| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2025-06-24 | |||
| 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 | |
| 16:20:24 | sean-k-mooney | this is all valid for next cycle but i think its unfair to change the critiria mid way. (removing +2s) | |
| 16:20:56 | sean-k-mooney | that up to each reviewer | |
| 16:21:05 | sean-k-mooney | but i htink taht would send lot of mixed messages | |
| 16:21:19 | sean-k-mooney | we only have 9? days till spec freeze | |
| 16:21:43 | sean-k-mooney | if folks want to not add a +2 or +1 to open spec that totally fair | |
| 16:22:10 | bauzas | that's why I'm saying : as we don't have quorum now, let's just leave that to each core's opinion | |
| 16:22:19 | sean-k-mooney | +1 | |
| 16:23:14 | Uggla | +1, I think it will be ok, based on the time left. | |
| 16:23:26 | Uggla | Moving on. | |
| 16:23:39 | gibi | OK | |
| 16:23:48 | Uggla | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:23:54 | Uggla | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-2025.2-status | |
| 16:24:42 | Uggla | I think we should pay attention to this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/951636 | |
| 16:26:38 | Uggla | #topic OpenAPI | |
| 16:26:45 | Uggla | #link: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22openapi%22+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement)+-status:merged+-status:abandoned | |