| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2022-05-25 | |||
| 06:34:42 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Revert "Raise minimum OpenStack SDK version to 0.99.0" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843192 | |
| 09:08:30 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Revert "Raise minimum OpenStack SDK version to 0.99.0" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843192 | |
| 09:12:21 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix python-dev reference in bindep https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843124 | |
| 09:51:50 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/cliff master: Migrate Python 3.6/7 jobs to Python 3.8 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/843123 | |
| 11:55:52 | opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/os-service-types master: Add Python 3.8 and 3.9 to supported runtimes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-service-types/+/843266 | |
| 12:25:30 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Rework caching https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/837802 | |
| 13:52:34 | frickler | gtema: ^^ as I mentioned in the review, do you think it is worth doing a 0.99.1 release with the new caching? or give it a few days first? or do you have something else in the queue you'd want to wait for? | |
| 13:53:36 | gtema | we can give it a try. I wanted overall to gather some more feedback on where it is painful (as I see now in Ansible/TripleO/Bifrost/etc) | |
| 13:53:47 | gtema | but no problem making 0.99.1 | |
| 14:07:49 | opendevreview | Jan Horstmann proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Return details in baremetal_node_info when iterating over all machines https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/839776 | |
| 16:18:29 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: requirements: Remove explicit pbr dependency https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842346 | |
| 16:18:29 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: requirements: Remove explicit pyparsing dependency https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842345 | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Defer loading cmd2 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842348 | |
| 16:18:30 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: requirements: Remove explicit python-subunit dependency https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842347 | |
| 16:18:31 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Remove final use of pkg_resources https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842350 | |
| 16:18:31 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Defer loading PyYAML https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/842349 | |
| 16:18:32 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Update Python testing per Zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/843312 | |
| 17:38:49 | eandersson | gtema, frickler: yea please make a 0.99.1 so we can test it with Senlin | |
| 18:01:25 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Adds mechanisms to extend OpenstackModule behaviors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843324 | |
| 18:01:26 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_node_info to use new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843325 | |
| 18:03:56 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_node_info to use new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843325 | |
| 18:07:23 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/cliff stable/train: [Train-Only] Remove lower-constraints https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/826876 | |
| 18:07:25 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/cliff master: setup.cfg: Replace dashes with underscores https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/787931 | |
| 18:48:08 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_inspect to be compatible with new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843334 | |
| 18:55:05 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Adds mechanisms to extend OpenstackModule behaviors https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843324 | |
| 19:01:26 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_inspect to be compatible with new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843334 | |
| 19:17:57 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_inspect to be compatible with new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843334 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2022-05-26 | |||
| 04:37:13 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_inspect to be compatible with new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843334 | |
| 05:33:41 | opendevreview | Rafael Castillo proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Update baremetal_inspect to be compatible with new sdk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843334 | |
| 08:45:43 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843419 | |
| 10:02:04 | stephenfin | gtema: A lot of the cloud layer functions take a 'filters' argument, and the docstrings for this suggest you can use jmespath expressions to generate the filters. However, it seems this functionality has been lost in the move to using the proxy. What do we want to do? | |
| 10:02:38 | stephenfin | I think we can either update the docstring to reflect the change in behavior, or modify all those functions to re-add this capability. The former is easier, the latter is better if people actually use this functionality | |
| 10:15:21 | jm1 | stephenfin: some cloud layer functions still use the filters argument to postprocess results, i.e. identity search_* functions such as search_users() still use _utils._filter_list() | |
| 10:15:48 | stephenfin | Yeah, I assume that is an oversight though and those will change | |
| 10:16:29 | jm1 | stephenfin: we had some discussions about that some time ago and i think gtema did not yet decide on that yet. in the end someone has to (re)implement them | |
| 10:17:23 | jm1 | stephenfin: we use filters in a lot of *_info modules in ansible openstack collection and thus would like to continue using them to break less use cases | |
| 10:18:05 | jm1 | stephenfin: gtema has public holiday today and will be back tomorrow ;) | |
| 10:20:47 | stephenfin | jm1: Thanks for the info (on both fronts) | |
| 12:00:07 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for network functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843435 | |
| 12:00:07 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Remove unused normalization helpers https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843434 | |
| 12:00:08 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for image functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843437 | |
| 12:00:08 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for accelerator functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843436 | |
| 12:00:09 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for identity functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843439 | |
