Posted	Nick	Remark
#openstack-sdks - 2020-11-02
12:27:08	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
12:39:34	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
12:53:55	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
12:54:07	openstackgerrit	Cédric Jeanneret (Tengu) proposed openstack/keystoneauth stable/train: Cleanup session on delete https://review.opendev.org/760911
12:54:07	openstackgerrit	Cédric Jeanneret (Tengu) proposed openstack/keystoneauth stable/train: Cleanup session on delete https://review.opendev.org/760911
12:55:30	openstackgerrit	Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Compute: Add user id support for keypair https://review.opendev.org/576507
12:55:46	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
13:17:40	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
13:38:58	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
14:01:47	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
14:09:21	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
14:31:16	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch compute flavors from novaclient/direct to SDK https://review.opendev.org/750151
14:34:09	openstackgerrit	Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch compute flavors from novaclient/direct to SDK https://review.opendev.org/750151
17:00:51	openstackgerrit	Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch console url show operations to SDK https://review.opendev.org/751262
17:08:42	openstackgerrit	Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add 'openstack server evacuate' command https://review.opendev.org/643578
17:23:24	openstackgerrit	Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add support for 'keypairs list --project' parameter https://review.opendev.org/755074
18:57:07	lbragstad	curious if anyone is around for some stable reviews? https://review.opendev.org/#/c/746967/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/746968/
20:34:07	openstackgerrit	Merged openstack/python-openstackclient stable/ussuri: Add system role assignment tests for users and groups https://review.opendev.org/746967
23:22:06	openstackgerrit	Merged openstack/python-openstackclient stable/train: Add API check for server_groups.list https://review.opendev.org/758079
#openstack-sdks - 2020-11-03
05:47:16	openstackgerrit	zhufl proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix invalid assertIsNotNone statement https://review.opendev.org/761053
05:59:51	openstackgerrit	wu.shiming proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE https://review.opendev.org/761055
09:41:56	nightmare_unreal	Thanks . Hopefully it's correct this time
09:41:56	nightmare_unreal	brinzhang_: stephenfin can you review the code : https://review.opendev.org/#/c/741181/
09:50:14	brinzhang_	nightmare_unreal: ack, added in my list
09:50:32	nightmare_unreal	thanks
10:07:14	openstackgerrit	Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix formatting of the flavor properties https://review.opendev.org/760906
10:11:40	dtantsur	hey folks! we're working on ansible 2.10 support in bifrost, does this ring any bells:
10:11:42	dtantsur	https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/6302f5b438e24bfd95b14c25fccb11d0/log/job-output.txt#673
10:11:47	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: ^^?
10:11:57	dtantsur	the same code used to work a few days ago
10:12:50	gtema	maybe https://review.opendev.org/#/c/746883/?
10:13:15	dtantsur	have we released that&
10:13:17	dtantsur	?
10:13:47	gtema	I guess not
10:13:57	gtema	it's merged, but not released in galaxy
10:14:34	sshnaidm|rover	right, not released
10:14:35	dtantsur	we're using galaxy, so it's not it
10:14:52	dtantsur	https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/e05c62547b3d547ffb433d1cf66e82b353f24262/lib/ansible/utils/collection_loader/_collection_finder.py#L398 is not new at all, I wonder why we only hit it now
10:15:21	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, I think I got these errors while using old ansible-lint
10:15:27	sshnaidm|rover	looks very familair
10:15:38	dtantsur	mmm, that's a hint! it's the linter job that fails
10:15:47	dtantsur	how old was that, do you recall?
10:16:31	dtantsur	I think we're using the latest one though..
10:16:48	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, https://review.opendev.org/#/c/753760/
10:16:58	sshnaidm|rover	seems like related to py3.8
10:17:17	dtantsur	sweet
10:19:08	sshnaidm|rover	and this https://review.opendev.org/#/c/754074/
10:19:19	sshnaidm|rover	moved to bionic since it doesn't have 3.8 as default
10:19:37	dtantsur	avoiding 2.10 is an option, but we cannot do it forever
10:19:44	dtantsur	(especially since the actual code works)
10:20:58	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, where is your ansible-lint config?
