| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-10-22 | |||
| 14:05:58 | stephenfin | frickler: oh, that's a good idea. I didn't think of that | |
| 14:06:07 | stephenfin | that'll do nicely. Thanks, frickler | |
| 14:06:26 | frickler | :) | |
| 14:07:56 | gtema | maybe also `block storage filter list` | |
| 14:08:24 | gtema | not to mix with volume as a resource | |
| 14:10:15 | stephenfin | OSC seems to use volume rather than block storage everywhere (though object store instead of simply object), so I'm not so sure about that one. I think 'volume resource' is as clear as e.g. 'volume service' is | |
| 14:16:17 | gtema | that is exactly what I mean. atm we have volume rather for the resource, than the service. If we want to have command related to the service (if I understood correctly what you mean) I would rather try using different name | |
| 14:18:10 | stephenfin | I agree that we shouldn't overload the term. I'm saying that we're already overloading it though and don't use "block storage" as a term anywhere except some docs. It doesn't seem wise to change direction unless we want to rename the existing commands? | |
| 14:19:06 | gtema | I wouldn't change existing commands, cause they refer to the volume as a resource. Where we refer to volume as a service - we can think | |
| 14:20:21 | gtema | object store is not having a prefix at all and that is already creating confusion (not only in OSC, but also in ansible) | |
| 14:21:02 | stephenfin | hmm, fair. Let me see what it looks like and how it fits with existing commands | |
| 14:22:41 | stephenfin | gtema: How about 'volume service resource filter list'? It's a heck of a mouthful but it works? | |
| 14:23:00 | stephenfin | If not, I'd be tempted to rename 'volume service list' to 'block storage service list' | |
| 14:23:11 | stephenfin | with a deprecated alias, of course | |
| 14:23:22 | gtema | maybe it would be really better in the major release introduce block_storage and object_storage | |
| 14:23:55 | gtema | `block storage service list` sounds much better to me | |
| 14:24:38 | stephenfin | so also 'block storage service cluster' for clusters of block storage services? | |
| 14:25:17 | gtema | service cluster? not `block storage cluster`? | |
| 14:25:40 | gtema | which cluster you mean? | |
| 14:27:09 | stephenfin | They're clusters of services https://docs.openstack.org/cinder/latest/contributor/api_microversion_history.html#id7 | |
| 14:27:33 | gtema | oh great, this is not on https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/v3 | |
| 14:27:39 | stephenfin | I think it's a HA thing, but I'm not really sure /o\ I'll have to ask Gorka | |
| 14:27:46 | stephenfin | Yeah, they're missing a few things from the docs :( | |
| 14:28:42 | gtema | very sad - really lot | |
| 14:29:08 | gtema | anyway, in this case I would rather go for `block storage cluster` | |
| 14:29:27 | gtema | I do not think using `service` inside in the command is useful | |
| 14:30:28 | gtema | missing stuff in docs mean we might miss lot in SDK | |
| 14:55:27 | gtema | stephenfin, if you are still around - is nova /limits still accept tenant_id as query_param? https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=show-rate-and-absolute-limits-detail#show-rate-and-absolute-limits | |
| 15:27:45 | stephenfin | gtema: yes, it's still tenant_id | |
| 15:28:02 | gtema | ok, thks | |
| 15:28:13 | stephenfin | there's a blueprint to change it to project_id (ditto for all other remaining references to tenant) but that hasn't landed yet | |
| 15:28:34 | gtema | good, adding it this way | |
| 15:31:10 | gtema | uhm, and quota-set is also non-standard (whatever standard actually is) - no support for ?usage=, but with /quota-sets/XXX/details | |
| 15:33:11 | stephenfin | yeah, there's a lot of those in the nova API, sadly | |
| 15:33:37 | stephenfin | i.e. 'GET /servers/{id}/detail' instead of e.g. 'GET /servers/{id}?detail=1' | |
| 15:34:45 | gtema | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/763414 is making me doubt in myself | |
| 15:35:01 | gtema | check passes, gate fails (single test I mean) | |
| 15:36:36 | stephenfin | not entirely related but why is HypervisorTests.test_hypervisor_list calling 'hypervisor show'? :) | |
| 15:37:11 | stephenfin | that's a strange failure | |
| 15:37:15 | gtema | nice question | |
| 15:39:39 | stephenfin | so the test fails at 2021-10-22 15:04:02.759154 after 5.132781s | |
| 15:39:45 | gtema | ah, cause I first try to get list of existing ids | |
| 15:42:11 | stephenfin | there's the request hitting the API at 15:04:02.564172 https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/1f6c15565b2840bfb6e4f09ec7714ea0/log/controller/logs/screen-n-api.txt#1979 | |
| 15:43:07 | gtema | apparently OSC receives empty response back | |
| 15:46:20 | stephenfin | the compute service is still up | |
| 15:46:30 | stephenfin | https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/1f6c15565b2840bfb6e4f09ec7714ea0/log/controller/logs/screen-n-cpu.txt#7018 | |
| 15:47:58 | gtema | I'm not able to understand why check and gate behaves differently - and this 2 times | |
| 15:48:07 | gtema | maybe I should rebase | |
| 15:48:22 | stephenfin | I'd suggest trying it. That's weird | |
| 15:48:36 | opendevreview | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch hypervisor operations to SDK https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/763414 | |