| 12:00:09 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for block storage functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843438 | |
| 12:00:10 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for object store functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843440 | |
| 12:00:11 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Update docstrings for compute functions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843441 | |
| 12:06:13 | gtema | My garden shed is disassembled, pause before preparing foundation for the new one. Repeating for myself about filters: | |
| 12:06:31 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: compute: Add support for os-simple-tenant-usages API https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843442 | |
| 12:06:37 | gtema | We should try implementing filters deep in base proxy list function | |
| 12:24:00 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: compute: Add support for instance actions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843449 | |
| 12:24:00 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: compute: Correct some docstrings https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843448 | |
| 12:24:01 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: WIP: compute: Add functional tests for server events https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843450 | |
| 12:50:26 | opendevreview | Lajos Katona proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add support for CRUD operations for QoS minimum packet rate rule https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/810559 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2022-05-27 | |||
| 06:07:10 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843419 | |
| 06:28:44 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Use bifrost's stable/yoga branch for jobs with OpenStack SDK 0.x.x https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843569 | |
| 07:16:56 | opendevreview | Jan Horstmann proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Return details in baremetal_node_info when iterating over all machines https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/839776 | |
| 07:38:25 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Use bifrost's stable/yoga branch for jobs with OpenStack SDK 0.x.x https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843569 | |
| 09:31:55 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [DNM] Added generic resource filtering by name_or_id, jmespath and dicts https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843587 | |
| 09:32:55 | jm1 | gtema: moin :) filters proof of concept for discussion https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843587 | |
| 09:33:38 | jm1 | gtema: is this similar to what you had in mind? | |
| 09:34:09 | gtema | yes, the direction is right | |
| 09:34:31 | gtema | we might need to think how to deal with whichever filters are supported or not | |
| 09:35:08 | gtema | and list should never get name_or_id argument | |
| 09:39:56 | jm1 | gtema: name_or_id could be replaced with a jsonpath filter in "filters" or something similar | |
| 09:40:58 | gtema | well, the point is that you should not call list function when you expect single entry | |
| 09:41:42 | gtema | for us it was always: if name_or_id is given we invoke search, otherwise go to list with filters | |
| 09:41:53 | gtema | s/search/find/ | |
| 09:48:26 | jm1 | gtema: makes sense. so we drop name_or_id from Resource.list() in that patch. | |
| 09:48:41 | gtema | yeah, I would say we should | |
| 09:48:53 | gtema | we do not want to have even more breaking changes ;-) | |
| 09:49:09 | jm1 | gtema: Cloud layer search_* functions always returned lists even with name_or_id given, unlike find functions. To keep this functionality we could add jsonpath expr. or similar things to filters in cloud function | |
| 09:49:53 | jm1 | gtema: maybe let me code an example, hard to describe.. | |
| 09:50:06 | gtema | yes, we can do with cloud functions pretty much everything what we now need | |
| 09:50:08 | gtema | yupp | |
| 09:50:50 | jm1 | gtema: what did you mean "we might need to think how to deal with whichever filters are supported or not"? like dropping jmespath stuff or something? | |
| 09:51:13 | gtema | not really | |
| 09:51:38 | gtema | we pass already query params as **params | |
| 09:51:50 | gtema | and those already implement most of the queries | |
| 09:51:58 | gtema | mean most of the params | |
| 09:52:27 | gtema | so we might want jmespath not to overtake everything | |
| 09:52:44 | gtema | filter on server side is better then on client | |
| 09:53:09 | gtema | so we might also "try" to parse jmsepath and whatever is supported as server-side filter pass it this way | |
| 09:53:34 | gtema | but maybe for beginning (just to improve broken backward compatibility) we can skip this for now | |
| 09:53:58 | gtema | so whatever is passed in query params is applied on server, whatever through jmes - on client side | |
| 09:57:44 | jm1 | gtema: my first idea was to drop this "filters" argument and instead add a param like "use_unknown_params_as_filters=False". We know what params are query params, so we could use all non-query-params as postprocessing filters. But i dropped that idea because this would not allow us to implement name_or_id in Resource.list() and does not allow using jmespath exprs. like a dedicated "filters" param does. But maybe you like that idea more? | |
| 10:00:04 | gtema | strategically this idea is better. We want to give user possibility to apply filters even if server side doesn't support this | |
| 10:00:34 | gtema | but it should be also disabled by default, since currently we through exception when user passes some unsupported query params | |
| 10:06:01 | jm1 | gtema: ack, let me updated the proc | |
| 10:06:04 | jm1 | *poc | |
| 10:06:26 | gtema | sure, thanks | |
| 12:10:32 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843419 | |
| 12:43:09 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [DNM] Added generic resource filtering by name_or_id, jmespath and dicts https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843587 | |
| 12:44:10 | jm1 | gtema: updated poc https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/843587 | |
| 12:44:38 | gtema | cool, will look deeper once I have some spare time | |
| 12:44:51 | jm1 | gtema: sure, np | |
| 12:48:29 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843528 | |
| 12:54:55 | opendevreview | Jakob Meng proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843528 | |
| 13:29:50 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/cliff master: Update Python testing per Zed cycle testing runtime https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/843312 | |
| 14:36:38 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Use bifrost's stable/yoga branch for jobs with OpenStack SDK 0.x.x https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843569 | |
| 14:37:58 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-collections-openstack stable/1.0.0: Warn users about us breaking backward compatibility https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/843528 | |