| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-04-26 | |||
| 16:15:23 | gmann | As testing runtime for Zed is centos-9-stream and in QA we agreed to drop the c8s support in devstack as well as in Tempest, I have proposed the changes there and will notify it on ML also. also moving c8s job to c9s, please review it - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/839275 | |
| 16:15:44 | bauzas | thanks gmann | |
| 16:15:49 | gmann | this series #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:drop-c8s-testing | |
| 16:16:09 | bauzas | gmann: on my list, will vote on it later today or tomorrow | |
| 16:16:26 | gmann | thanks, meanwhile I will get tempest depends-on merge | |
| 16:17:03 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:17:24 | bauzas | I have to sit down and consider all the implications but your patch seems good to me | |
| 16:17:35 | bauzas | and either way, ship is sailed | |
| 16:17:52 | bauzas | centos9 is targeted for zed | |
| 16:17:57 | gmann | yeah | |
| 16:18:29 | bauzas | do we have any tracking LP bug about the centos8 failures ? | |
| 16:18:58 | bauzas | ideally, I'd want those to be wontfix if we decide we move on | |
| 16:19:15 | gmann | no bug as of now, we are going as per the testing runtime. and as we drop the py36 from projects then it is broken like for nova as of now | |
| 16:19:29 | bauzas | ok | |
| 16:19:37 | bauzas | then no paperwork to fill in | |
| 16:19:45 | gmann | it is failing as in nova we made nova require >=py3.8 and other projects will do the same | |
| 16:19:45 | bauzas | :) | |
| 16:19:52 | bauzas | oh | |
| 16:19:55 | bauzas | right | |
| 16:20:51 | bauzas | anyway, I guess we can continue | |
| 16:20:58 | gmann | yeah | |
| 16:21:10 | bauzas | #info STOP DOING BLIND RECHECKS aka. 'recheck' https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/testing.html#how-to-handle-test-failures | |
| 16:21:30 | bauzas | just as a weekly periodic reminder (which includes me, stupid bias) | |
| 16:21:54 | bauzas | next topic, | |
| 16:21:59 | bauzas | #topic Release Planning | |
| 16:22:03 | bauzas | #link https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html | |
| 16:22:07 | bauzas | #info Zed-1 is due in 3 weeks | |
| 16:22:10 | bauzas | tick-tock | |
| 16:22:27 | artom | ♫ on the clock ♫ | |
| 16:23:10 | bauzas | I said last week I should ask this week for a spec review day, but do people feel good about considering it for in two weeks ? | |
| 16:23:16 | gibi | bah, I have to allocate some time to the placement PCI tracking spec | |
| 16:23:19 | artom | No shame, those pop songs are earworms by design | |
| 16:23:52 | bauzas | artom: but the party don't stop | |
| 16:23:52 | artom | gibi, you have sean-k-mooney's original spec to work from, so not starting from scratch | |
| 16:24:00 | gibi | artom: true true | |
| 16:24:15 | gibi | bauzas: I'm OK to have a review day next week or the week after | |
| 16:24:33 | melwitt | :) | |
| 16:24:35 | bauzas | gibi: I have to write some spec for deprecating the keypair generation, you know | |
| 16:24:46 | bauzas | so | |
| 16:24:47 | gibi | :) | |
| 16:25:12 | bauzas | maybe saying a spec review day not next tuesday, but tuesday after that ? | |
| 16:25:22 | bauzas | ie. May 10th ? | |
| 16:25:37 | sean-k-mooney | the 10 ya that would be ok i think | |
| 16:26:13 | bauzas | I see no objections | |
| 16:26:23 | gibi | good for me | |
| 16:26:41 | bauzas | #agreed first spec review day will happen on May 10th, bauzas to communicate thru the mailing list | |
| 16:27:09 | bauzas | this leaves 2 weeks for people writing specs, you are warned | |
| 16:27:20 | bauzas | (again, this includes me) | |
| 16:28:17 | bauzas | we'll have another round of spec reviews, as we agreed last PTG, either way | |
| 16:28:51 | bauzas | ok, next | |
| 16:29:00 | bauzas | #topic Review priorities | |
| 16:29:04 | 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 | |