10:21:51	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: not much interesting there https://opendev.org/openstack/bifrost/src/branch/master/.ansible-lint
10:24:34	sshnaidm|rover	still 1.0.0? https://opendev.org/openstack/bifrost/src/branch/master/ansible-collections-requirements.yml
10:25:05	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: is it a hard cap or a lower cap?
10:25:20	sshnaidm|rover	I think hard
10:25:37	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, just for an experiment, I'd try to run it on ubuntu-bionic
10:25:47	sshnaidm|rover	to know if it's py3.8 issue
10:26:34	sshnaidm|rover	but most probably not..
10:26:36	dtantsur	I can change basepython locally
10:26:55	dtantsur	(I see it on my fedora just as well, but it also uses 3.8
10:28:07	dtantsur	fails with 3.6 just as well
10:30:30	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, where do you install collection in the job?
10:30:47	dtantsur	okay, I think I got it. lemme show you in a minute
10:34:22	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/760127/5/tools/ansible-lint.sh
10:35:51	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, oh, so it didn't find collection
10:36:23	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: it DID find the collection, that's the problem
10:36:39	dtantsur	it found it via some implicit logic and choked on it
10:37:44	openstackgerrit	Cédric Jeanneret (Tengu) proposed openstack/keystoneauth stable/train: Cleanup session on delete https://review.opendev.org/760911
10:38:44	sshnaidm|rover	tbh hard to understand where it's installed.. why not to build from ~/src/openstack/openstack-ansible-collections or whatever it is
10:39:02	sshnaidm|rover	that way you can use the newest from repo, not 1.0.0 release..
10:40:36	dtantsur	sshnaidm|rover: you mean, install it from source? maybe that's what we should do, dunno
10:40:45	sshnaidm|rover	dtantsur, yep
10:40:46	dtantsur	(the linters job always uses a pre-created source installation)
11:03:51	stephenfin	gtema: Any chance you could stick https://review.opendev.org/#/c/757874/ on your review queue, please? :)
11:04:32	gtema	yes. BTW you make me disappointed in my changes ;-)
11:05:34	stephenfin	gtema: Ha, sorry. I hope I wasn't too harsh /o\ Let me know if you disagree with anything, of course
11:05:42	gtema	no problem
11:05:51	stephenfin	(The main problem was the performance issue of the fetch-update proxy calls, btw. The rest were nits and could be ignored)
11:05:59	gtema	btw, regarding your comment on delete_flavor_extra_specs_property calling get_Flavor 2 times
11:06:09	gtema	are you sure? Cause it actually should not be the case
11:06:42	stephenfin	I'm not sure, no. I was just reading the the openstacksdk code and it seemed like it would do a fetch each time
11:06:49	stephenfin	Perhaps I'm misreading it?
11:06:53	gtema	nope, it should not
11:07:17	gtema	https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/proxy.py#L305
11:07:48	gtema	this is the get_resource, which is in the end being invoked to decide what we pass to it: id or instance of the object.
11:07:58	gtema	in reality it doesn't invoke the fetch again
11:08:54	stephenfin	You're calling it with flavor.id though
11:09:09	gtema	yes, and it is enough for it
11:09:15	stephenfin	which means you trigger this path, I think? https://opendev.org/openstack/openstacksdk/src/branch/master/openstack/proxy.py#L327-L331
11:09:44	stephenfin	though i didn't check if that actually fetches things
11:09:45	gtema	if I pass complete object it has no advantage, but disadvantage of passing more data to other function (especially ugly in tests)
11:10:14	gtema	even here no request is being send
11:10:41	stephenfin	oh, okay, I wasn't expecting that
11:11:09	gtema	without commit this is not doing anything
11:11:13	gtema	no problem with that
11:11:14	stephenfin	in that case, ignore that comment :) sorry for the confusion
11:11:24	gtema	no problem
11:12:27	gtema	I am actually since perhaps a year confused on pretty much that issue - passing more than require is not good (especially for huge objects), but passing less cause some extra functions
11:13:16	stephenfin	yeah, the Resource model and general lazy loading concept it uses does take a bit of time to wrap your head around
11:13:34	gtema	yes, it's woodoo

Earlier   Later