Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-07-19
16:10:44 dansmith so we can see that it's passed N times in a row?
16:10:45 sean-k-mooney dansmith: yes
16:10:53 dansmith or has this only run once?
16:10:54 sean-k-mooney dansmith: i can see if i can get that
16:11:08 bauzas dansmith: https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-integrated-compute-centos-9-stream&project=openstack%2Fnova&skip=0
16:11:11 sean-k-mooney i think you can filter the build by pipeline and proejct
16:11:11 dansmith sean-k-mooney: not important now, just wanted to make sure we don't need to build a thing
16:11:24 sean-k-mooney ya basically ^
16:11:37 bauzas dansmith: as you see, for the moment, we're still testing c9s in check and gate due to a tempest template
16:11:39 dansmith yeah but that only shows one periodic run, is that because it has only run once yet?
16:11:44 bauzas dansmith: correct
16:11:47 dansmith gtotcha
16:12:03 bauzas we could also check experiment if we want
16:12:13 sean-k-mooney https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/850242
16:12:16 bauzas ta
16:12:22 sean-k-mooney that is the tempest template update patch ^
16:12:28 dansmith ack
16:12:46 bauzas #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/850242 removing Centos 9 stream jobs from default Tempest template
16:13:10 bauzas #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=nova-emulation&pipeline=periodic-weekly&skip=0 Emulation periodic job runs
16:13:18 bauzas #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag.
16:13:25 bauzas #info STOP DOING BLIND RECHECKS aka. 'recheck' https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/testing.html#how-to-handle-test-failures
16:13:30 bauzas that's it
16:13:32 bauzas moving on
16:13:40 bauzas #topic Release Planning
16:13:48 bauzas #link https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html
16:13:55 bauzas #info Zed-2 was last week
16:14:02 bauzas #info Specs are no longer accepted
16:14:23 bauzas #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/zed current blueprints open for the zed timeframe
16:14:41 bauzas 13 bps
16:14:45 bauzas less than in Yoga
16:14:54 bauzas we could have one more
16:15:06 bauzas but this will be discussed in the open discussion
16:15:38 bauzas oh, I forgot to prepare an etherpad, stupid me
16:16:05 bauzas give me a second, I'd like to ask our API microversion proposers to ask for a specific microversion
16:16:19 bauzas instead of all of them rushing into 2.92
16:16:22 bauzas 2.91
16:17:48 bauzas there it is
16:18:05 bauzas #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-zed-microversions-plan Etherpad for a microversion use query
16:18:24 bauzas fwiw, I left 2.91 for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/845897
16:18:40 bauzas and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/849133 is now ready for 2.92
16:19:01 bauzas the latter will require a very small merge conflict resolution due to the api docs
16:19:24 bauzas but as you see, nothing was preventing me to use the 2.92 microversion even if 2.91 wasn't merged
16:19:46 bauzas that's why I propose our different change owners to ask for a microversion
16:20:34 gibi you will have a bit more than a single conflict on the api doc but yes hopefully the conflict will be small
16:20:36 bauzas I'll send an email tomorrow explaining about this
16:20:42 bauzas gibi: I tested it
16:20:50 bauzas gibi: 4 files were conflicting
16:20:53 gibi I expect a conflict on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/849133/5/doc/api_samples/versions/v21-version-get-resp.json
16:21:04 bauzas yup, this one and the root v2
16:21:15 bauzas plus the rest api microversions list doc
16:21:21 bauzas and I can't remember the last one
16:21:23 gibi and on the api_version_request.py
16:21:25 bauzas but easy conflicts
16:21:50 bauzas could be harder to resolve if two changes are touching the same API resource
16:22:01 Uggla fyi I have just reserved 2.93 for virtiofs
16:22:01 bauzas but let's not overcomplicate this
16:22:28 bauzas Uggla: then prepare your API change to use the 2.93 microversion, this should work like mine
16:22:31 gibi bauzas: sure
16:23:44 bauzas tbc, we reserve the right to flip the microversions
16:23:50 Uggla need to review because I bet on 2.92.
16:23:53 bauzas depending on the state of the review
16:24:05 bauzas we had runways before
16:24:17 bauzas take it as a unformal runway for asking reviews
16:24:56 bauzas either way, I'll send an email explaining the rules
16:25:15 bauzas I don't want an overcomplicated process
16:25:29 bauzas this is just a way to prevent people doing frequent rebases
16:26:07 bauzas but the smaller microversion you ask, the higher you need to be reviewed hence be present
16:26:35 bauzas I just don't want us to wait for new revisions that could stale other changes
16:27:03 bauzas so I'll just say that we're free to drop some change from the microversion number
16:27:32 bauzas hope you folks don't disagree with this stupid plan
16:28:18 gibi with the amount of folks pushing for a microversion right now I don't see trouble
16:28:30 Uggla sounds good
16:28:32 bauzas well, I see 5 different patches
16:28:34 bauzas at leasty
16:29:00 bauzas anyway, moving on
16:29:02 gibi personally I would not bet on current+3 or higher to be ordered
16:29:18 bauzas #action bauzas to clarify the game rules of the etherpad in a later email tomorrow
16:29:19 gibi but having a c+1 and c+2 ordered make sens
16:29:21 gibi e
16:29:29 bauzas gibi: that's a reasonable point
16:29:36 bauzas I could remove 2.95 and newer
16:29:55 bauzas moving on
16:29:57 gibi and also if you are not ready for review then please don't allocate a microversion :)
16:29:57 bauzas #topic Review priorities
16:30:07 bauzas gibi: that's the game rule
16:30:14 gibi coolio
16:30:28 bauzas and if you are on vacations for 4 weeks, don't ask for the next microversion
16:30:49 bauzas or ask the next one, provided your patch can be reviewed before you leave
16:30:51 bauzas :)
16:30:56 gibi :)
16:31:08 bahnwaerter :)
16:31:33 bauzas only 3.5
16:31:51 bauzas #topic Review priorities
16:32:05 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
16:32:16 bauzas huzzah
16:32:21 bauzas #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/837595 is merged
16:32:51 bauzas #link https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/process.html#what-the-review-priority-label-in-gerrit-are-use-for explains now the new gerrit flag and how to use it
16:33:21 gibi would be interesting to see how many +1 will appeare on this list from now
16:33:53 dansmith I friggin hate the RP label btw
16:33:56 bauzas at least two from sean-k-mooney :)

Earlier   Later