| 15:49:14 | gtema | well, and if check will fail now I would be even more confused ;-) | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-10-23 | |||
| 12:39:30 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 12:45:03 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-10-25 | |||
| 08:18:01 | thomasb06 | gtema: Hello. The lines are two long, would you any guidelines in this case: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/814395 | |
| 08:18:14 | thomasb06 | sometimes the class name is huge | |
| 10:59:31 | gtema | thomasb06 - pushed update to this change | |
| 11:32:25 | opendevreview | Jiří Stránský proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Add documentation links to README.md https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/814782 | |
| 15:02:37 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 16:00:45 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 16:45:10 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 18:55:00 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 20:41:49 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 22:34:38 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| 23:40:28 | opendevreview | Diwei Zhu proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Switch server backup to sdk. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/814332 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-10-26 | |||
| 07:15:12 | thomasb06 | gtema: Hello. There's only one commit to check, maybe I can send another bunch of docstring reformats? | |
| 07:15:33 | gtema | sure, shoot it | |
| 08:25:07 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Add documentation links to README.md https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/814782 | |
| 08:29:34 | thomasb06 | gtema: all the files of the first batch are in conflict. Would you know a command to fetch everything back from the server? | |
| 08:34:18 | thomasb06 | done one by one, there were only 4 | |
| 08:34:42 | gtema | ok | |
| 08:54:54 | thomasb06 | the command `git review -v -y` returns the following error: https://x0.at/0QLb.txt | |
| 08:55:58 | gtema | maybe as before you have empty commit or something similar? | |
| 09:14:14 | frickler | thomasb06: gtema: "change https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/814370 closed" you are trying to push again a change that was already merged | |
| 09:14:26 | frickler | likely need to rebase your stack on top of current master | |
| 09:14:53 | gtema | ah, sure | |
| 09:14:58 | frickler | or feature branch even | |
| 09:45:27 | thomasb06 | frickler: wow, how do you do that? | |
| 09:50:29 | thomasb06 | If run `git pull origin feature/r1`, it says "Already up to date." | |
| 09:53:40 | frickler | thomasb06: I usually have the branches checked out locally, so I'd do "git checkout feature/r1;git pull;git checkout my-branch;git rebase feature/r1" | |
| 09:56:21 | thomasb06 | let me try | |
| 10:05:32 | thomasb06 | now there's a new message: https://x0.at/1fyC.txt | |
| 10:08:02 | gtema | thomasb06 - you are having fun trying things nobody from us ever tried as I see :) | |
| 10:08:21 | frickler | thomasb06: that means that you have either messed up the gerrit remote or your public key | |
| 10:08:46 | frickler | thomasb06: you could try to remove the remote and recreate it with "git review -s" | |
| 10:09:01 | gtema | try really doing those manually one by one. I guess the problem is that you rely on script to generate changes and under some conditions things are not going it is expected by platform | |
| 10:10:04 | gtema | we should plan apply https://git.tsi-dev.otc-service.com/ecosystem/service_catalog/-/merge_requests/19 on Friday | |
| 10:10:14 | thomasb06 | It seems ok now: https://x0.at/zrAx.txt ? No idea what I did wrong... | |
| 10:10:26 | gtema | sorry, wrong room | |
| 10:13:28 | thomasb06 | gtema: /we is reliefed | |
| 10:13:39 | thomasb06 | * /m | |
| 10:27:00 | opendevreview | Thomas Bucaioni proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Reindentation of the docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/815467 | |
| 10:27:24 | thomasb06 | frickler: cheers | |
| 10:27:54 | thomasb06 | gtema: do I keep going, or it gets a bit messy afterwards? | |
| 10:29:11 | gtema | You can keep going. Just try to make not depending changes (each from/to current HEAD) and not stacked changes like last time | |
| 10:30:23 | thomasb06 | so `git reset HEAD` after each commit? | |
| 10:48:36 | gtema | Yeah | |
| 12:00:45 | opendevreview | Thomas Bucaioni proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Reindentation of the docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/815476 | |
| 12:02:13 | opendevreview | Thomas Bucaioni proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Reindentation of the docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/815477 | |
| 12:03:57 | opendevreview | Thomas Bucaioni proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Reindentation of the docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/815478 | |
| 12:05:15 | opendevreview | Thomas Bucaioni proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Reindentation of the docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/815480 | |