| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2026-09-14 | |||
| 16:11:27 | Uggla | I saw earlier discussion with Sean about a possible patch missing. | |
| 16:11:44 | Uggla | But I have not read yet. So Would rather not say something wrong | |
| 16:12:08 | elodilles | ah, OK. fingers crossed | |
| 16:12:12 | elodilles | about stable: | |
| 16:12:18 | elodilles | #info we have now stable/2026.2 branch for every project | |
| 16:12:32 | elodilles | #info stable gates should be OK (I'm not aware of any stable gate issue) | |
| 16:12:37 | elodilles | #info stable branch status / gate failures tracking etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-stable-branch-ci | |
| 16:13:11 | Uggla | thx elodilles | |
| 16:13:29 | Uggla | #topic vmwareapi 3rd-party CI efforts Highlights | |
| 16:13:35 | fwiesel | Hi, no updates from my side. | |
| 16:13:44 | Uggla | thx fwiesel | |
| 16:14:07 | Uggla | #topic Nova using openstack sdk for neutron | |
| 16:14:34 | Uggla | lajoskatona something you'd like to share? | |
| 16:15:14 | lajoskatona | I updated some of the patches 2 weeks ago to use the new SDK, but last week I travelled so no fresh news | |
| 16:15:54 | Uggla | ok good thx | |
| 16:16:22 | Uggla | #topic Bug scrubbing | |
| 16:16:34 | Uggla | #info up to 70 (+3). | |
| 16:16:41 | Uggla | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bug-triage-roster | |
| 16:16:47 | Uggla | #link https://truc.uggla.fr/ to follow the trend. | |
| 16:17:02 | Uggla | #info Next meeting (next week): [public] Upstream bug triage. Wednesday, Septembre 16th · 15:30 – 16:00 UTC. Video call link: meet.google.com/zjr-rxus-hzj | |
| 16:17:35 | Uggla | #topic Open discussion | |
| 16:17:56 | Uggla | (sean): reappoveal of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-vfio-variant-driver-managed-mode-via-cyborg for 2027.1 | |
| 16:20:11 | Uggla | ok let's switch topic because Sean seems not available. | |
| 16:20:19 | Uggla | (gibi): proposal for nova-reviewer group | |
| 16:20:35 | gibi_ | o/ slight correction to that | |
| 16:20:42 | gibi_ | I think the "how to populate the new nova-reviewer group?" question need some preparation before the PTG. | |
| 16:20:50 | gibi_ | gmaan already indicated that the review comments in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/986141 not his preferred way for discussing this. | |
| 16:21:01 | gibi_ | So I'm raising here, how should we prepare this topic to the PTG so that we spend the time finding consensus instead of spending the time formulating and explaining opinions. | |
| 16:21:34 | gibi_ | I mean on the PTG time window we should focus on finding consesus | |
| 16:21:38 | gibi_ | rather that gathering ideas | |
| 16:21:44 | gmaan | yeah, its good to discuss in PTG than gerrit | |
| 16:22:17 | gibi_ | I think we need to do the gathering ideas and understanding each outhers viewpoint before the PTG | |
| 16:22:29 | bauzas | agreed with gibi | |
| 16:22:34 | gmaan | ++ | |
| 16:22:38 | Uggla | ++ | |
| 16:23:22 | gibi_ | so the question how to do that? | |
| 16:23:41 | gibi_ | I added some lazy strawmans in the doc patch | |
| 16:23:52 | gibi_ | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/986141 | |
| 16:24:08 | gibi_ | but I hear you gmaan that review comments might not be a best format for it | |
| 16:24:28 | gibi_ | For me it would be helpful to see other's oppinions before the actual PTG and be able to ask clarifying question about it to understand them. | |
| 16:24:49 | gibi_ | and I can also do a braindump myself so other can see it | |
| 16:25:05 | gmaan | yeah, i think we can start with what current criteria/expectation are to become nova-core for the nova-reviewers also and we can see what all we can change or add? | |
| 16:25:33 | bauzas | ++ | |
| 16:25:58 | bauzas | I can add my thoughts too in the patch | |
| 16:26:03 | gibi_ | should I put my views in an etherpad? mail? on that doc patch? | |
| 16:26:17 | gmaan | even it is from adjacent service reviewer/core, i feel strongly that we should not make it volunteer basis or because they are core in other service quality for nova-reviewer | |
| 16:26:36 | gmaan | gibi_: i prefer in etherpad if we are going to discuss in PTG | |
| 16:27:08 | gibi_ | I'm OK with an etherpad (I don't like email that much) | |
| 16:27:48 | gibi_ | So I will dump into the PTG one my ideas. Lets try to focus on understanding each other before we start debating. Shall we? | |
