| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-04-26 | |||
| 16:07:21 | gibi | yepp it is a retry loop | |
| 16:07:26 | gibi | for cinder attachment create | |
| 16:07:38 | gibi | anyhow we can move on :) | |
| 16:08:16 | gibi | I'm ready to pass the baton | |
| 16:08:51 | bauzas | gibi: I'll then add the low-hanging-fruit tag | |
| 16:08:57 | gibi | bauzas: works of me | |
| 16:08:58 | bauzas | this may help | |
| 16:09:01 | gibi | *for | |
| 16:10:15 | bauzas | gibi: nah, it worked *of* you as you proposed the solution :) | |
| 16:10:47 | bauzas | anyway, this leads to the last point | |
| 16:10:49 | bauzas | melwitt: around ? | |
| 16:11:03 | melwitt | yes | |
| 16:11:15 | bauzas | melwitt: you're next in the bug triage roster | |
| 16:11:29 | bauzas | melwitt: do you feel brave enough to get the bug baton ? | |
| 16:12:01 | melwitt | bauzas: haha, yes. sounds cool | |
| 16:12:28 | bauzas | as a reminder for everyone, this baton doesn't imply any matter of ownership or responsibility | |
| 16:12:47 | bauzas | anyone wanting to help is welcome, based on his or her free time | |
| 16:13:00 | bauzas | and others may help if they want | |
| 16:13:16 | bauzas | melwitt: which leads to me saying you can ping me if you need help for upstream triage | |
| 16:13:29 | melwitt | cool, thanks | |
| 16:13:38 | bauzas | #info Next bug baton is passed to melwitt | |
| 16:13:46 | bauzas | melwitt: thanks, very much appreciated | |
| 16:13:57 | bauzas | next topic then, | |
| 16:14:01 | bauzas | #topic Gate status | |
| 16:14:06 | bauzas | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs | |
| 16:14:12 | bauzas | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs | |
| 16:14:26 | bauzas | #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Placement periodic job status | |
| 16:14:30 | bauzas | #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=nova-emulation&pipeline=periodic-weekly&skip=0 Emulation periodic job runs | |
| 16:14:34 | bauzas | #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag. | |
| 16:14:51 | bauzas | that's been a while we got a new gate failure | |
| 16:15:05 | gibi | I saw some intermittent one but had not time to dig in | |
| 16:15:19 | gmann | for centos-8-stream, non voting job is failing 100% now. | |
| 16:15:23 | gmann | As testing runtime for Zed is centos-9-stream and in QA we agreed to drop the c8s support in devstack as well as in Tempest, I have proposed the changes there and will notify it on ML also. also moving c8s job to c9s, please review it - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/839275 | |
| 16:15:44 | bauzas | thanks gmann | |
| 16:15:49 | gmann | this series #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:drop-c8s-testing | |
| 16:16:09 | bauzas | gmann: on my list, will vote on it later today or tomorrow | |
| 16:16:26 | gmann | thanks, meanwhile I will get tempest depends-on merge | |
| 16:17:03 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:17:24 | bauzas | I have to sit down and consider all the implications but your patch seems good to me | |
| 16:17:35 | bauzas | and either way, ship is sailed | |
| 16:17:52 | bauzas | centos9 is targeted for zed | |
| 16:17:57 | gmann | yeah | |
| 16:18:29 | bauzas | do we have any tracking LP bug about the centos8 failures ? | |
| 16:18:58 | bauzas | ideally, I'd want those to be wontfix if we decide we move on | |
| 16:19:15 | gmann | no bug as of now, we are going as per the testing runtime. and as we drop the py36 from projects then it is broken like for nova as of now | |
| 16:19:29 | bauzas | ok | |
| 16:19:37 | bauzas | then no paperwork to fill in | |
| 16:19:45 | bauzas | :) | |
| 16:19:45 | gmann | it is failing as in nova we made nova require >=py3.8 and other projects will do the same | |
