| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2017-04-05 | |||
| 15:37:43 | briancurtin | if you guys need an SDK release, we’re probably close to one. should probably wait on a couple of these load_balancer ones since they’re close to being done and they’re all related | |
| 15:38:31 | sindhu | reedip: for some reason I thought u addressed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/383025/74/doc/source/command-objects/floating-ip.rst@156, are u doing it or shall I do it | |
| 15:39:00 | reedip | sindhu : be my guest if you want to .. I was searching for the patch that merged on 3rd april :) | |
| 15:39:06 | dtroyer | thanks briancurtin. I think there are a couple of things in OSC that go with new/fixed SDK bits. We're cutting a release today or tomorrow for OSC and osc-lib so we're not really blocked on the SDK | |
| 15:40:14 | sindhu | reedip: oh ok | |
| 15:40:25 | dtroyer | sindhu, reedip: actually, it isn't just released, but that version of the SDK needs to be in the minimum in global requirements (requirements.txt) before we can assume it will be present | |
| 15:40:57 | reedip | dtroyer : yeah, thats what is bliocking us and is our requirement ( the SDK needs to be in ou requirements ) | |
| 15:41:52 | sindhu | dtroyer: Oh ok ... but we don't have to be blocked by that now right? | |
| 15:41:58 | ankur-gupta-f4 | briancurtin: for the load balancer ones we are concerned over the functional tests not being run. And we haven't yet been able to verify whether the calls/functionally are working correctly yet. I don't know if you want to wait upon those to release. Else, we can push those all though and deal with fixing them later | |
| 15:42:44 | briancurtin | ankur-gupta-f4: yeah, actually it does look like the functional tests might take a bit so we could be waiting a while. i’ll take a look in about an hour and see if we have anything else necessary to get a release out | |
| 15:44:08 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: [WIP] Introduce Member for Octavia (loadbalancing) https://review.openstack.org/451488 | |
| 15:44:30 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce Member for Octavia (loadbalancing) https://review.openstack.org/451488 | |
| 15:44:31 | ankur-gupta-f4 | that seems best. I would prefer to hold off on merging the LBs till I/we can verify its working as expected locally before merging. | |
| 15:44:54 | dtroyer | sindhu: if an OSC review requires an SDK review to be present to work, yes, you must either handle both cases (with and without the SDK review present) or you must wait until the SDK release that includes that dependent review is in global-requirements. | |
| 15:45:10 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : feel free to let me know if something needs to be done for octaviaclient | |
| 15:45:32 | ankur-gupta-f4 | yea review the initial. Figure out how to deal with that function that just "pass"es | |
| 15:45:59 | reedip | link ? | |
| 15:46:31 | sindhu | dtroyer: Okay, cool. got it ... thanks :) | |
| 15:46:36 | ankur-gupta-f4 | sindhu: reedip: once the SDK 9.15 is released you will need to follow up with a patchset like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/451482/1/global-requirements.txt to bump the global req. then we can merge it | |
| 15:46:50 | ankur-gupta-f4 | reedip: | |
| 15:46:51 | ankur-gupta-f4 | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446223/ | |
| 15:47:08 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : Openstack Proposal bot would do that itself, isnt it ? | |
| 15:47:10 | ankur-gupta-f4 | dtroyer: could use your quick input on how its being implemented as well before i get too down the rabbit hole | |
| 15:47:21 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 ( for Link ) : thanks :)( | |
| 15:47:37 | ankur-gupta-f4 | reedip: i don't think so, since I've had to do it a couple times already | |
| 15:48:05 | reedip | dtroyer : ^^ shouldnt the proposal bot pick it up ? | |
| 15:48:52 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Add 'cliff-commands' Sphinx directive https://review.openstack.org/453383 | |
| 15:48:52 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Add 'cliff-command' Sphinx directive https://review.openstack.org/450322 | |
| 15:49:03 | ankur-gupta-f4 | once merged to global-req, then proposal bot bumps it for all the individual projects as well... i believe | |
| 15:49:42 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 15:50:25 | rabel_b1 | new proposal for you ::) | |
| 15:50:51 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : yeah it should, and you dont need to do it yourself, in the Ideal scenario | |
| 15:50:55 | reedip | rabel_b1 : thanks :) | |
| 15:53:13 | rabel_b1 | reedip: it has some weeknesses that should be fixed when migrating to MultiKey...andSoOn. but i think for now it should be fine. | |
| 15:54:29 | reedip | rabel_b1 : ok , will put it in the review tab :) | |
| 15:55:23 | sindhu | ankur-gupta-f4: but we don't need SDK now for 383025 to work right? | |
| 15:56:53 | reedip | we dont ... I agree | |
| 15:57:10 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add "qos-policy" option to "port create" & "port set" https://review.openstack.org/419236 | |
| 15:57:51 | openstackgerrit | Reedip proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: "floating ip set/unset port" for OSC https://review.openstack.org/383025 | |
| 15:59:29 | dtroyer | reedip, ankur-gupta-f1: the proposal bot creates reviews for projects based on what gets merged into the requirements repo. We have to propose the reviews to requirements. | |
| 15:59:44 | dtroyer | ankur-gupta-f1: what did you want input on? | |
| 16:00:53 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce L7Policy for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/451980 | |
| 16:01:29 | ankur-gupta-f4 | dtroyer: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446223/ | |
