| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-02-29 | |||
| 19:16:52 | sean-k-mooney | but other pushed back | |
| 19:16:56 | JayF | (oslo_service.sslutils) | |
| 19:17:02 | JayF | I assume you read my comment about that? | |
| 19:17:10 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: my main concern is we do not know how much it is failing and before adding it as nv or so it is confusing to say this as 'bets effort' | |
| 19:17:18 | sean-k-mooney | how are canonical dealing with that in ubuntu 24.04 | |
| 19:17:42 | sean-k-mooney | like they are releaseign caracal on 3.12 on ubuntu 24.04 | |
| 19:17:55 | JayF | sean-k-mooney: I have no idea whatsoever. I just know this eventlet stuff was swept under the rug repeatedly and we idnd't take real action to address it | |
| 19:18:00 | sean-k-mooney | so either those feature are not imporant to them or they hae worked around it | |
| 19:18:13 | dansmith | JayF: I really don't understand the sslutils thing so I must be missing something.. they moved to wrapping the context instead of the socket, right? there's some other issue? | |
| 19:18:14 | gmann | adding 24.04 is a good signal to know how much it fail | |
| 19:18:42 | JayF | dansmith: going to look at the code again, they may have improved it since I last evaluated | |
| 19:18:45 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: ya so i think im fine with the propsal | |
| 19:19:00 | sean-k-mooney | but i want to try and figure out what is broken and see if we can start adressing it | |
| 19:19:05 | dansmith | JayF: okay afaict, that issue is resolved | |
| 19:19:17 | sean-k-mooney | even if it take use another release or two too figure that out | |
| 19:20:09 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: that was my exact reason for wanting 24.04 on the slate as best effort earlier | |
| 19:20:12 | sean-k-mooney | i have hte 24.04 aplah nightly downloaded but i havent had time to give it a spin yet | |
| 19:20:20 | dansmith | maybe "best effort" connotes too much "effort" or maybe too much "best" | |
| 19:20:20 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: true, and once we set the 3.12 tox jobs like on 24.04 we can always add them as periodic->nv etc even they are not required in runtime. this is how we did in past too | |
| 19:20:47 | JayF | too much best *was* my objection | |
| 19:21:04 | dansmith | JayF: that's valid, so let's come up with some other term or something | |
| 19:21:11 | JayF | but dansmith is right, we should be able to adapt oslo_service.sslutils to the new api | |
| 19:21:13 | dansmith | JayF: 24.04 is best BIG LOOMING ICEBERG | |
| 19:21:19 | sean-k-mooney | hehe maybe we need a "some, proably not much, effort" section | |
| 19:21:19 | JayF | lol | |
| 19:21:29 | dansmith | half-assed effort | |
| 19:21:30 | gmann | idea when we added 'best effort' was to have at least one temepst job running. | |
| 19:21:37 | JayF | "We're gonna try but like, there's only one of us for every 17 projects /s" | |
| 19:21:38 | JayF | ;) | |
| 19:21:49 | dansmith | gmann: but for py38 that was only unit and functional | |
| 19:21:53 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: well we have 3.12 in centos 9 stream today as a non default | |
| 19:22:04 | gmann | dansmith: py38 was mandatory not in best effort | |
| 19:22:09 | sean-k-mooney | and soon ubuntu 24.04 | |
| 19:22:14 | dansmith | gmann: mandatory but unit and functional only | |
| 19:22:15 | JayF | dansmith: sean-k-mooney: my objection to python 3.12 being listed best effort is no longer valid in light of the new information ... as long as someone is actually going to adapt that interface lol | |
| 19:22:24 | sean-k-mooney | so ya we can tyr to get some teempest testign started when its not FF | |
| 19:22:30 | gmann | dansmith: ah, yes | |
| 19:22:51 | dansmith | gmann: so if the big concern is how best our effort is, then let's use different words, that's fine with me | |
| 19:24:44 | gmann | it says this which I think should be clear ? 'This distribution list is the best effort to test them in OpenStack CI/CD.These may not be part of integrated testing and may be tested periodically only.' | |
| 19:25:22 | gmann | or we can add more description here for example. pre-released things also if available like 24.04 case today | |
| 19:26:00 | dansmith | gmann: I get it. pick different words :) | |
| 19:27:06 | gmann | :) 'Optional Testing', 'Advance Testing' | |
| 19:27:36 | gmann | 'Unstable Testing' | |
| 19:27:52 | sean-k-mooney | im just going to download the iso, install it and see if it works and report back | |
| 19:28:16 | dansmith | gmann: I think optional sounds too unconcerned, but the others are reasonable to me | |
| 19:29:27 | gmann | ack, let me add 'Advance/Unstable Testing' so that we can cover any advance testing for non-released versions or unstable one like Centos Stream | |
| 19:37:43 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: this is the next one of melwitt's series I think we need your re-+2 on: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826755/36 | |
| 19:38:35 | sean-k-mooney | i was looking at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/910571 just now but sure ill swap to that | |
| 19:38:54 | dansmith | okay just saying that's the next one ready (almost) to go to the gate | |
| 19:39:00 | sean-k-mooney | so ot me that shows i still have a +2 on that | |
| 19:39:03 | sean-k-mooney | on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826755/36 | |
| 19:39:28 | sean-k-mooney | so it just need a +w right | |
| 19:39:40 | dansmith | oh sorry, it doesn't for me, but I see now | |
| 19:39:50 | dansmith | it put your +2 in the "and 5 more" overflow meny | |
| 19:39:52 | dansmith | how dumb | |