| 16:19:52 | bauzas | oh | |
| 16:19:55 | bauzas | right | |
| 16:20:51 | bauzas | anyway, I guess we can continue | |
| 16:20:58 | gmann | yeah | |
| 16:21:10 | bauzas | #info STOP DOING BLIND RECHECKS aka. 'recheck' https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/testing.html#how-to-handle-test-failures | |
| 16:21:30 | bauzas | just as a weekly periodic reminder (which includes me, stupid bias) | |
| 16:21:54 | bauzas | next topic, | |
| 16:21:59 | bauzas | #topic Release Planning | |
| 16:22:03 | bauzas | #link https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html | |
| 16:22:07 | bauzas | #info Zed-1 is due in 3 weeks | |
| 16:22:10 | bauzas | tick-tock | |
| 16:22:27 | artom | ♫ on the clock ♫ | |
| 16:23:10 | bauzas | I said last week I should ask this week for a spec review day, but do people feel good about considering it for in two weeks ? | |
| 16:23:16 | gibi | bah, I have to allocate some time to the placement PCI tracking spec | |
| 16:23:19 | artom | No shame, those pop songs are earworms by design | |
| 16:23:52 | artom | gibi, you have sean-k-mooney's original spec to work from, so not starting from scratch | |
| 16:23:52 | bauzas | artom: but the party don't stop | |
| 16:24:00 | gibi | artom: true true | |
| 16:24:15 | gibi | bauzas: I'm OK to have a review day next week or the week after | |
| 16:24:33 | melwitt | :) | |
| 16:24:35 | bauzas | gibi: I have to write some spec for deprecating the keypair generation, you know | |
| 16:24:46 | bauzas | so | |
| 16:24:47 | gibi | :) | |
| 16:25:12 | bauzas | maybe saying a spec review day not next tuesday, but tuesday after that ? | |
| 16:25:22 | bauzas | ie. May 10th ? | |
| 16:25:37 | sean-k-mooney | the 10 ya that would be ok i think | |
| 16:26:13 | bauzas | I see no objections | |
| 16:26:23 | gibi | good for me | |
| 16:26:41 | bauzas | #agreed first spec review day will happen on May 10th, bauzas to communicate thru the mailing list | |
| 16:27:09 | bauzas | this leaves 2 weeks for people writing specs, you are warned | |
| 16:27:20 | bauzas | (again, this includes me) | |
| 16:28:17 | bauzas | we'll have another round of spec reviews, as we agreed last PTG, either way | |
| 16:28:51 | bauzas | ok, next | |
| 16:29:00 | bauzas | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:29:04 | bauzas | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1 | |
| 16:29:52 | bauzas | the vIOMMU change probably needs paperwork | |
| 16:30:41 | bauzas | tl;dr: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/830646 requires at least a blueprint, and maybe a spec | |
| 16:30:42 | sean-k-mooney | ya i started to review it i kind of think it shoudl have a mini spec | |
| 16:30:51 | melwitt | +1 | |
| 16:31:09 | bauzas | I can use my hammer | |
| 16:31:21 | bauzas | but I could soften it | |
| 16:31:51 | bauzas | explaining we require a blueprint and some discussion at a nova meeting before we can pursue reviewing it | |
| 16:31:59 | bauzas | ricolin: are you around ? | |
| 16:32:18 | sean-k-mooney | im not againt the proposaly in fact i have wanted to add supprot for a while but we need to agree on the extra_specs/image propeties and define the scope | |
| 16:32:28 | sean-k-mooney | i was recommening keeping it small for now | |
| 16:32:31 | bauzas | yeah, and that's why we need a debate | |
| 16:32:55 | bauzas | not about which paper stamp we should use | |
| 16:33:02 | sean-k-mooney | there is viommu supprot with the limited chagne required for there acclerator to work | |
| 16:33:08 | bauzas | but whether we all agree on the design | |
| 16:33:13 | sean-k-mooney | and then there is full supprot with security and isolation | |
| 16:33:38 | bauzas | correct, that's why we need to discuss this correctly and address the design scope | |