| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-09-14 | |||
| 15:48:29 | gibi | nova meeting starts in 12 minutes here in the channel | |
| 16:00:05 | gibi | #startmeeting nova | |
| 16:00:05 | opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Sep 14 16:00:05 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gibi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | |
| 16:00:05 | opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | |
| 16:00:05 | opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'nova' | |
| 16:00:07 | gibi | o/ | |
| 16:01:04 | elodilles | o/ | |
| 16:02:59 | gibi | lets wait a bit for the others | |
| 16:05:32 | gibi | if only elodilles and me are here then I will be extra quick | |
| 16:06:08 | gibi | so we have to cut RC1 this week | |
| 16:06:36 | gibi | release tracking etherpad is here https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-xena-rc-potential | |
| 16:06:44 | gibi | please review the reno prelude before Friday | |
| 16:06:51 | gibi | prelude: #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/807786 | |
| 16:07:12 | gibi | that is the only thing I'm tracking as still have to land before RC1 | |
| 16:07:46 | gibi | I looked at the untriaged backlog and I don't see any obvious regression for xena | |
| 16:07:57 | gibi | if you do have such bug / fix then let me know | |
| 16:08:04 | sean-k-mooney | oh o/ | |
| 16:08:12 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: o/ | |
| 16:08:17 | sean-k-mooney | im here but a litte distracted | |
| 16:08:30 | gibi | that was all important I wanted to say | |
| 16:08:38 | gibi | elodilles, sean-k-mooney: is there anything to discuss? | |
| 16:08:57 | elodilles | one thing regarding stable | |
| 16:09:13 | gibi | go | |
| 16:09:16 | sean-k-mooney | ah tere was a question about when to do the next stable release right | |
| 16:09:18 | elodilles | yesterday we got a question whether we are planning to release | |
| 16:09:22 | elodilles | on stable | |
| 16:09:34 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: that's it :) | |
| 16:09:46 | elodilles | last release was exactly 2 months ago | |
| 16:10:00 | elodilles | so I guess we could prepare releases | |
| 16:10:04 | gibi | I'm happy to check release patches but I think I lost my PTL approve power since the election results were merged | |
| 16:10:24 | elodilles | that's probably true :) | |
| 16:10:30 | sean-k-mooney | do we want to wait until after rc1 is out and done with | |
| 16:10:30 | gibi | so you have to ping bauzas to approve them | |
| 16:10:43 | elodilles | then we need bauzas either as PTL or as release liaison :) | |
| 16:11:04 | gibi | hopefully somebody can take the release liason over from bauzas | |
| 16:11:08 | elodilles | (he owns both role now) | |
| 16:11:10 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: is there a connection? | |
| 16:11:35 | sean-k-mooney | just gate capastity so no not really | |
| 16:11:43 | elodilles | and sean-k-mooney question is the next one: do we want to wait for something? | |
| 16:12:06 | sean-k-mooney | we might want to wait for the open redirect cve fixes | |
| 16:12:15 | elodilles | if not, then I can prepare the releases today or tomorrow | |
| 16:12:21 | sean-k-mooney | thats really the only thing im thinking of | |
| 16:13:05 | sean-k-mooney | they are merged to usuri i think so we could start with W->U | |
| 16:13:05 | elodilles | sean-k-mooney: some part are merged back till ussuri, | |
| 16:13:25 | elodilles | but if i'm not mistaken there is one part which is still waiting for review in victoria | |
| 16:13:27 | sean-k-mooney | and and do train after | |
| 16:13:45 | sean-k-mooney | ah right for the /// case | |
| 16:13:47 | elodilles | (reminder: train is EM, so there won't be any release) | |
| 16:13:56 | sean-k-mooney | ah ok cool | |
| 16:14:11 | gibi | I agree to release Wallaby now, then land the cve last fix to V and release that | |
| 16:14:17 | elodilles | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/806626 | |
| 16:14:25 | elodilles | this needs stable review ^^^ | |
| 16:14:30 | gibi | then backort the last cve fix to U etc. | |
| 16:14:37 | elodilles | and the also ussuri version of it | |
| 16:14:47 | gibi | can I get stable power? | |
| 16:14:54 | gibi | ;) | |
| 16:14:58 | elodilles | :] | |
| 16:15:30 | sean-k-mooney | ok so are we agreed we shoudl merge those then release them | |
| 16:15:37 | sean-k-mooney | once we get the ack for bauzas | |
| 16:15:51 | elodilles | sounds good to me | |
| 16:16:02 | sean-k-mooney | lyarwood: melwitt if you have time to review those on stable that would also help | |
| 16:16:58 | elodilles | yes, reviews are welcome and appreciated for those patches | |
