| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2023-01-10 | |||
| 16:39:44 | 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) | |
| 16:39:50 | bauzas | #info As a reminder, cores eager to review changes can +1 to indicate their interest, +2 for committing to the review | |
| 16:40:13 | bauzas | I'll slowly but progressively use this label for knowing what to review | |
| 16:40:17 | bauzas | so you know about it | |
| 16:40:25 | bauzas | next topic (we only have 20 mins) | |
| 16:40:29 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:40:34 | bauzas | elodilles: happy to see you back | |
| 16:40:41 | elodilles | :) | |
| 16:40:49 | elodilles | we mostly discussed, but | |
| 16:41:10 | elodilles | #info stable branches seem to be unblocked / OK -- except placement, osc-placement, ... | |
| 16:41:33 | elodilles | thanks gmann for fixing the tox4 issues on stable branches! | |
| 16:41:45 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:41:54 | elodilles | and maybe one more thing: | |
| 16:41:55 | gmann | for pin not fix :) | |
| 16:42:13 | elodilles | gmann: yepp, a good workaround for now ;) | |
| 16:42:53 | elodilles | so maybe we should do nova stable releases as there are already some merged content on zed, yoga and xena | |
| 16:43:29 | elodilles | and a small side track: i would want some stable core opinions about my comment here: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912 | |
| 16:43:46 | elodilles | as the zed release might depend on that | |
| 16:43:53 | bauzas | elodilles: sure, want me to create the releases ? | |
| 16:44:01 | bauzas | stable releases, I mean | |
| 16:44:04 | elodilles | but that can be done after the meeting | |
| 16:44:08 | bauzas | we're in a good timing | |
| 16:44:45 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles this is your main question right https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/867912/5/nova/conf/workarounds.py | |
| 16:44:49 | elodilles | bauzas: yes, if you have time :) otherwise i can also propose them | |
| 16:44:57 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: yes | |
| 16:45:06 | sean-k-mooney | so i considerd that when reviewing | |
| 16:45:25 | sean-k-mooney | i tought the value of the fix in behaivor outwaied the possibel performance impact | |
| 16:45:44 | sean-k-mooney | but you are correct that fliping the default would maintain the old behaivor | |
| 16:46:01 | sean-k-mooney | fliping the default woudl also result in a workaorunds option being enabeld by default | |
| 16:46:07 | sean-k-mooney | which we generally avoid | |
| 16:46:20 | sean-k-mooney | so not changing the default felt more consitent to me | |
| 16:46:41 | sean-k-mooney | im not sure what other think ^ | |
| 16:46:47 | bauzas | hmmm | |
| 16:46:52 | bauzas | loading the context | |
| 16:47:20 | sean-k-mooney | the context is mostly captured in teh help text :) | |
| 16:47:21 | bauzas | so it was a opt-out config | |
| 16:47:36 | bauzas | and when backporting it suddently became opt-in | |
| 16:47:44 | bauzas | right? | |
| 16:47:49 | sean-k-mooney | no we did not change it when back porting | |
| 16:47:55 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: question is should we | |
| 16:48:14 | sean-k-mooney | so on master we default to the new more desireable beahvior | |
| 16:48:15 | elodilles | no. to put it simple: we change the default behavior on stable branches | |
| 16:48:30 | sean-k-mooney | and elodilles is asking shoudl we keep the old beahivor in the backports | |
| 16:48:36 | bauzas | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/864773/3/nova/conf/workarounds.py default on master is False | |
| 16:48:40 | bauzas | so that's opt-in | |
| 16:49:00 | bauzas | which is the same for the backports | |
| 16:49:02 | elodilles | i mean, given an installed environment, they upgrade, and the behaviour is changed with the upgraded nova | |
| 16:49:14 | sean-k-mooney | elodilles: correct | |
| 16:49:18 | bauzas | elodilles: I don't see a problem here with keeping it opt-in | |
| 16:49:41 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: well it will required all operator to update there config to adress the bug | |
