| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-03-28 | |||
| 16:45:30 | dtantsur | I'm not sure it really blocks the migration, but I do agree it can be confusing | |
| 17:00:44 | elmiko | catch ya later folks, have a good weekend =) | |
| 17:03:01 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Cleanup split of openstackcloud https://review.openstack.org/648435 | |
| 17:26:45 | openstackgerrit | Ian Y. Choi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: DNM - Start building pdfs of docs https://review.openstack.org/601659 | |
| 17:54:15 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Make PATCH a first class operation and support it for baremetal https://review.openstack.org/647730 | |
| 18:30:09 | elmiko | edleafe++ i like your response to the email | |
| 18:30:41 | edleafe | elmiko: well sure, because I spelled your nick correctly. :) | |
| 18:34:56 | elmiko | LOL | |
| 20:23:12 | dustinc | ubnt 8-port | |
| 20:23:41 | dustinc | love browser-base clients...sorry | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-03-29 | |||
| 05:35:32 | openstackgerrit | Ian Y. Choi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: DNM - Start building pdfs of docs https://review.openstack.org/601659 | |
| 08:26:21 | ITD27M01 | mordred: If you have a second can you review a small change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/648117/ it is very important for us | |
| 09:07:42 | mordred | ITD27M01: wow, it's a field that takes a stringified-json? I suppose I shouldn't ask why it's not just actually a dict type in the mistral server-side | |
| 10:03:56 | ITD27M01 | mordred: Generally, I have no answer to this question. All attributes on mistral api side are strings. This also applies to input [1]. There comment about this from briancurtin [2] | |
| 10:04:04 | ITD27M01 | mordred: Special method to_dict() has created for convertation [3] | |
| 10:04:11 | ITD27M01 | mordred: [1] https://docs.openstack.org/mistral/latest/api/v2.html#executions | |
| 10:04:19 | ITD27M01 | mordred: [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/workflow/v2/execution.py#L44 | |
| 10:04:26 | ITD27M01 | mordred: [3] https://github.com/openstack/mistral/blob/master/mistral/api/controllers/resource.py#L27 | |
| 10:29:23 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Adds missing "params" attribute for creating a Mistral workflow execution https://review.openstack.org/648117 | |
| 14:36:04 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Allow replacing service implementation https://review.openstack.org/648704 | |
| 14:43:19 | brtknr | hello, how do i check openstacksdk version? | |
| 14:45:03 | brtknr | `python -m openstack version` is great but i'd like to get the value from code | |
| 14:49:47 | dtantsur | brtknr: maybe query pbr, like in https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/master/ironic/version.py#L16-L18 ? | |
| 14:49:51 | brtknr | wait, sdk.version.__version__ seems to cut it... is there a "proper" way? | |
| 14:56:09 | gtema | brtknr: print(openstack.version.__version__) works for me | |
| 14:56:37 | gtema | the only possible problem with it, that for openstacksdk==0.10.0 this does not work | |
| 14:56:47 | brtknr | gtema: works for me too! im just wondering if there is a proper way.. | |
| 14:56:54 | brtknr | or this is good enough | |
| 14:57:11 | gtema | well, this is good enough and used also in Ansible to detect sdk version | |
| 14:57:59 | gtema | if you look to openstack.version.py - you will see this is just a short-cut to a longer "proper" way | |
| 15:14:44 | brtknr | gtema: you're right :D | |
| 15:33:55 | brtknr | gtema: I cant find any examples where a comparison is made against openstacksdk version within Ansible openstack modules | |
| 15:34:22 | gtema | brtknr: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/lib/ansible/module_utils/openstack.py#L121 | |
| 15:35:56 | brtknr | gtema: I decided to only look inside `ansible/lib/ansible/modules/cloud/openstack` | |
| 15:36:31 | gtema | happend | |
| 15:36:39 | gtema | s/happend/happens/ | |
| 15:52:37 | brtknr | Does this look okay: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/53757 | |
| 15:55:07 | mordred | brtknr: yeah. that looks good on a quick look (conferencing today) - I assume the tags= parameter will just be silently ignored so we don't have to be fancy with avoiding sending it on earlier sdks? | |
| 15:55:56 | brtknr | Yes earlier sdks still accept tags, but do nothing | |
| 15:56:39 | mordred | cool - then yeah, that looks good to me | |
| 15:57:03 | gtema | oh mordred, we need to speed up clearing ansible PRs | |
| 15:57:30 | mordred | yeah | |
| 15:57:36 | mordred | very much so | |
| 16:07:45 | brtknr | mordred: please ship the updated version... just thought that the check should only be made if there a tag specified at all | |
| 16:11:57 | brtknr | gtema: to be fair, only 50 of 1664 open PRs are openstack related :P | |
| 16:12:42 | gtema | yes, but they are very long pending | |
| 16:12:57 | gtema | some of them are even mine | |
| 16:18:17 | brtknr | gtema: yes I was just looking at os_server_tags.. which another person also appears to have implemented... i wonder how many are dupes | |
| 16:18:36 | gtema | that's why we need to clean things up | |
| 16:18:56 | brtknr | gtema: what happens after shipit tag is applied? | |
| 16:18:58 | gtema | I would need to reimplement os_server_tags to support currently implemented SDK bindings | |
| 16:19:07 | gtema | there should be 2 shipits | |
| 16:19:20 | brtknr | gtema: oh okay | |
| 16:19:26 | gtema | and then it is automatically merged. But only special guys can apply shipit | |
| 16:20:29 | brtknr | gtema: gtema ok cool | |
| 17:10:08 | larsks | Whinge of the day: I wish that the output of the get_* functions in openstacksdk could be used as input to the set_* functions. I'm trying to migrate quotas between two environments, and I wish I could simply new.set_compute_quotas(old.get_compute_quotas()), but of course that doesn't work. | |
| 17:26:12 | dtroyer | larsks: ++ I've wanted to do that in some cases with OSC, the REST APIs themselves do not always work that way | |
| 17:42:36 | dtruong | mordred Can we get https://review.openstack.org/#/c/648334/ merged and then get a new openstacksdk release? | |