| 16:29:52 | bauzas | the vIOMMU change probably needs paperwork | |
| 16:30:41 | bauzas | tl;dr: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/830646 requires at least a blueprint, and maybe a spec | |
| 16:30:42 | sean-k-mooney | ya i started to review it i kind of think it shoudl have a mini spec | |
| 16:30:51 | melwitt | +1 | |
| 16:31:09 | bauzas | I can use my hammer | |
| 16:31:21 | bauzas | but I could soften it | |
| 16:31:51 | bauzas | explaining we require a blueprint and some discussion at a nova meeting before we can pursue reviewing it | |
| 16:31:59 | bauzas | ricolin: are you around ? | |
| 16:32:18 | sean-k-mooney | im not againt the proposaly in fact i have wanted to add supprot for a while but we need to agree on the extra_specs/image propeties and define the scope | |
| 16:32:28 | sean-k-mooney | i was recommening keeping it small for now | |
| 16:32:31 | bauzas | yeah, and that's why we need a debate | |
| 16:32:55 | bauzas | not about which paper stamp we should use | |
| 16:33:02 | sean-k-mooney | there is viommu supprot with the limited chagne required for there acclerator to work | |
| 16:33:08 | bauzas | but whether we all agree on the design | |
| 16:33:13 | sean-k-mooney | and then there is full supprot with security and isolation | |
| 16:33:38 | bauzas | correct, that's why we need to discuss this correctly and address the design scope | |
| 16:33:49 | sean-k-mooney | i would suggest we split it like that and only do the former this cycle | |
| 16:34:11 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: well, we need a owner, at first :) | |
| 16:34:35 | bauzas | even if we agree on the direction, we need gears | |
| 16:34:37 | sean-k-mooney | yep mnaser also expressed interest. im not sure that stephenfin will work on it this cycle | |
| 16:35:05 | bauzas | I'm sure stephenfin said he was okay to leave it for others to continue :) | |
| 16:35:27 | bauzas | hence the gerrit hammer | |
| 16:35:47 | bauzas | this may help people to react and assign some time for this | |
| 16:36:43 | bauzas | I'll also drop the review-prio flag which is meaningless in this case as we can't merge it as it is | |
| 16:37:43 | bauzas | ok, moving on if nobody yells | |
| 16:38:10 | bauzas | #topic Stable Branches | |
| 16:38:14 | bauzas | elodilles: your turn | |
| 16:38:20 | elodilles | #info ussuri and older branches are blocked until 'l-c drop' patches merge - https://review.opendev.org/q/I514f6b337ffefef90a0ce9ab0b4afd083caa277e | |
| 16:38:30 | elodilles | #info other branches should be OK | |
| 16:38:36 | elodilles | #info nova projects' stable/victoria transitioned to Extended Maintenance - no further releases will be produced from victoria, but branch remains open to accept bug fixes | |
| 16:38:44 | elodilles | and that's all I think ^^^ | |
| 16:39:15 | melwitt | we need second core wink wink | |
| 16:39:24 | elodilles | :] | |
| 16:39:41 | gibi | I would be happy to approve... ;) | |
| 16:39:52 | gibi | (has some blocked train backports :D) | |
| 16:40:03 | bauzas | I can do things | |
| 16:40:12 | bauzas | my brain fsck'd me | |
| 16:40:12 | gibi | bauzas: ask elodilles to add me into the stable-core group | |
| 16:40:20 | gibi | then I can help | |
| 16:40:53 | bauzas | gibi: I think we said at the PTG I should propose your name against the stable team | |
| 16:41:01 | gibi | yeah I think so | |
| 16:41:05 | gibi | so lets do it :D | |
| 16:41:05 | bauzas | so, | |
| 16:41:19 | bauzas | #1 I'll do my homework and review such l-c patches | |
| 16:41:53 | bauzas | #2 I'll do my duty and engage discussions about reconciling the nova team and the nova-stable team in some intelligent manner | |
| 16:43:18 | bauzas | last topic in the agenda, | |
| 16:43:21 | bauzas | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:43:27 | bauzas | (gibi) Allow claiming PCI PF if child VF is unavailable https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838555 | |