| 16:01:38 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce L7Rule for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/452832 | |
| 16:01:42 | ankur-gupta-f4 | to see if its in the fashion that looks okay/works for you. | |
| 16:02:23 | ankur-gupta-f4 | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/447068/ is piece in OSC to initialize it. | |
| 16:02:50 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Bout to head out to airport so will be on/off for the next couple hours but will log back in on the plane. | |
| 16:02:56 | mordred | cdent: the example iin https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/microversion_specification.html#version-discovery says it was taken from nova, but it does not match what nova emits | |
| 16:03:19 | cdent | a) /me shakes tiny fist | |
| 16:03:24 | cdent | b) predates me | |
| 16:03:35 | mordred | k. I mena- I like what's in the spec better | |
| 16:03:36 | cdent | c) give me a few minutes and I'll look into it more closely and fix it | |
| 16:03:47 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 16:03:50 | mordred | but I'm wondering if we should align the spec to nova or try to get nova to add an additional key to theirs? | |
| 16:03:55 | cdent | it is quite likely that what's in the spec is desirable | |
| 16:04:03 | mordred | cdent: (the tl;dr is nova uses "version" to mean max_version) | |
| 16:04:27 | cdent | oh yeah, that's an intentional change | |
| 16:04:30 | mordred | ok. cool | |
| 16:04:32 | cdent | the surrounding tesxt is wrong | |
| 16:04:42 | mordred | I'll make the project-navigator stuff align to the api-wg thing | |
| 16:05:00 | cdent | yes please | |
| 16:06:19 | mordred | cdent: also - for major versions without microversions, min_version and max_version can be omitted or contain empty strings? or only be omitted? or do you care? | |
| 16:08:24 | cdent | mordred: as far as I'm aware we haven't yet provided guidance for discovery in a non microversioned world, but my interpretation is that 'id' takes on the meaning of "the actual version you're getting, majorly" and min and max ought to be omitted | |
| 16:08:48 | reedip | sindhu : I updated the latest PS with the changes mentioned by dtroyer | |
| 16:09:09 | cdent | mordred: so, basically, keep id, put the version in there, leave min and max out | |
| 16:09:43 | sindhu | reedip: great! thanks :) | |
| 16:10:04 | dtroyer | is the presence/absense of min_version and max_version how we would detect microversion support? | |
| 16:10:31 | cdent | dtroyer: that seems to be the implication | |
| 16:10:38 | cdent | but I'm not sure if that's intentional or not | |
| 16:10:40 | openstackgerrit | Reedip proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: "floating ip set/unset port" for OSC https://review.openstack.org/383025 | |
| 16:10:51 | dtroyer | I'm generalizing the client-side negotiation code to put into ksa… | |
| 16:12:52 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: "floating ip set/unset port" for OSC https://review.openstack.org/383025 | |
| 16:13:21 | mordred | cdent: https://review.openstack.org/453361 | |
| 16:13:49 | mordred | dtroyer: that is my hunch, yes | |
| 16:14:27 | cdent | mordred: cool, will look properly soon | |
| 16:14:29 | mordred | dtroyer: and ooh - you adding version discovery and microversion-per-call suport? or just one or just theother? | |
| 16:14:50 | dtroyer | I've started with the negotiation, will be doing per-call since OSC needs it | |
| 16:15:04 | mordred | woot | |
| 16:15:08 | dtroyer | mordred: https://review.openstack.org/451618 | |
| 16:15:15 | mordred | I've been avoiding bothering with that so far | |
| 16:15:18 | dtroyer | it's all in OSC for development ATM | |
| 16:19:21 | mordred | dtroyer: ah - so cool - I _also_ want major version discovery and have a minor portion of that somewhere - but can add that in when you're happy with what you've got there for microversions | |
| 16:19:25 | mordred | (and I like what you've got there) | |
| 16:29:28 | openstackgerrit | Chris Dent proposed openstack/api-wg master: Remove reference to nova on version discovery https://review.openstack.org/453744 | |
| 16:35:11 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce L7Policy for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/451980 | |
| 16:38:09 | mordred | dtroyer: also, I finally got around to writing a patch to horizon to add suport for downloading clouds.yaml files | |
| 16:38:20 | mordred | (fixing tests right now) | |
| 16:38:49 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce L7Policy for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/451980 | |
| 16:39:04 | dtroyer | mordred: \o/ | |
| 16:44:04 | mordred | dtroyer: remote: https://review.openstack.org/453669 Add support for downloading clouds.yaml files | |
| 16:50:49 | dtroyer | mordred: Nice. Maybe OSC should grow this too, and maybe both need to have a way to pull the update for the vendors file? | |
| 16:52:03 | mordred | dtroyer: yah - I have some patches I'll push up later today about vendors files too | |
| 16:52:28 | dtroyer | coolio | |
| 16:52:29 | mordred | dtroyer: and I've been thinking of making a few osc commands like "add cloud" that could injest a clouds.yaml from a vendor into an existing one | |
| 16:53:20 | dtroyer | yeah, thats a natural place to manage that file... | |
| 16:53:34 | mordred | ++ | |
| 16:57:17 | reedip | stevemar: there ? | |
| 17:00:49 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Enable to create legacy router https://review.openstack.org/449176 | |
| 18:10:40 | openstackgerrit | Nakul Dahiwade proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce L7Policy for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/451980 | |
| 18:46:19 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Develop api.versions for microversion discovery https://review.openstack.org/451618 | |