| 19:39:53 | dansmith | I can +w | |
| 19:40:23 | sean-k-mooney | ya it did the saem for you in one of the other pathces | |
| 19:40:31 | sean-k-mooney | i hate the new way the ui handeles this | |
| 19:40:38 | dansmith | seems like it should sort people with votes tot he top | |
| 19:40:39 | dansmith | tyeah | |
| 19:41:05 | sean-k-mooney | so im +2 back up to the create patch | |
| 19:41:20 | sean-k-mooney | whic i have not re reviewd since we are stoping at the testing one | |
| 19:41:52 | sean-k-mooney | so i think the stack is good for what we neeed today | |
| 19:42:39 | dansmith | from you yeah, I haven't made it through all up to there though | |
| 19:45:08 | sean-k-mooney | im going to try and get a few other bitd done related to down stream and then im going to finish for today and cook food | |
| 19:45:22 | sean-k-mooney | ping me if anything comes up | |
| 19:46:58 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Removed explicit call to delete attachment https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/891289 | |
| 19:46:58 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Disconnecting volume from the compute host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877446 | |
| 19:47:37 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: actully before i leave the glance multiple location stuff is not done yet right | |
| 19:48:40 | sean-k-mooney | well glance client is not in any case | |
| 19:48:42 | dansmith | officially punted | |
| 19:48:44 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-glanceclient/+/890634 | |
| 19:48:50 | dansmith | so no need to look | |
| 19:48:51 | sean-k-mooney | ok | |
| 20:56:34 | gmann | dansmith: sean-k-mooney: updated version for testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/908862 | |
| 21:21:45 | dansmith | gmann: yeah it's in my queue | |
| 23:38:42 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: testing: Add ephemeral encryption support to fixtures https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/910571 | |
| #openstack-nova - 2024-03-01 | |||
| 00:20:41 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: add multinode ironic shard job https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/910333 | |
| 06:27:17 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Disconnecting volume from the compute host https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/877446 | |
| 06:27:18 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Removed explicit call to delete attachment https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/891289 | |
| 10:08:53 | tobias-urdin | sean-k-mooney: when you have time, see if this updated patch is ok now based on your feedback https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/904381 | |
| 10:09:40 | tobias-urdin | also super interested in your ideas on how to solve the bug for this patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/875859 that we got hit by some days ago | |
| 10:31:09 | sean-k-mooney[m] | bauzas: can we get https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/896100 in to unblock the uc bump | |
| 10:32:32 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I don't have context but I can take a look | |
| 11:22:12 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: imagebackend: Add support to libvirt_info for LUKS based encryption https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826755 | |
| 11:22:25 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/nova master: Add encryption support to convert_image https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/870934 | |
| 11:25:43 | ratailor__ | Hi cores, can I get reviews on https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22list-requested-az%22 | |
| 11:30:33 | ratailor__ | elodilles, gibi sean-k-mooney[m] dansmith please review ^^ | |
| 11:47:55 | gibi | ratailor__: bauzas: I -1 on the AZ series, the mock in the functional tests feels like a paperover of a bug | |
| 11:48:41 | stephenfin | bauzas: Can we please just merge https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/896100 and move on | |
| 11:55:17 | opendevreview | Amit Uniyal proposed openstack/nova master: Refactor vf profile for PCI device https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/905134 | |
| 12:02:20 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: tl;dr castalan added 2 new required abstract methods to a basecalse we inherit form | |
| 12:02:33 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: that got reverted on stable last cycle | |
| 12:02:57 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: but the castalan version that was intened for stabel only got pulled into master by mistake | |
| 12:03:21 | sean-k-mooney | so we were not seing this for the last cycle | |
| 12:03:49 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we should have had this code chagne since bobcat | |
| 12:05:37 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: i dont really think its reasoable to punt the new castalane version for two cycles in a row just because we didnt accept a patch that addes to uncalled functions that raise not implemetned | |
| 12:06:28 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: there was a way for castalan to not make this a breaking api change | |
| 12:07:04 | sean-k-mooney | but im not sure how fair it is to say to them rework this now and do another release unless we are going to write that patch for them | |
| 12:07:58 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: im not particaly happy either but apparenty the non-client release deadline is the deadlien for the code to be merged not the deadline for the requirement repo to be bumped | |