| 16:49:57 | elodilles | bauzas: it is opt-out :) you have to change the configuration to have the existing behaviour | |
| 16:50:10 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney which is the current behaviour on master, right? | |
| 16:50:32 | sean-k-mooney | on master we now set the reseved value on instnace boot | |
| 16:50:51 | sean-k-mooney | before this patch we set reserved wehn deleteing | |
| 16:51:12 | bauzas | because the option defaults to False, right? | |
| 16:51:28 | bauzas | if you set to True, you keep the original behaviou | |
| 16:51:29 | sean-k-mooney | the workaroudn option is a skip to opt out yes and it default to false | |
| 16:51:31 | bauzas | behaviour | |
| 16:51:35 | sean-k-mooney | correct | |
| 16:51:43 | bauzas | ok | |
| 16:51:48 | bauzas | so, say we backport this | |
| 16:51:54 | bauzas | as it is | |
| 16:52:22 | bauzas | to understand, that means we'll change the behaviour by upgrading to the latest (obviously .y) release | |
| 16:52:26 | sean-k-mooney | as is then the stable branchs get the new behaivor and you need to modify the config to restore the old behaiovr | |
| 16:52:44 | sean-k-mooney | but this is an internal implemation detail that is not part of any public contract | |
| 16:52:47 | bauzas | I think we have semver for communicating the behavioural change | |
| 16:52:49 | sean-k-mooney | so we felt this was better | |
| 16:53:29 | bauzas | can we discuss this out of the meeting ? | |
| 16:53:33 | bauzas | we have 5 mins left | |
| 16:53:35 | sean-k-mooney | sure | |
| 16:53:42 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:53:46 | bauzas | (bauzas) As a reminder, Summit proposals deadline is today 11:59pm PT | |
| 16:53:57 | elodilles | so if we release now zed, then the operators who uses zed, need to update their configs to have NOT to change how nova works | |
| 16:53:59 | bauzas | you have the very last minute to add your topics | |
| 16:54:26 | bauzas | fwiw, I proposed two forum sessions about nova onboarding and operator meet&greet | |
| 16:54:41 | bauzas | if someone wants to co-host the onboarding forum session, let me know | |
| 16:55:19 | bauzas | gmann: correct me but forum proposal deadline is on april ? | |
| 16:55:37 | bauzas | I'm confused by the fact they added the forum proposals in the tool | |
| 16:55:42 | gmann | bauzas: I hope so. I asked Erin in email but no reply yet. But from form it shows april | |
| 16:55:54 | bauzas | yup, hence my confusion | |
| 16:56:31 | kashyap | Oh, come on...after all the jobs passed, one "tempest-integrated-compute" job times out :( https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/8b07fa0b71c94fb6abb2b350c5c84c74 | |
| 16:56:31 | bauzas | I just hope we won't get like Berlin some Forum sessions that very look like Summit sessions with slides and one-sided discussions | |
| 16:56:44 | bauzas | kashyap: on our meeting atm | |
| 16:56:45 | kashyap | Oops, sorry for that random chime in. | |
| 16:56:52 | kashyap | bauzas: Yeah, only realized it just now (sorry) | |
| 16:56:56 | bauzas | np | |
| 16:57:00 | bauzas | (gmann) updates on switching the RBAC(scope and new defaults) defaults in nova | |
| 16:57:08 | gibi | bauzas: if you need a co-host for the onboarding then you can write me up | |
| 16:57:09 | bauzas | you have 3 mins | |
| 16:57:36 | bauzas | gibi: noted. I'm used to do some onboarding and I have ideas but having a co-speaker is somehow better | |
| 16:57:44 | gibi | sure | |
| 16:58:07 | bauzas | looks like gmann is gone and our meeting will end | |
| 16:58:14 | gmann | patch is ready for review #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/866218/12 | |
| 16:58:19 | bauzas | cool thanks | |
| 16:58:40 | bauzas | gmann: I've seen your ping, I just didn't had time to review it yet | |
| 16:58:44 | gmann | please check and it need placement test fixture change too which is depends-on on nova change #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/869525/3 | |
| 16:59:05 | gmann | do not want to delay the switching at the end of cycle | |
| 16:59:32 | bauzas | I've just said review-prio +2 | |
| 16:59:44 | gmann | Tempest already run integration job with new RBAC on Nova, glance, neutron and cinder and it is passing finw | |
| 16:59:48 | gmann | thanks | |