Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-09-21
16:06:57 gibi we need https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810192 then an RC2 for nova
16:07:01 bauzas most of our efforts should go to merging bugfixes
16:07:19 bauzas gibi: right, I forgot about it
16:08:16 bauzas strangely, LP says Fix Released for Xena https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1944111
16:08:20 gibi for some reason the bug is not showing up in the rc critical query
16:08:47 gibi feels like an LP bug around branching
16:08:57 bauzas yup
16:09:06 bauzas will add it in the etherpad for tracking
16:09:22 gibi already done :)
16:09:29 bauzas hah
16:09:35 bauzas naïce ;)
16:09:57 bauzas ok, let's wait a bit for releasing RC2
16:10:06 bauzas We now have RC1 releases for both Nova and Placement #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/808706 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/808713
16:10:12 bauzas We will need a Placement RC2 release due to #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/810001
16:10:36 bauzas https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/810193 needs special treatme
16:10:41 bauzas treatment
16:10:57 bauzas +2d now
16:11:17 gibi we have the last RC deadline at 1st of Oct afaik
16:11:25 bauzas yeah
16:11:29 gibi so yes, we can hold up RC2 a bit to see if anything else pops up
16:11:34 bauzas hence me saying let's hold a bit for a RC2 proposal
16:11:43 bauzas ya
16:11:54 bauzas Remember to propose regression bugfixes for a new RC with nova-xena-rc-potential
16:12:06 bauzas #topic Review priorities
16:12:14 bauzas https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1
16:12:28 bauzas this is absolutely empty
16:12:54 bauzas cores, please enjoy this new button until we discuss other ways to use it at the PTG
16:13:29 bauzas is there anyone wanting to have their changes be a priority for reviews ?
16:13:53 bauzas (that's your time, folks)
16:13:59 artom Wait, only cores can set the priority label?
16:14:15 bauzas with the current implementation, yes
16:14:31 bauzas I'm about to propose other possibilities at the PTG
16:14:41 bauzas (which reminds me I have to write something in the etherpad)
16:14:46 artom Can a non-core propose the label, or is the whole thing owned entirely by cores?
16:15:08 bauzas artom: dude, that's the whole discussion we had in the related doc change :)
16:15:14 gibi artom: this is the currently agreed process https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/792357 but sure we can discuss it on the PTG
16:15:18 dansmith surely it will be totally useless if not curated by a smaller group right?
16:15:32 artom Sorry, not opening pandora's box again, just catching up
16:15:34 bauzas I'm happy to see people offering alternatives :)
16:15:35 dansmith in bug trackers where everyone can set priority, people set their bugs to be "urgent" all the time
16:15:37 opendevreview Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova master: Update min supported service version for Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809932
16:15:42 dansmith I can't imagine it will be useful otherwise
16:15:46 opendevreview Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova master: Update min supported service version for Yoga https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/809932
16:16:10 bauzas dansmith: I had an alternative proposal I left in the comments but we can discuss this at the PTG (and I'll propose a documentation change)
16:16:21 dansmith ack
16:16:21 artom Essentially, for my own selfish needs, all I can do with the Priority label is query it, and look at those reviews in case my opinion on them is of any use to anyone, right?
16:16:51 bauzas artom: for the moment, the idea is that cores make some review vows when setting the label
16:17:04 gibi artom: if you help merging reviews in priority then cores will have more bandwidth to look at other reviews including yours :D
16:17:04 bauzas meaning they engage themselves to review this patch in question
16:17:35 bauzas but I'm not sure we should continue this conversation now, we have some agenda left
16:17:42 bauzas (and a stretched time)
16:18:07 artom Understood.
16:18:45 bauzas moving on
16:18:55 bauzas #topic PTG Planning
16:19:01 bauzas every info is in the PTG etherpad #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-yoga-ptg
16:19:14 bauzas If you see a need for a specific cross project section then please let me know (gibi or bauzas)
16:19:18 bauzas gibi: I jinxed you :p
16:19:42 bauzas at least we can see regular updates from sean-k-mooney :)
16:20:05 gibi I expect more and more topics as we close to the PTG date
16:20:16 gibi I think the current list is normal given we have a month still
16:20:25 bauzas absolutely right
16:20:26 gibi (a bit less of a month
16:20:27 gibi )
16:20:31 bauzas I'm not afraid of having extra time
16:20:36 gibi me neither
16:21:15 bauzas but I'd say, take this month as an opportunity to start designing your features, so you can raise your questions at the PTG
16:21:36 bauzas anyway, moving on
16:21:42 bauzas #topic Stable Branches
16:21:58 bauzas (that could last a bit)
16:22:00 bauzas nova's stable/ussuri and stable/train are blocked (due to latest virtualenv uses latest setuptools which removed use_2to3)
16:22:07 bauzas the future proof solution would be to pin virtualenv during tox install for stable branches, otherwise new errors can appear with every new release of setuptools, virtualenv, etc
16:22:12 bauzas until we decide about the right solution we can maybe set lower-constraints job as non-voting ( https://review.opendev.org/809955 )
16:22:16 bauzas probably placement branches have the same errors
16:22:21 bauzas elodilles: floor is yours
16:22:30 gibi bauzas: yes, this is the same error
16:22:35 opendevreview Merged openstack/nova stable/xena: Add missing __init__.py in nova/db/api https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/810192
16:22:47 gibi it affects a lot of projects that still uses decorator 3.4 as dep
16:22:56 gibi nova affected from ussuri backwards
16:23:02 gibi placement affected all the way to master
16:23:08 gibi (master fix landed)
16:23:09 lyarwood ah I missed this review sorry
16:23:11 bauzas super awesome
16:23:31 sean-k-mooney we may want to consider droping that dep at some point
16:23:38 bauzas we actually have a longer explanation in the open discussion section
16:23:55 bauzas let's just hold this discussion until that point
16:24:10 sean-k-mooney although we are unlikely to hit the same issue again
16:24:12 bauzas (which we will have 30 mins for)
16:24:20 bauzas #topic Sub/related team Highlights
16:24:37 bauzas Libvirt (bauzas)
16:24:45 lyarwood bauzas: happy to take over the libvirt part now you're PTL btw
16:24:56 bauzas lyarwood: awesome
16:24:58 bauzas I was asking for it
16:25:03 lyarwood bauzas: not that I have anything for today but we have a few things this cycle
16:25:07 bauzas any stuff to raise ?
16:25:08 bauzas kk
16:25:27 bauzas #info lyarwood to chair the libvirt subteam by now
16:25:43 bauzas lyarwood: thanks for offering your name
16:25:55 artom Don't take it in vain now
16:26:03 bauzas #topic Open discussion
16:26:10 bauzas one last paperwork bit

Earlier   Later