| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-02-18 | |||
| 16:12:09 | bauzas | if not, moving on in a sec | |
| 16:13:13 | bauzas | #topic PTG planning | |
| 16:13:19 | bauzas | as a reminder, | |
| 16:13:22 | bauzas | #info Next PTG will be held on Apr 7-11 | |
| 16:13:29 | bauzas | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-2025.2-ptg | |
| 16:13:44 | bauzas | please add your items to discuss at that PTG into that etherpad | |
| 16:14:45 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:14:54 | bauzas | elodilles: take the mic | |
| 16:14:59 | elodilles | yepp | |
| 16:15:03 | elodilles | #info stable gates seem to be healthy | |
| 16:15:14 | elodilles | #info stable/2023.2 release patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/941420 (stable/2023.2 (bobcat) is going to transition to EOL in ~2 months) | |
| 16:15:35 | elodilles | note that it will directly go to End of Life as it is not a SLURP release | |
| 16:15:48 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:15:56 | elodilles | and that's all from me | |
| 16:18:20 | fwiesel | I suspect it is my turn. | |
| 16:18:21 | fwiesel | #topic vmwareapi 3rd-party CI efforts Highlights | |
| 16:18:29 | bauzas | thanks fwiesel | |
| 16:18:29 | fwiesel | No updates from my side. | |
| 16:18:34 | bauzas | cool thanks | |
| 16:18:45 | bauzas | still fighting the dragons ? | |
| 16:19:25 | fwiesel | Yes, I didn't quite get around to it, that is the main reason of the lack of progress. | |
| 16:19:36 | bauzas | no worries, we all have urgent business to sell | |
| 16:19:42 | bauzas | moving on then | |
| 16:19:53 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:20:00 | bauzas | two items today AFAICS | |
| 16:20:07 | bauzas | (sean-k-mooney) neutron removal of linux bridge | |
| 16:20:09 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: around N? | |
| 16:20:14 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 16:20:28 | sean-k-mooney | so... neutron removed linxu bridge | |
| 16:20:38 | sean-k-mooney | they did not deprecated it in the last slurp | |
| 16:20:42 | sean-k-mooney | so we never did | |
| 16:20:55 | sean-k-mooney | so my propsoal is we deprecate it this release | |
| 16:21:03 | sean-k-mooney | disable the linux bridge job | |
| 16:21:09 | sean-k-mooney | and remove supprot next cycle | |
| 16:21:14 | sean-k-mooney | we need to do this in os-vif as well | |
| 16:21:18 | sean-k-mooney | i have a patch up for that | |
| 16:21:33 | sean-k-mooney | os-vif is subject to the non clinet lib freeze and is currently blocked | |
| 16:21:37 | sean-k-mooney | form merging code because of this | |
| 16:21:47 | sean-k-mooney | we have some patches we want to merge before then | |
| 16:21:55 | sean-k-mooney | so the topci is, are we ok with that plan | |
| 16:22:01 | sean-k-mooney | deprecate and disbales testing this cycle | |
| 16:22:16 | sean-k-mooney | then remove next cycle | |
| 16:22:23 | gibi | I'm OK to deprecate and disable. We cannot really do anything else if neutron pulled the plug | |
| 16:22:44 | sean-k-mooney | ill submit the patch for that for nova later today | |
| 16:22:48 | sean-k-mooney | i jsut need to write it | |
| 16:23:05 | bauzas | yeah I think we can agree | |
| 16:23:19 | sean-k-mooney | we are not fully blocked as the linux bridge job only tirggers on a subset of files | |
| 16:23:24 | bauzas | send the deprecation signal and remove the job | |
| 16:24:18 | bauzas | anyone having concerns by the deprecation ? | |
| 16:25:02 | sean-k-mooney | nova in 2025.1 woudl be able to run with older neutron or with linux bridge if you wrote an out of tree ml2/driver | |
| 16:25:13 | sean-k-mooney | so i will note that in the release note | |
| 16:25:47 | sean-k-mooney | but i dont expect that we will need/want to supprot that going forward. we can have that discssion before doing the removal form nova itslef | |
| 16:26:12 | sean-k-mooney | the thing is os-vif does nto host plugins for out of tree neutron backends | |
| 16:26:25 | sean-k-mooney | so we shoudl remove the os-vif supprot in os-vif next cycle in either case | |
