Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2022-12-06
16:18:49 bauzas looks so
16:18:57 bauzas #topic Review priorities
16:19:03 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+OR+label:Review-Priority%252B2)
16:19:08 bauzas #info As a reminder, cores eager to review changes can +1 to indicate their interest, +2 for committing to the review
16:19:15 bauzas anything to discuss about priorities ?
16:20:07 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Reproducer for bug 1951656 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866157
16:20:08 opendevreview Sylvain Bauza proposed openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Handle mdev devices in libvirt 7.7+ https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866158
16:20:34 bauzas nevermind the above ^ (doing two things at same time)
16:20:39 bauzas looks not, moving on
16:20:47 bauzas #topic Stable Branches
16:21:03 bauzas elodilles: you could have an opportunity to not lemme discuss alone :)
16:21:17 elodilles :)
16:21:18 elodilles yepp
16:21:29 elodilles actually stable gates were quiet
16:21:37 elodilles i mean patches merged :)
16:21:41 bauzas correct, I worked on the stable branches
16:21:46 elodilles #info stable branches seem to be unblocked / OK
16:21:50 bauzas and I haven't seen any problems so far
16:21:52 elodilles #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci
16:21:59 elodilles neither have i
16:21:59 bauzas down to wallaby at least
16:22:23 elodilles i've seen merged patches even older than wallaby
16:22:29 bauzas you know, nothing to tell is better than saying anything here in this section :)
16:22:37 elodilles yepp :)
16:22:46 bauzas moving on then, and profit.
16:22:49 elodilles ++
16:22:52 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:22:52 elodilles :)
16:23:04 Kirill_ can someone review this: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/863773 . sean-k-mooney already reviewed and and set +1, need more reviews for setting +2, right?
16:23:07 bauzas I had a question but I don't see a quorum
16:23:24 bauzas Kirill_: nod, lemme see
16:23:41 bauzas ah that one
16:23:41 Kirill_ thanks
16:23:50 bauzas sure, I'll do some review
16:23:56 sahid_ o/ then, i have one regarding review priority
16:24:14 bauzas sahid_: sure, shoot
16:24:40 sahid_ thanks
16:24:51 sahid_ it's just to know, we have this that had the bit Review-Priority
16:24:52 sahid_ https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/857838
16:25:09 sahid_ I'm wondering whtehr the impl can I have also that bit, or if it's a different process?
16:25:12 sahid_ :-)
16:25:27 bauzas sahid_: surely, you can ask for it :)
16:25:42 bauzas sahid_: ping us tomorrow and we'll see
16:25:53 bauzas looks there are not a lot of people around atm
16:26:08 sahid_ yeah... no worries, will see that tomorrow
16:26:10 sahid_ thanks a lot
16:27:02 bauzas np
16:27:36 bauzas so let's end this meeting for now, I'll ask about which meetings to skip during the xmas period next week
16:27:55 bauzas anyone having anything to raise before we say it's a wrap ?
16:28:34 bauzas looks not,
16:28:39 bauzas thanks all
16:28:43 opendevmeet Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2022/nova.2022-12-06-16.01.html
16:28:43 bauzas #endmeeting
16:28:43 opendevmeet Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2022/nova.2022-12-06-16.01.log.html
16:28:43 opendevmeet Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2022/nova.2022-12-06-16.01.txt
16:28:43 opendevmeet Meeting ended Tue Dec 6 16:28:43 2022 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
16:29:23 elodilles thanks bauzas o/
16:29:51 elodilles that sounds fun :D
16:29:51 sean-k-mooney kgube: we generally do not like tracking changes to nova in other projects specs
16:30:31 sean-k-mooney kgube: if you are chaing the sematics or the extend voluem external event even if that does not change the content passed to the api we shoudl still have a spec to dicuss that
16:30:47 kgube sean-k-mooney, alright!
16:30:57 sean-k-mooney Kirill_: i wanted gmann or other to confirm my reasoning on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/863773/10/specs/wallaby/approved/nova-vnc-support-for-ironic.rst#134
16:32:03 sean-k-mooney Kirill_: i.e. that we do not need a microversion for this change and there is no other upgrade impact for the reasons is stated in the commnet
16:35:11 gmann sean-k-mooney: I kept it open but somehow got distracted. It is in my list.
16:35:57 Kirill_ per my understanding, we don't need any miniversions cause if nova does not support my changes the result will be the same as now, if ironic does not support - again we will catch error - vnc is unsupported. i'll try such scenarios tomorrow.
16:36:54 sean-k-mooney Kirill_: ya so part of what im wondering is changing form a 400 to a 200 ok
16:37:15 sean-k-mooney and i think it is because if it was a libvirt instance then a 200 would have been valid
16:37:31 sean-k-mooney or possible for the same api request
16:37:46 sean-k-mooney so to me there is no need for a microverion
16:38:55 Kirill_ ++
20:22:51 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Test aborting queued live migration https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841483
20:22:57 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Add functional tests to reproduce bug #1960412 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841760
20:48:58 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/wallaby: Clean up when queued live migration aborted https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/841736
#openstack-nova - 2022-12-07
01:09:58 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/train: Fix the wrong exception used to retry detach API calls https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866090
01:09:59 opendevreview melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/train: Retry attachment delete API call for 504 Gateway Timeout https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866091
04:57:37 opendevreview Hiroki Narukawa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: add sftp driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866672
07:24:12 opendevreview Hiroki Narukawa proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: add sftp driver https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866672
10:24:06 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support multiple config file with mod_wsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864014
10:24:39 gibi bauzas: ^^ that is an easy fix
10:24:58 bauzas gibi: ack, looking
10:26:03 gibi stephenfin: a friendly poke about the pci in placement series. If you have time, review would be appreciated. bottom is: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/852771
10:50:11 sahid_ gibi: o/ i will review it as well if you don't mind :-)
10:51:05 gibi sahid_: go for it! and thank you :)
10:51:33 gibi sahid_: please note that we landed the inventory reporting and allocation healing in zed, the patches open now is for the scheduling support
10:51:56 gibi sahid_: and also this is only covering PCI devices requested via the pci alias in the flavor. The neutron SRIOV support is planned for later
10:56:34 sahid_ ack thank you for the heads-up I noticed that on the first path some of them get landed during zed
11:33:14 sean-k-mooney sahid_: the feature has basiclaly been code compelte for a while it just hit m3 so got pushed to A
11:34:21 sean-k-mooney sahid_: our orginal goal was to try and land this all by m1 but time going away form us so we are trying to make an effort to finaly get this merged before people start disaparing for PTO
11:36:42 opendevreview Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Support multiple config file with mod_wsgi https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864014
11:49:13 sahid_ sean-k-mooney: ack i understand your point i guess
11:56:44 sahid_ guys I have a question regarding the usage of NOTE(name) do we really think that we should continue using it? I mean most of the time such note a just comment, no actions are required. Where I see that makes sense is for TODO/FIXME
11:58:58 sean-k-mooney yes i dislike having bare NOTE/FIXME without the name
11:59:17 sean-k-mooney it has come up before that we coudl drop the (name) portion
11:59:21 sean-k-mooney and some project have
11:59:38 sean-k-mooney we have a hacking check that enforces it to keep nova consitent
11:59:42 sahid_ I would drop the whole NOTE thingm with name or not
12:00:04 sean-k-mooney and just use bare comments
12:00:09 sahid_ yes
12:00:34 sean-k-mooney we could but because we cant eaially use git blame on some of our files
12:00:47 sahid_ instead of for TODO(name) or FIXME(name), which make sense has there is an action behind it

Earlier   Later