Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-sdks - 2020-03-04
21:25:20 mordred efried: nope. that's one of teh nice things about yaml
21:25:32 umbSublime Thanks mordred !
21:25:40 mordred Shrews: well - no need to wait - there you are, all nice and ready for you
21:25:42 efried mordred: +2
21:25:44 mordred \o/
21:26:09 mordred umbSublime: thak you - that was very helpful debugging info - and I imagine you won't be the only one to hit that
21:31:48 umbSublime That was the easy part ;)
21:36:25 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Build utility image for using osc https://review.opendev.org/711246
21:36:25 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add bindep file https://review.opendev.org/711055
22:04:25 openstackgerrit Sam Morrison proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Always display direction for security group rules https://review.opendev.org/709017
22:05:19 openstackgerrit Sam Morrison proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Always display direction for security group rules https://review.opendev.org/709017
22:22:03 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Fix H236 and remove exclusion https://review.opendev.org/698066
22:27:00 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Remove from __future__ lines https://review.opendev.org/698067
22:27:01 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Test with and assert support for python3 https://review.opendev.org/710641
22:57:07 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix: Set image name correctly if filename is not passed https://review.opendev.org/710368
23:19:52 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk stable/train: Handle HTTP errors in add/remove router interface calls https://review.opendev.org/710994
23:19:56 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk stable/train: Fix error handling on add/remove router iface calls https://review.opendev.org/710995
#openstack-sdks - 2020-03-05
00:20:16 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Handle old status-less placement service https://review.opendev.org/711328
10:26:19 dtantsur mordred: yep, as far as I remember, futurist extends stdlib
11:43:29 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add port property: ip_allocation https://review.opendev.org/711237
12:06:01 mgoddard I think ansible 2.9.6 has broken openstack modules
12:06:12 mgoddard we're seeing this everywhere in kolla:
12:06:15 mgoddard https://b317bafa0db642d61e9b-babe6b68bec526aecbe80deed799da2b.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/711295/3/check/kolla-ansible-centos-source/b02cb5e/primary/logs/ansible/deploy
12:06:18 mgoddard py2 and py3
13:30:38 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Implement If-Match support for Neutron resources https://review.opendev.org/710030
13:45:16 frickler mordred: you just got me slightly confused by adding sdk core to osc core, doesn't that preempt the governance patch a bit?
14:00:45 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Include "fields" to "SecurityGroup" query parameters https://review.opendev.org/710820
14:22:52 mgoddard odyssey4me: hi
14:50:22 mordred mgoddard: AWESOME. I'm poking and trying to reproduce the traceback at the moment but havne't been able to yet - might need to hold a test node
14:50:39 mgoddard mordred: I have more info
14:50:48 mordred frickler: yeah - I was in there doing core team update from the mailing list and figured I just go ahead and take care f that too ... might be a little ahead of myself
14:50:51 mgoddard mordred: see my comment on https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/67577/files
14:50:56 mgoddard it's an easy fix
14:51:11 mgoddard just patching up kolla then I'll raise a bug in ansible and push a fix
14:51:21 mgoddard seems like everything is breaking this week
14:51:27 mordred aha! cool. and yes - it does seem that way
14:51:57 mordred mgoddard: fwiw - once we've switched the modules to the collection, we can co-gate them on kolla
14:52:03 mordred and prevent stuff like that
14:52:42 mgoddard mordred: I think the existing jobs would have caught it. It was a bit of custom code for 2.8 in a backport
14:52:50 mordred AH
14:52:51 mgoddard looks like no CI for 2.8?
14:53:08 mordred yeah - I don't think we run openstack jobs on stable-2.8 - which is probably a mistake :)
14:53:14 mordred let me go see if I can rectify that
14:54:06 mgoddard that would be nice
14:57:26 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add ansible stable-2.9 job and run 2.8 and 2.9 https://review.opendev.org/711471
14:58:48 mordred mgoddard: ^^ that - and remote: https://review.opendev.org/711474 Run openstacksdk functional jobs on ansible 2.8 and 2.9
14:59:21 mordred and yeah - if the tests had been hooked up that should have caught that
14:59:49 mordred mgoddard: ping me when you push up the ansible fix and I can lgtm it
15:06:54 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Switch to futurist for concurrency https://review.opendev.org/711301
15:07:10 mordred dtantsur: that one ^^ should be green now
15:08:33 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Deal with collection build modifying tree https://review.opendev.org/711033
15:08:39 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Fix license metadata https://review.opendev.org/711035
15:08:45 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Clean up minor build quibbles https://review.opendev.org/711036
15:12:51 dtantsur nice!
