Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2025-06-23
20:01:00 opendevreview Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: Implement sound model extra spec for libvirt. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/940770
20:01:00 opendevreview Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add objects and notifications for sound model. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/926126
20:01:01 opendevreview Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: Implement USB controller extra spec for libvirt. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/950643
20:01:01 opendevreview Michael Still proposed openstack/nova master: libvirt: Add objects and notifications for USB controller model. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/927354
21:30:35 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Add new policies for live migrate APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953063
21:46:46 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Use pre-commit for lint jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/952987
21:46:46 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: Replace keystoneclient with openstacksdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/952986
23:22:53 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Add project manager role in Nova API policy rule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953158
23:25:29 opendevreview Ghanshyam proposed openstack/nova master: Add project manager role in Nova API policy rule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/941347
#openstack-nova - 2025-06-24
06:28:46 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
06:36:32 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
07:19:43 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
07:23:03 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
07:24:32 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-novaclient master: tests: Remove use of ddt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/953193
08:13:36 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for services APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953196
11:29:24 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
13:24:00 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: tests: Use valid UUIDs for cinder resources https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952935
13:24:01 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for volumes APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952348
13:24:01 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Only apply "soft" additionalProperties validation to requests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952936
13:24:02 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for volume attachments APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952350
13:24:02 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for snapshots APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952349
13:24:03 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for security group APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952973
13:24:03 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for floating IP APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/952972
13:24:04 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for services APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953196
13:25:12 opendevreview Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add response body schemas for server usage audit log APIs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/953209
15:01:15 Uggla Nova meeting in ~1h
15:24:31 opendevreview Johannes Beisiegel proposed openstack/nova master: feat: compute created weigher https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/947503
15:52:46 gmaan Uggla: Due to board meeting at same time, I will not be able to attend nova meeting today.
15:53:19 Uggla gmaan, ok so I'll skip "your" topic.
15:53:35 Uggla gmaan thx for warning me.
15:54:18 Uggla Meeting in ~5mn
15:56:20 fungi i'll be lurking here in case there are more questions about the btg topic from last week, but also mostly on the board ai policy discussion conference call
16:01:44 opendevmeet The meeting name has been set to 'nova'
16:01:44 opendevmeet Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:01:44 opendevmeet Meeting started Tue Jun 24 16:01:44 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is Uggla. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:44 Uggla #startmeeting nova
16:01:53 Uggla Hello everyone
16:02:24 bauzas o/
16:02:31 elodilles o/
16:02:54 andreykurilin O/
16:02:57 bauzas the quickier being the better
16:03:11 gibi o/
16:03:16 bauzas (sorry, was a rant)
16:03:21 gibi bauzas: it will
16:03:27 Uggla bauzas ;)
16:03:45 Uggla #topic Bugs (stuck/critical)
16:03:52 Uggla #info No Critical bug
16:04:08 gibi the question is where we will be when that bubble bursts
16:04:22 Uggla #topic Gate status
16:04:33 Uggla #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs
16:04:40 Uggla #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-ci-failures-minimal
16:04:47 Uggla #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fnova&project=openstack%2Fplacement&branch=stable%2F*&branch=master&pipeline=periodic-weekly&skip=0 Nova&Placement periodic jobs status
16:04:57 Uggla #info Please look at the gate failures and file a bug report with the gate-failure tag.
16:05:03 Uggla #info Please try to provide meaningful comment when you recheck
16:05:42 Uggla jumping to next topic because gmaan is not available.
16:05:46 Uggla #topic Release Planning
16:05:53 Uggla #link https://releases.openstack.org/flamingo/schedule.html
16:05:59 Uggla #info Nova deadlines are set in the above schedule
16:06:19 Uggla #info Nova Spec review day was last week.
16:06:46 bauzas we have one week before the spec freeze
16:06:57 bauzas let's be productive :)
16:07:01 Uggla I'm not sure we managed to review a lot of them. As I think everybody was busy.
16:07:28 Uggla bauzas, You are right spec freeze is July 3rd
16:07:30 gibi do we want to impose a limit how much we approve based on how much bandwidth we have to review implementation?
16:07:55 bauzas good call, last time (Epoxy) I was figuring this wasn't needed due to the low level of approved ones
16:08:03 bauzas what's the current state of approved specs ?
16:08:44 Uggla bauzas, I'm not up2date with it. :(
16:08:50 ratailor How can I get reviews for https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/show-instance-action-finish-time%22 which is already completed.
16:08:51 fungi that did seem like one of the upshots of the btg topic discussion too, approving a reasonable number of specs helps to not set unrealistic expectations for the people who might submit changes to implement them
16:10:30 bauzas https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/2025.2/
16:10:41 bauzas I see 7 approved
16:10:52 bauzas but I can't recall whether we approved specless bps
16:11:00 sean-k-mooney we have
16:11:08 gibi eventlet removal is a specless bp
16:11:08 sean-k-mooney not a lot but one or two
16:11:14 sean-k-mooney i think thsoe are all done
16:11:19 sean-k-mooney well expcte eventlet
16:11:19 Uggla we have also some specless BP.
16:11:22 bauzas that would put the number to a small 10
16:11:41 sean-k-mooney im not sure we shoudl set a numerical limit
16:11:54 bauzas I'd assume that we have a room for not more than 5 or 6 but usually we only merge ~12 features per cycle
16:12:01 sean-k-mooney i prefered gibis suggestion last week or +1 isntead of +2
16:12:05 sean-k-mooney if you dont plan to review
16:12:08 bauzas so that's really a messaging
16:12:20 bauzas messaging question
16:12:42 gibi yeah I applied that last week on some specs
16:13:21 bauzas the real ask here is whether we want to paperwork some capacity limits while we never did before
16:13:50 bauzas but about the btg discussion, it has a cost : people could consider that we're committed to review their implementation, which isn't the case
16:13:56 sean-k-mooney if we had one i woudl likely be forece to downgrade some of my +2s to +1s we can condier it next cycle
16:14:05 sean-k-mooney but i dont want to chagne things this cycle at this point
16:14:06 gibi I think if each core is only +2 a spec if they promise to review the impl then there will be a natural emergent limt
16:14:25 bauzas I still want to review a couple of left specs that I got interested by
16:15:09 bauzas gibi: we somehow approached that on the previous PTG but we never enforced such rule yet
16:15:30 Uggla I agree gibi, that's probably a good method.
16:15:58 bauzas but we're in the middle of the acceptance process
16:17:07 gibi sure I don't suggest to go back and change +2s (but could be if you want) but going forward we can be limiting +2s
16:17:10 bauzas I mean, I'm not opposed to that, but there are precedent specs that we approved
16:18:13 bauzas anyway, if you feel so, do so
16:18:29 bauzas I'll personnally follow that rule too
16:19:44 sean-k-mooney i really dont want to change the rules this cycle

Earlier   Later