| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2020-05-04 | |||
| 15:05:58 | bauzas | okay, I *think* I understand | |
| 15:06:14 | bauzas | by merging gmann's patch, we're creating a new section | |
| 15:06:19 | dhellmann | right | |
| 15:06:45 | dansmith | jsuchome: I had feedback, so addressing that is necessary in addition to just rebasing it | |
| 15:07:13 | dhellmann | sheesh, there are a lot of changes in nova :-) generating the release notes takes ages | |
| 15:10:18 | gmann | dhellmann: should not merge section happen when it is release say rc2 version relese? and till then anything new goes into unreleased section instead of ussuri release section ? | |
| 15:10:31 | dhellmann | I think I have a fix, give me a sec to rebase | |
| 15:11:38 | gmann | dhellmann: ok, thanks | |
| 15:12:59 | gmann | bauzas: dhellmann may be i could have edited the existing reno instead of new so that it would conflict but that just hides this issue does not solve. | |
| 15:13:31 | gmann | bauzas: gibi i was searching and could not find any such issue (where new reno added in rc) for train and stein rc. | |
| 15:17:11 | gibi | honestly I can only agree what you found with the reno problem but I cannot give to that discussion. I hope dhellmann's fix will help | |
| 15:19:41 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: Add nova-status upgrade check and reno for policy new defaults https://review.opendev.org/725146 | |
| 15:19:41 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: use more distinct link references in release notes https://review.opendev.org/725301 | |
| 15:19:52 | dhellmann | let's see if ^ helps | |
| 15:22:33 | jsuchome | dansmith: well, yeah, I'm not sure how to address it. Are you suggesting some different path then using this formerly deprecated entry point? As I'm not the creator of the original code I would rather not rework it completely... | |
| 15:22:44 | dhellmann | gibi : sphinx is like a compiler & linker for docs instead of for code. If there are 2 sections on a page with the same name, that's like having 2 functions in a module with the same name. Sphinx can't figure out which one you want to link to. | |
| 15:23:07 | gibi | dhellmann: thanks. and also thanks for fixing it | |
| 15:23:28 | dansmith | jsuchome: yes, I'm not okay with undeprecating that hook mechanism just to add something in-tree for it | |
| 15:23:51 | dhellmann | this is only related to reno because it's assembling the notes files into rst for sphinx. the same error could have happened if the text had been written by hand | |
| 15:30:58 | gibi | dhellmann: so your patch can fix it as it changes the references current pointing to the ambiguous title to point to some specific title that is not duplicated by gmann's recent patch | |
| 15:31:13 | dhellmann | that's right | |
| 15:31:16 | gmann | dhellmann: thanks for fixing. and that did not complain in original change because Sphinx already merged the Upgrade Section - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725301/1/releasenotes/notes/ussuri-prelude-4b96f1244cefcdf4.yaml | |
| 15:31:25 | dhellmann | the patch isn't quite right (it failed locally) but it's a different error | |
| 15:31:45 | bauzas | sorry was in a meeting | |
| 15:32:30 | gmann | dhellmann: any way Sphinx can error or warning for using implicit links at least for same link in same page? just for future so that it can be fixed in original change itself. | |
| 15:33:04 | dhellmann | good question. I don't know. | |
| 15:33:21 | dhellmann | there's a `reno lint` command, maybe that's a check it could do? | |
| 15:33:49 | bauzas | I'm a bit afraid of https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725301/ because it would be a bit more difficult for people to provide their own reno notes | |
| 15:34:01 | gmann | dhellmann: ok. let me try sometime later. | |
| 15:34:16 | bauzas | but we're close to RC2 so I wouldn't be picky | |
| 15:34:47 | dhellmann | another possible improvement for reno is to have it automatically add unique anchors for each file so that the prelude could have used those anchor names | |
| 15:35:12 | dhellmann | the problem with that is that the same note can appear in multiple series (backports) so you can't just use the filename | |
| 15:36:05 | bauzas | dhellmann: gmann: gibi: if you wanna get MHO, I'd just prefer to https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725146/2/releasenotes/notes/bug-1875418-0df3198e36530ec7.yaml to just amend an existing upgrade note instead of creating this YAML file | |
| 15:36:13 | gmann | dhellmann: yeah, asking for explicit anchor is much safe in case of backporting things. | |
| 15:36:34 | bauzas | we could leave some placeholder YAML file for backports | |
| 15:36:56 | bauzas | this would be simplier to manage rather than explicit sphinx targets | |
| 15:36:59 | dhellmann | bauzas : the whole point of reno is you don't have to do that sort of thing | |
| 15:37:03 | bauzas | I know :( | |
| 15:37:06 | gmann | bauzas: but that does not solve the whole things, same issue can occur for any new reno while backport | |
| 15:37:26 | dhellmann | another fix would be to remove the links in the prelude entirely | |
| 15:37:49 | gibi | bauzas: would you like to do that change on master first to keep the reno (even if it is ignored) in sync between branches? | |
| 15:38:10 | bauzas | gibi: which change ?N | |
| 15:38:41 | gibi | bauzas: ammending the existing upgrade reno instead of adding a new one | |
| 15:38:52 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: use more distinct link references in release notes https://review.opendev.org/725301 | |