| 16:26:42 | sean-k-mooney | anyway thats all form me | |
| 16:27:38 | bauzas | cool thanks | |
| 16:28:14 | bauzas | #agreed linuxbridge will be deprecated by 2025.1 | |
| 16:28:30 | bauzas | next time | |
| 16:28:38 | bauzas | gmann (I will not be able to attend the meeting due to a time conflict, but most of you know the context and proposal), Spec freeze exception for RBAC service/manager role | |
| 16:28:49 | bauzas | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/937650 | |
| 16:29:43 | bauzas | gmann requested for a late specless approval | |
| 16:29:53 | bauzas | spec approval (my bad) | |
| 16:30:01 | bauzas | Spec has one +2 already and code changes are in progress: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/policy-service-and-manager-role-default%22 | |
| 16:30:47 | bauzas | usually we would not approve a spec so late in the cycle, but there are some criterias here to talk | |
| 16:31:01 | bauzas | 1/ the spec is quite simple and only relates to policy changes | |
| 16:31:37 | bauzas | 2/ we already merged some efforts related to policy | |
| 16:31:50 | bauzas | 3/ sean-k-mooney already accepted the spec | |
| 16:32:00 | bauzas | would there any concern by the approval ? | |
| 16:32:34 | sean-k-mooney | yes, although that was with the coment it needs an execption and the undersanding we woudl have this converstaion about 4 weeks ago | |
| 16:32:52 | sean-k-mooney | from me just review bandwith | |
| 16:32:58 | bauzas | my personal opinion on that is the risk about the policy changes | |
| 16:33:19 | gibi | yeah, if there are two cores signing up for reviewing it the I have no objection | |
| 16:33:26 | gibi | but the time is pretty sort | |
| 16:33:28 | bauzas | we're talking of modifying the inter-service communication | |
| 16:33:37 | sean-k-mooney | we are but | |
| 16:33:46 | bauzas | so the patches would require extra caution | |
| 16:33:59 | sean-k-mooney | by defualt i this cycle swe will go form admin to admin or service | |
| 16:34:07 | bauzas | I'm not opposed to give that series a late approval, but I wouldn't rush on reviewing the patches to be clear | |
| 16:34:17 | sean-k-mooney | so the real upgrade impact woudl be next cycle or whenever we drop admin | |
| 16:34:27 | sean-k-mooney | the manager changes would also be additive | |
| 16:35:32 | sean-k-mooney | we obviouly need to validate that our exsing jobs do not require modfiigcaiont to pass | |
| 16:35:40 | sean-k-mooney | to ensure there is no upgrade impact | |
| 16:36:06 | sean-k-mooney | we may also want to explcity have the new defautl job enable extra testing fo the manager policy | |
| 16:36:43 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: what the state of the tempets testing for this | |
| 16:39:04 | sean-k-mooney | my irc client freeked out so not sure if i missed messages | |
| 16:40:20 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: gmann was unable to attend the meeting | |
| 16:40:28 | bauzas | so he won't be able to reply to you I guess | |
| 16:40:31 | sean-k-mooney | oh ok. | |
| 16:40:54 | bauzas | fwiw, I don't really know what to do with that spec | |
| 16:41:07 | bauzas | I don't have the context yet and I need some time to reload it | |
| 16:41:14 | bauzas | so I won't be able to +2 it shortly | |
| 16:41:49 | sean-k-mooney | lookign at the tempest patches | |
| 16:42:01 | bauzas | if any other nova-core is able to review that spec, I'm not opposed to a late approval but those two cores shall honestly sign off for the implementation review too | |
| 16:42:38 | sean-k-mooney | so i am not sure ill have time to rewview it either by the way | |
| 16:42:55 | sean-k-mooney | i think this shoudl be moved to next cycle honestly | |
| 16:43:50 | sean-k-mooney | i woudl prefer to focus on merging the ohter approved specs | |
| 16:45:00 | gibi | I dont see cores signing up, so punt it | |
| 16:45:13 | bauzas | that's sad but reasonable | |
| 16:45:22 | bauzas | we shouldn't offer help if we can't review the patches | |
| 16:45:58 | sean-k-mooney | to be clear form my perspecitve this was punted when it missed the sepc freeze | |