15:12:52 mordred brtknr: the magnum function tests for sdk seem to always be failing - and it seems to be related to detecting magnum: https://4689b6461ef076a1f80e-32e19aab5c30ebc59039fa10c249436d.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/711301/1/check/openstacksdk-functional-devstack-magnum/9a10a15/testr_results.html
15:13:30 mordred brtknr: this makes me think our devstack job is not configured properly ... do you know anything about magnum devstack job config?
15:14:24 mordred dtantsur: and yeah - I think that's a nice improvement and should let us make things nicer without making sdk unuable in the services
15:17:50 Shrews oh good. i was also trying to reproduce the strictversion thing without success. glad to page irc back in and see the issue was found
15:18:10 mgoddard mordred: https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/68043
15:20:25 rm_work what is the plan for the next SDK release?
15:22:29 mgoddard mordred, Shrews: I'll send something to the ML about ansible 2.8.9. Any [tags] I should use?
15:23:47 rm_work (I ask about the next release, because I need to use the feature I just added in a client change)
15:26:30 mordred brtknr: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/9a10a15e2a2e4af18021948078429d1c/log/job-output.txt#50351 this might have something to do with it - from what I can tell magnum IS running in that cloud
15:26:52 mordred rm_work: I think we're pretty good for a next release - all of the recent things people need have landed - let me double check that
15:27:37 Shrews though maybe i just did
15:32:42 mordred Shrews: yeah - although this one seems weird - it seems like the magnum is completely there and operational - and we're detecting that it's been disabled by config
15:33:31 mordred Shrews: check https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/9a10a15e2a2e4af18021948078429d1c/log/job-output.txt#50351
15:34:41 Shrews yep, that's what i saw when i looked at it last. until we make other groups care about supporting their services into sdk/osc instead of expecting us to have deep knowledge on all-the-things, it probably doesn't matter that it's broken
15:35:01 mordred yeah - except randomly today I'm worried that there's some basic sdk bug
15:35:19 mordred because it's _no_ disabled by config in the clouds.yaml
15:35:56 mordred so even if magnum is broken - we're at the very least returning the wrong error here
15:40:55 openstackgerrit Sagi Shnaidman proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Add Openstack guidelines spec from Ansible https://review.opendev.org/704558
16:00:46 elmiko API SIG office hour now open \o/
16:01:06 mordred elmiko: does that mean it's time to start drinking?
16:01:43 elmiko hmm, not a bad idea XD
16:12:10 tosky from the flam^H^H^H^Hdiscussion on the list and dtantsur's comment, it seems to me that having OSC autonegotiating the last possible microversion is a good thing, because the high level clients should be user-focused and hide the details
16:12:14 tosky do I get it correctly?
16:12:43 dtantsur o/
16:14:51 elmiko tosky: that makes sense to me, fwiw
16:15:30 elmiko one question though, by "last possible microversion" do you mean the highest version or lowest?
16:16:21 tosky highest - as in "I want all the supported features"
16:20:25 mordred so ...
16:20:49 elmiko tosky: ack, thanks
16:20:56 mordred there's some good scrollback in here from yesterday between me and umbSublime where I explained a slightly altered view of that but which mostly agrees with dtantsur
16:22:05 mordred but the tl;dr is that a) I agree with that as a goal but b) sdk needs to know what the 'latest' microversion it can undersatnd without blowing up is - because if it's expecting a response and a microversion radically changes it, it needs to know how to deal with that
16:22:46 mordred to me this means that we should in fact strict to always get the latest microversion - and in a perfect world part of the process of adding a new microversion to a service would also be coming and adding a quick mv bump to sdk
16:22:55 mordred in many cases those patches to sdk are trivial
16:23:16 mordred and *much* less work than the corresponding work to add the new api feature
16:23:43 mordred but in some cases they might be more complex - and will require a conversation about how to expose the feature in a way that doesn't break people
16:25:29 mordred in some places we're behind and we need to catch up. in other places, like ironic - people like dtantsur are really good about coming in and bumping the max_microversion and adding fields really quickly
16:28:34 openstackgerrit Monty Taylor proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Build utility image for using osc https://review.opendev.org/711246
16:31:45 tosky thanks
16:34:00 tosky one thing I'd like to point out for the (probably) upcoming goal of making OSC on par with the custom clients: I think it may makes sense in some cases to decouple the improvements OSC and the migration to SDK, if the latter means waiting on a tons of non-implemented feature
16:34:04 tosky features*
16:34:06 tosky that's it
16:38:40 dtroyer tosky: that point seems to get blurred a lot when this topic comes up so thanks for pointing it out. It may not be the last time it is required
16:39:07 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Deal with collection build modifying tree https://review.opendev.org/711033
16:39:08 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Fix license metadata https://review.opendev.org/711035
16:39:09 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Clean up minor build quibbles https://review.opendev.org/711036
16:39:10 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Add Openstack guidelines spec from Ansible https://review.opendev.org/704558

Earlier   Later