| 15:38:53 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: Add nova-status upgrade check and reno for policy new defaults https://review.opendev.org/725146 | |
| 15:39:02 | dhellmann | ok, I think ^ solves it | |
| 15:39:44 | dhellmann | the 2nd problem was that the text of the links was the same, too, so `title <url1>`_ and `title <url2>`_ was causing a conflict. The fix was to use double underscore so sphinx doesn't try to "define" a link with the title | |
| 15:39:59 | bauzas | sorry, still in a meeting :/ | |
| 15:40:17 | gmann | i think, the idea of not have link in prelude make sense as there is only one 'Upgrade section' in merged releasenotes . | |
| 15:40:27 | dhellmann | I have to go do some other stuff, so I'll leave the bots to run and let you decide how you want to fix it. | |
| 15:40:35 | gibi | dhellmann: thanks | |
| 15:40:45 | gmann | dhellmann: sure, thanks again. | |
| 15:40:55 | dhellmann | gmann : for projects with 2 real releases in one stable branch there could be multiple upgrade sections | |
| 15:41:15 | dhellmann | so if there are upgrade notes from 21.0.0 to 21.0.1 then you'll have the same thing again | |
| 15:41:17 | gibi | gmann, bauzas: I have to drop for today. I would go with the current proposed solution just because it is already proposed and we have limited time | |
| 15:41:28 | gmann | dhellmann: i see. | |
| 15:41:34 | bauzas | gibi: fair enough | |
| 15:41:38 | gmann | ok | |
| 15:41:42 | bauzas | and I'm on the same tangency | |
| 15:41:52 | gibi | bauzas: but we can talk about rules for the future to avoid this | |
| 15:42:06 | bauzas | I also have very limited brain now to understand all the issues | |
| 15:42:34 | bauzas | gibi: worth +2ing both dhellmann's changes and then I +W them ? | |
| 15:42:42 | gmann | bauzas: gibi this is good things to note down for rc backport somewhere to handle in master side itself, any good place you recommend. wiki/doc ? | |
| 15:42:49 | jsuchome | dansmith: what are my options? Would it be acceptable just to extend load_transfer_modules to explicitly load rbd download mechanism? | |
| 15:43:07 | bauzas | gmann: we have the contributor docs | |
| 15:43:08 | gibi | bauzas: I'm not a stable core | |
| 15:43:09 | gmann | review guide ? | |
| 15:43:25 | gibi | gmann: review guide is a good place yes | |
| 15:43:40 | bauzas | gmann: we have the contributor docs https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/contributor/releasenotes.html | |
| 15:43:41 | gmann | let me add something there and we can find common way whatever we agree on. | |
| 15:43:47 | gibi | gmann: thanks! | |
| 15:43:50 | bauzas | gibi: you are for ussuri | |
| 15:44:04 | dansmith | jsuchome: I have to look at it in more detail to figure out what the right thing to do is, but using the external plug point (and changing the behavior of that in the process) isn't the best plan, IMHO | |
| 15:44:05 | gibi | bauzas: I tried I only have +1 right | |
| 15:44:10 | bauzas | gibi: waaaaaat ? | |
| 15:44:31 | gibi | elod: If you have time there is stable/ussuri reno fix to merge before RC2 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725301 | |
| 15:44:35 | dansmith | jsuchome: I'm guessing that the rbd image module can probably pass a download routine to glance but I'd need to go look | |
| 15:44:37 | jsuchome | dansmith: it was written in some release notes that in case some users are already using it, it might be the way to un-deprecate it. That's exactly the case here | |
| 15:44:54 | dansmith | jsuchome: I don't want to un-deprecate it | |
| 15:46:26 | bauzas | gibi: okay, the ship halfly-sailed, we need +W | |
| 15:46:42 | gibi | bauzas: I've pinged elod, he will chekck it | |
| 15:46:48 | bauzas | leave it for now, I'll chase up another stable-core | |
| 15:47:04 | bauzas | gibi: but this isn't normal you can't +2 on stable/ussuri | |
| 15:47:15 | gibi | and I have to leave so talk to you tomorrow | |
| 15:47:22 | bauzas | gibi: np, \o | |
| 15:47:27 | gibi | o/ | |
| 15:51:18 | gmann | bauzas: gibi thanks. ttyt | |
| 15:57:49 | kashyap | bauzas: Here's the 'nova-next' in-progress job :) -- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/708701/ | |
| 15:58:01 | kashyap | Need to dig into the Ubuntu-based failures | |
| 16:00:05 | dansmith | jsuchome: I'll put up some code as an example of a path forward in a bit | |
| 16:00:47 | jsuchome | dansmith: thanks! | |
| 16:13:25 | kashyap | gibi: When you get time tomm, please have a gander at point-166 here: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-victoria-ptg (Cc: bauzas) | |
| 16:34:31 | dansmith | jsuchome: do you want me to mangle the existing patch a bit to show what I think needs to happen? it'll take it into WIP state, but should be able to form a basis for moving forward | |
| 16:58:39 | openstackgerrit | Dan Smith proposed openstack/nova master: Remove deprecated nova.image.download hook https://review.opendev.org/725338 | |
| 17:07:40 | elod | bauzas dhellmann : the releasenotes job works now, but the links seem incorrect in the generated docs: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/725301/ ... or do I miss something? | |
| 17:10:04 | dhellmann | elod : you're right | |
| 17:10:15 | dhellmann | I probably messed up the link syntax | |
| 17:11:31 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: use more distinct link references in release notes https://review.opendev.org/725301 | |
| 17:11:32 | openstackgerrit | Doug Hellmann proposed openstack/nova stable/ussuri: Add nova-status upgrade check and reno for policy new defaults https://review.opendev.org/725146 | |
| 17:11:38 | dhellmann | elod : let's try ^ | |