| 16:17:42 | sean-k-mooney | if there is nothing else we can likely wrap the meeting there | |
| 16:17:57 | gibi | yeah | |
| 16:17:59 | gibi | anything else? | |
| 16:18:08 | elodilles | nothing from me :X | |
| 16:18:25 | gibi | then lets close this | |
| 16:18:30 | gibi | #endmeeting | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Sep 14 16:18:30 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-09-14-16.00.html | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-09-14-16.00.txt | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/nova/2021/nova.2021-09-14-16.00.log.html | |
| 16:20:44 | gibi | thanks | |
| 16:21:16 | elodilles | thanks o/ | |
| 16:37:25 | artom | elodilles, while we're kinda on the topic (con't from the meeting, sorta), could you give an opinion on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/791481 ? | |
| 16:38:19 | artom | It's "blocking" a few backports, so it'd be good to get fixed on whether it's get-in-able or not | |
| 16:40:49 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: fixtures: Handle binding of first port https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/796905 | |
| 16:40:50 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: Neutron fixture: don't clobber profile and vif_details if empty https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/796906 | |
| 16:40:51 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: functional: Add live migration tests for PCI, SR-IOV servers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/796907 | |
| 16:40:53 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: Test SRIOV port move operations with PCI conflicts https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/796908 | |
| 16:40:55 | opendevreview | Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/nova stable/victoria: Update SRIOV port pci_slot when unshelving https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/796909 | |
| 16:40:56 | artom | For now I've just stacked on top | |
| 17:04:34 | elodilles | artom: well, it's test-only so that's good. on the other hand it is just refactoring (which is usually refused to accept as valid backport - if it's not some trivial change), thus I think it's not really "blocking". I understand that it makes backporting easier for some cases, but... | |
| 17:05:48 | artom | elodilles, so the alternative is that every backport that goes back to train (and Red Hat has to care about stable/train for a loooon time) is harder to write and review because it'll have a note about having to adjust method params or w/e | |
| 17:06:54 | elodilles | well, there will be ONE point where a patch needs modification / resolve of conflicts, but further back it can be still clean | |
| 17:07:31 | artom | elodilles, right, I meant in the sense that *every* patch going back to train will need that modification | |
| 17:07:49 | artom | As opposed to landing the test refactor and forgetting about it | |
| 17:08:45 | elodilles | let's say if we backport it till train then a patch that needs backport to stein will need the very same modification (though I understand that stein expects way less backports) | |
| 17:09:32 | artom | elodilles, ah, I see your point. We'd just be pushing back the point at which we need manual adjustments to the backport | |
| 17:10:16 | elodilles | exactly | |
| 17:10:41 | artom | I agree, I just don't know how much of an issue it will be in practice... | |
| 17:11:31 | elodilles | it depends on the amount of similar patches I think :) | |
| 17:11:42 | artom | elodilles, so, you have more experience reviewing stable branches, what would you say the ratio of RH to non-RH backports is? | |
| 17:12:28 | elodilles | definitely RH wins over non-RH, that's true :) | |
| 17:12:28 | artom | Or to put it slightly different, RH care about stable/train (queens is still a thing, though we expect way less work on it now) | |
| 17:13:05 | artom | I'm trying to tread carefully here, because this is *not* just throwing our weight around | |
| 17:13:36 | artom | If CERN (to name a random example) or Vexxhost or whoever are still running stein a need loads of backports to it, it's a different conversation | |
| 17:16:45 | elodilles | anyway, I'm not completely against backporting this, I'm just thinking as well where is the line and maybe this is somewhere there :) | |
| 17:17:44 | artom_ | But if stable/train happens to be the stable branch that's most popular by virtue of being what RH supports, it would make sense to me to make backports to train as easy as possible? <-- repeating myself in case it didn't send before my connection dropped | |
| 17:17:55 | mnaser | artom: thanks for thinking of us :) we don't care about stein anymore (thankfully :]) | |