| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-02-15 | |||
| 16:13:02 | bauzas | #agreed Implementation review day happening on Thursday Feb 17th, bauzas to communicate after the meeting | |
| 16:13:15 | bauzas | ok, next point | |
| 16:13:28 | bauzas | should we consider prioritizing some blueprints over some others ? | |
| 16:13:30 | bauzas | also, | |
| 16:13:53 | bauzas | should we start planning to look at all the API changes adding a new microversion ? | |
| 16:14:00 | bauzas | and asking the owners to rebase in between them ? | |
| 16:14:10 | gibi | do we have more than one series with microversion? | |
| 16:14:18 | bauzas | at least we have one largez | |
| 16:14:19 | gibi | I know about the tenant_id one | |
| 16:14:31 | gmann | yeah one is tenant-id i know of | |
| 16:14:42 | gibi | then no worries on the microversion bumpo | |
| 16:15:03 | gibi | but I agree to say out loud that bps without patches are now being ignored for the FF | |
| 16:15:18 | gibi | that is some level of prioritization :) | |
| 16:15:35 | bauzas | fine with me | |
| 16:15:39 | bauzas | I started to look at https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:bp%252Fremove-tenant-id | |
| 16:16:18 | bauzas | and I'll prioritize unified-limits, this one plus the policy changes and the any-traits support | |
| 16:16:27 | bauzas | at least for the 4 days | |
| 16:16:40 | gibi | I can be on the hook for chateaulav's series | |
| 16:16:43 | gibi | about emulation support | |
| 16:16:52 | gmann | +1, I have kept tenant-id first patch as -W until whole series is ready. | |
| 16:16:59 | chateaulav | gibi: appreciated | |
| 16:17:11 | gibi | and I'm also available for the unified-limits one | |
| 16:17:18 | bauzas | I already have 4 series on my plate | |
| 16:17:31 | bauzas | hence my question about who could cover the others | |
| 16:18:01 | bauzas | good (or bad) news are, 10 blueprints are showing no effort | |
| 16:18:24 | bauzas | and 2 need serious rework | |
| 16:18:53 | bauzas | so most of the things we can reasonably land are already marked up for reviews + wayward | |
| 16:18:58 | gibi | bauzas: if you seem some patch series that I haven't reviewed yet and not on your plate already then let me know and I will jump on it | |
| 16:19:20 | bauzas | the policy series is hard to review | |
| 16:19:29 | sean-k-mooney | i think some of the things without patche have patches we just have not linked them properly | |
| 16:19:34 | bauzas | so a second core with good knowledge is appreciated | |
| 16:19:48 | gmann | I will continue on tenant-id and more of pushing the policy and 'host info to project' changes by this week max. | |
| 16:19:49 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: hence the etherpad | |
| 16:19:59 | bauzas | it's open to anyone | |
| 16:20:01 | sean-k-mooney | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/multiqueue-flavor-extra-spec is an example. i added a new section at the top for things that are feature complete but have followup by the way | |
| 16:20:19 | gibi | bauzas: noted | |
| 16:20:30 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: thanks, works with me | |
| 16:20:57 | gmann | bauzas: I will catch dansmith for policy one. | |
| 16:20:59 | bauzas | anyway, let's continue to chat on IRC | |
| 16:21:05 | bauzas | and keep the pace | |
| 16:21:37 | bauzas | any additional note to say ? | |
| 16:21:40 | sean-k-mooney | if there are no patches for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-change-default-overcommit-values i might do that quickly | |
| 16:22:44 | gibi | bauzas: do you still aiming to land https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/boot-vm-with-unaddressed-port ? | |
| 16:22:59 | bauzas | gibi: yes, I need to update based on your comment | |
| 16:23:02 | gibi | ack | |
| 16:23:04 | bauzas | was planning to do it today :) | |
| 16:23:10 | bauzas | as you see, I'm lagging :) | |
