45 | |
| 13:09:01 | kashyap | I first dimissed it as cheap plastic crap; but it's been my daily driver for a couple of years | |
| 13:09:44 | gibi | it is on my list too but now your recommendation boosted it up on the list :L) | |
| 13:10:38 | kashyap | gibi: It's like French Press, but without the soot at the bottom | |
| 13:11:03 | bauzas | fwiw, I love my Mignifica S coffee machine :) | |
| 13:11:15 | kashyap | gibi: A single AeroPress in a cafe costs about 5 euros here! If I buy one. In 10 days the device will start paying for itself! | |
| 13:11:19 | kashyap | :) | |
| 13:11:24 | bauzas | Magnifica sorry | |
| 13:11:26 | gibi | I talked the barista in the coffee shop at the corner they do it with soaking during the night | |
| 13:11:43 | kashyap | gibi: Yeah, that's the "real" cold brew, indeed | |
| 13:12:06 | kashyap | I only make hot-brew w/ AeroPress, but cold is also possible, as the instructions point it out | |
| 13:12:56 | gibi | kashyap: totally true about the cost of shop coffee. I rearly visit the shop. I have my bialetti for mokka | |
| 13:13:00 | bauzas | I can do cold brew with my machine... I just need to wait for 10 mins after creating a coffee :p | |
| 13:13:14 | kashyap | LOL, it's not the same as overnight soaking | |
| 13:13:38 | bauzas | I know | |
| 13:13:48 | bauzas | but, | |
| 13:13:52 | kashyap | gibi: I work a lot from coffee shops (to beat the cabin fever) ... and probably spend more than I should on coffees. | |
| 13:13:58 | bauzas | I prefer to wait 12 hours for bbq :) | |
| 13:13:58 | gibi | bauzas: you can try waiting 12 hours after you brew with a machine :) | |
| 13:15:09 | gibi | kashyap: btw here a good cold brew costs ~2.5 EUR, but still :D | |
| 13:17:21 | artom__ | gibi, ack, I saw the review email come in, cheers! | |
| 13:31:54 | bauzas | elodilles: you left me puzzled https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/837953 | |
| 13:37:50 | elodilles | bauzas: well, i heard in the past that unreleased .gitreview and TOX_CONSTRAINTS update patches caused problems in RH downstream. in general that is not worth to create a release (no change in package at all), but with a 'patch' version bump maybe it does not hurt | |
| 13:38:50 | bauzas | elodilles: honestly, we don't really care of stable/victoria :) | |
| 13:38:56 | bauzas | we = my employer | |
| 13:39:36 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: already heard of this ^ ? | |
| 13:40:03 | sean-k-mooney | ooo does not care | |
| 13:41:30 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: downstream we do override the .gitignore but i dont think it should break us | |
| 13:41:45 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: if it did it would be trivial to fix so i would always do the right thing upstream | |
| 13:42:53 | elodilles | bauzas sean-k-mooney : ack, then i think they are good as they are :) | |
| 13:42:55 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: i think we can safely merge the .gitreview change and _not_ release it then apply the EM tag based on the sha but if we want the EM tag to point to the last release that is also ok | |
| 13:43:31 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: the patch is already merged | |
| 13:43:36 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: *-em tags always tha *last* release from the branch | |
| 13:43:54 | bauzas | the question is, should we include it as part of the -em tag, that's it | |
| 13:44:10 | bauzas | as we can't release a package after, like elodilles said | |
| 13:45:05 | bauzas | while I don't care of the CI changes as elodilles noted, I'm a bit torn whether we should include the propre gitreview target in the last build | |
| 13:45:17 | bauzas | "build" rather with quotes | |
| 13:45:44 | elodilles | from package point of view they are not included (pypi, tarball) so the release would just be unnecessary fuss for package consumers | |
| 13:46:18 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: right but teh way the em tag is ment to work is it is ment ot allow you to restore the branch | |
| 13:46:31 | sean-k-mooney | so the em tag shoudl be on the last patch in the stable branch | |
| 13:46:54 | bauzas | then we should include the gitreview patch | |
| 13:47:22 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: well, no, that's the *-eol you mean i think :) | |
| 13:47:33 | sean-k-mooney | oh sorry you are right | |
| 13:47:38 | sean-k-mooney | i was thinking of eol | |
| 13:47:42 | sean-k-mooney | for em we are not removing the branch | |
| 13:47:49 | sean-k-mooney | then ya its fine as is | |
| 13:47:55 | sean-k-mooney | no need to do another release | |
| 13:48:06 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: do you agree? | |
| 13:48:56 | bauzas | hmmmm | |
| 13:49:18 | bauzas | I'm not *that* opiniated, I just want to be convinced | |
| 13:49:25 | bauzas | what's the purpose of the -em tag ? | |
| 13:49:46 | sean-k-mooney | really just to signal that no more releases will be made | |
| 13:52:40 | elodilles | yepp | |
| 13:54:48 | bauzas | that's my understanding | |
| 13:55:08 | bauzas | now, looking at https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/python-novaclient+branch:stable/victoria | |
| 13:55:17 | bauzas | we only have 2 patches in the branch :) | |
| 13:55:26 | bauzas | one isn't required | |
| 13:55:38 | bauzas | the other one just updates the gitreview target | |
| 14:01:15 | elodilles | yepp, those are not part of the packages (even if we tag and release them) | |
| 14:07:34 | bauzas | elodilles: OK, then I'll change my vote | |
| 14:25:50 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Simulate bug 1969496 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838554 | |
| 14:25:51 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Allow claiming PCI PF if child VF is unavailable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838555 | |
| 14:26:54 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: finalized the fix ^^ | |
| 14:27:38 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: VMware: Split out VMwareAPISession https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/832156 | |
| 14:27:53 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: ack ill add that to my review list so for this week | |
| 14:28:01 | gibi | thanks! | |
| 14:28:47 | sean-k-mooney | ah nice you have all 3 parts. the repoduce, allowing it to claim and also fixing the inconsitent state | |
| 14:28:55 | gibi | yepp | |
| 14:36:50 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: is there a reason you did the simulation second in the series | |
| 14:37:19 | sean-k-mooney | i woudl have expected the startup patch to be last | |
| 14:37:33 | sean-k-mooney | so simulate, claim then start up | |
| 14:37:41 | sean-k-mooney | it works this way too just wondering | |
| 14:38:27 | gibi | the reason was that I started with teh cleanup path as it was easier to get to it. but no technical dependency so I can reorder if needed | |
| 14:39:51 | sean-k-mooney | no thats ok in principal once the start up check is merged you dont need the others | |