| 19:18:39 | openstackgerrit | Jeremy Houser proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Moved skiptest to setUpClass in order to avoid failures in test_snapshot and test_volume_transfer due to presence of openstack commands within setUpClass https://review.openstack.org/648760 | |
| 21:19:16 | mordred | dtruong: I was sort of hoping to get some sort of feedback on that plan from the release team - have you heard anything further? | |
| 21:21:29 | mordred | larsks: that's the goal. it will actually work with the resource layer objects - but we've got some unwinding to do and we haven't ported quota support down into the resource layer | |
| 21:21:55 | mordred | larsks: which is to say, I agree with you and I am sorry it's not there yet | |
| 21:26:06 | dtruong | no, i haven't heard anything | |
| 21:27:08 | mordred | hrm. well - yes - in theory I'm fine moving forward with that plan. let's go poke people again real quick | |
| 21:29:58 | dtruong | ok, let me ping them in the release IRC channel | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-03-30 | |||
| 00:21:05 | larsks | mordred: eh, no worries :). Thanks for taking the time to respond to my whinging. | |
| 10:24:46 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for generating form-post signatures https://review.openstack.org/639760 | |
| 10:24:47 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Remove and rearrange object bonged proxy tests https://review.openstack.org/648352 | |
| 10:24:47 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Move set_temp_url_key logic into resource objects https://review.openstack.org/648347 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-04-01 | |||
| 08:31:06 | openstackgerrit | Rico Lin proposed openstack/keystoneauth master: Update auth plugin name list in document https://review.openstack.org/648920 | |
| 09:23:34 | openstackgerrit | Cao Xuan Hoang proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Expose locked status for Server https://review.openstack.org/648931 | |
| 09:58:36 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for generating form-post signatures https://review.openstack.org/639760 | |
| 09:58:37 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Move set_temp_url_key logic into resource objects https://review.openstack.org/648347 | |
| 09:58:38 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Remove and rearrange object bonged proxy tests https://review.openstack.org/648352 | |
| 10:31:29 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Cleanup split of openstackcloud https://review.openstack.org/648435 | |
| 12:41:19 | openstackgerrit | Cao Xuan Hoang proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Expose locked status for Server https://review.openstack.org/648931 | |
| 15:06:54 | openstackgerrit | Cao Xuan Hoang proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Expose locked status for Server https://review.openstack.org/648931 | |
| 15:39:54 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Move set_temp_url_key logic into resource objects https://review.openstack.org/648347 | |
| 15:39:54 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for generating form-post signatures https://review.openstack.org/639760 | |
| 15:39:55 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Remove and rearrange object bonged proxy tests https://review.openstack.org/648352 | |
| 15:43:07 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/os-api-ref master: trivial: Remove unused attribute https://review.openstack.org/649079 | |
| 16:32:49 | cyberpear | It seems like newer versions of opentack sdk barf if a domain is not provided, but older versions accept no domain just fine. Is this an accurate assessment? Is this expected? | |
| 16:33:11 | cyberpear | (I noticed because my ansible playbooks broke on the step of 'os_user') | |
| 19:56:42 | openstackgerrit | Jim Rollenhagen proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Ignore case in security group rule --ethertype https://review.openstack.org/649174 | |
| 19:57:48 | jroll | ^ fairly easy review :) | |
| 20:03:21 | cyberpear | looks good to me | |
| 20:06:01 | dtroyer | jroll: Really, we didn't already do that? /me shakes head… | |
| 20:06:20 | jroll | right? I was surprised | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2019-04-02 | |||
| 07:46:09 | openstackgerrit | Cao Xuan Hoang proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Expose locked status for Server https://review.openstack.org/648931 | |
| 08:51:42 | pas-ha | hi all, plz review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/564200 (add user password locking capabilities to openstack CLI, supported by Keystone since Rocky) | |
| 10:21:34 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Move Orchestration methods into Proxy https://review.openstack.org/649273 | |
| 10:40:34 | mordred | gtema: nice call on importing resource into normalize :) | |
| 10:41:17 | mordred | gtema: I think you probably already have thought this - but once we're done squishing all of these things together, I hope _normalize.py goes away and we just use the Resource definitions to define the data models | |
| 11:20:33 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/os-api-ref master: trivial: Remove unused attribute https://review.openstack.org/649079 | |
| 13:40:19 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Volume backup functional test tweak https://review.openstack.org/649327 | |
| 13:41:53 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Allow dynamic properties on Resource https://review.openstack.org/649329 | |
| 14:44:08 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Move Orchestration methods into Proxy https://review.openstack.org/649273 | |
| 16:24:22 | Shrews | mordred: i was thinking a bit about the statsd key formatting issue (wrt to nodepool). it'd be convenient if the caller could pass a method to use to format the key. but looking at how we pass the statsd info all the way down to Proxy... geesh that's a mess. adding a new param for the formatting func is painful. | |
| 16:25:10 | mordred | Shrews: yeah - I thought about a similar thing and had a similar self response | |
| 16:25:11 | Shrews | somehow factoring that portion out would be ideal.... | |