| 16:23:39 | bauzas | I have a tempest test for verifying https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/boot-vm-with-unaddressed-port that I need to make progress on | |
| 16:23:45 | gibi | cool | |
| 16:24:07 | bauzas | but given tempest is branchless, I guess people agreed this is not impacted by our milestones, right? | |
| 16:24:11 | bauzas | agree* | |
| 16:24:15 | gibi | right | |
| 16:24:29 | gibi | I was about to suggest to decouple tempest from the nova impl | |
| 16:24:47 | bauzas | ok, I'll try ty upload a WIP change against tempest as a proof of work | |
| 16:25:12 | gmann | feature flag is something you can try for branchless tempest | |
| 16:25:21 | bauzas | gmann: did that :) | |
| 16:25:27 | gmann | ohk | |
| 16:25:33 | bauzas | again, need to upload my WIP | |
| 16:25:43 | gmann | gibi: and this one? you are targeting for yoga ? I can skip re-review if not (for now :)) https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/821423 | |
| 16:25:49 | bauzas | but it's far from being mergeable | |
| 16:26:46 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: i don tthink we need the tempest test to merge the nova change | |
| 16:26:52 | gibi | gmann: that is a bugfix so we have an extra week for that after FF. | |
| 16:27:01 | gibi | gmann: but yes, I would like to have it | |
| 16:27:04 | gmann | gibi: yeah, ack | |
| 16:27:05 | sean-k-mooney | if you have a WIP patch and plan to work on it i think we can trust you to finish it | |
| 16:28:55 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: yup indeed | |
| 16:29:01 | bauzas | anyway | |
| 16:29:09 | bauzas | any other blueprint to mention ? | |
| 16:29:13 | gibi | - | |
| 16:30:12 | bauzas | then, | |
| 16:30:23 | bauzas | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:30:30 | bauzas | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement+OR+project:openstack/os-traits+OR+project:openstack/os-resource-classes+OR+project:openstack/os-vif+OR+project:openstack/python-novaclient+OR+project:openstack/osc-placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1 | |
| 16:30:50 | bauzas | we said we could use this flag to tell things we plan to review | |
| 16:31:04 | bauzas | I'll do this then accordingly | |
| 16:31:17 | bauzas | at least for the 4 BPs I mentioned | |
| 16:31:43 | bauzas | any other point to mention ? | |
| 16:32:48 | bauzas | looks not | |
| 16:32:52 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:32:56 | bauzas | elodilles: ? | |
| 16:33:07 | elodilles | yes, | |
| 16:33:23 | elodilles | actually the state is more or less the same as last week | |
| 16:33:38 | elodilles | gates are OK, except queens and pike | |
| 16:34:03 | elodilles | I still not proposed a working fix for the docs job for them | |
| 16:34:07 | artom | Oh, wallaby has that same tagged attachment bug, I think | |
| 16:34:32 | elodilles | artom: hmmm | |
| 16:34:59 | elodilles | actually this one progressed a bit: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:workaround-disable-apic | |
| 16:35:29 | elodilles | nova part in wallaby is on the gate, | |
| 16:35:39 | artom | OK, so maybe we won't need https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/828542 | |
| 16:35:50 | elodilles | whenever that lands then we need the devstack part | |
| 16:36:55 | elodilles | artom: i think that is not needed in wallaby | |
| 16:37:05 | elodilles | but have to double check | |
| 16:37:22 | bauzas | ack | |
| 16:37:39 | artom | Anecdotally it seems that we do? But as I said, no hard data | |
| 16:37:53 | gmann | elodilles: is this ready? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/805632 | |
| 16:37:59 | gmann | I can check devstack backports | |
| 16:38:33 | elodilles | gmann: i think yes, we can remove the Workflow label *when* the nova part has merged | |
| 16:38:48 | elodilles | gmann: i'll ping you | |
| 16:39:02 | artom | And yeah, if it's fixed by the apic workaround we can abandon | |
| 16:39:02 | gmann | elodilles: ack, thanks | |
| 16:39:12 | elodilles | gmann: thanks too :) | |