| 16:28:09 | gmaan | yeah, thanks gibi_ | |
| 16:28:20 | Uggla | sounds good | |
| 16:28:31 | gmaan | i mean sounds good to me but other can tell their preferece too | |
| 16:28:50 | gmaan | but i agree that email are hard to read and get consensus | |
| 16:28:53 | bauzas | I'd be prefering to help nova reviewers instead of other service reviewers but let's discuss this in the etherpad | |
| 16:29:27 | gibi_ | OK sounds like we have the next step. Thanks | |
| 16:29:30 | gibi_ | Uggla: back to you | |
| 16:29:53 | Uggla | thx gibi_ | |
| 16:30:36 | Uggla | Anything else you'd like to discuss ? | |
| 16:30:55 | Leo[m] | Hello | |
| 16:31:21 | Leo[m] | Just wanted to circle back on my spec about using hostname for ceph mon references: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/1000098 | |
| 16:31:32 | sean-k-mooney | o/ | |
| 16:31:46 | Leo[m] | It's been up for a while and I was hoping to get someone to look at it | |
| 16:32:01 | Leo[m] | Please let me know if there is anything else I can do on my end | |
| 16:32:01 | sean-k-mooney | Leo[m]: i assume you mean dns name so FQDN | |
| 16:32:03 | sean-k-mooney | not hostname | |
| 16:32:51 | Leo[m] | Yes, the intention is to use a generic CNAME record so the ceph mons can change without needing to change the references in Nova | |
| 16:33:01 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: for my topic i wanted to ask can we reappove the cybrog manage mode specless bluepint for this cycle | |
| 16:33:34 | sean-k-mooney | it missed last cycel because of the cyborg side not nova so im hopign stephen and Melanie will be fine with revieing it this cycle | |
| 16:34:20 | sean-k-mooney | Leo[m]: if the entire tech stack supprot that i think that woudl be infinetly better then the situation we have today | |
| 16:34:57 | Uggla | sean-k-mooney ok but will it need changes on the nova side ? | |
| 16:35:09 | tkajinam | Leo[m], maybe the right path is to propose that topic to the upcoming ptg and discuss details there, while that would attract attentions from cores. | |
| 16:35:18 | sean-k-mooney | yes but i have written those its a very small patch | |
| 16:35:26 | Uggla | tkajinam ++ | |
| 16:35:30 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: like -20+300 lines | |
| 16:35:39 | tkajinam | maybe it's a good timing to create an etherpad to gather topics ? | |
| 16:35:53 | sean-k-mooney | Uggla: if it didnt need nova change it woudl not have a nova blueprint :) | |
| 16:35:54 | Uggla | tkajinam done | |
| 16:36:01 | tkajinam | Uggla++ | |
| 16:36:37 | sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/994579 | |
| 16:36:44 | sean-k-mooney | that is the entirity of the patch | |
| 16:36:54 | Leo[m] | What would it take to propose the change at the upcoming PTG? | |
| 16:37:12 | sean-k-mooney | Leo[m]: you just need to add it to the adgenda | |
| 16:37:19 | sean-k-mooney | and Uggla will help you find a spot | |
| 16:37:27 | sean-k-mooney | *time | |
| 16:38:09 | Leo[m] | Ok. I don't want to take up too much time for such a small change | |
| 16:38:33 | sean-k-mooney | its an imporant operational pain point | |
| 16:38:46 | sean-k-mooney | so i think its size is not the thing to focus on :) | |
| 16:39:11 | sean-k-mooney | Leo[m]: i have not looked at the spec yet | |
| 16:39:22 | sean-k-mooney | but the main aspect i would ask is how do we upgrade to this | |
| 16:39:30 | sean-k-mooney | per host config options are not a good path | |
| 16:39:36 | sean-k-mooney | at least not long term | |
| 16:39:42 | sean-k-mooney | as they cause issues with live migration | |
| 16:39:54 | sean-k-mooney | but ya we can work out those details later | |
| 16:39:57 | Uggla | Leo[m] usually we discuss topic at PTG and then the changes are reviewed. | |
| 16:40:33 | Leo[m] | What do you mean by "per host config options"? | |
| 16:40:48 | Leo[m] | Sounds good. Does that mean I should prepare the PR now? | |
| 16:41:21 | sean-k-mooney | ideally we woudl not bave a boolen config flage to opt into using the hostname | |
| 16:41:26 | sean-k-mooney | ```As currently proposed, one config option will be added | |
| 16:41:28 | sean-k-mooney | (a boolean in ``[libvirt]``, default ``False``) that allows operators | |
| 16:41:30 | sean-k-mooney | to opt in to using hostnames for the mon addresses``` | |