| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2023-07-31 | |||
| 17:56:44 | arddennis | The problem that "is_public" attribute of the volume type always gets converted to "os-volume-type-access:is_public" which is not accepted. | |
| 17:56:44 | arddennis | Attempt to change it using sdk results in "'os-volume-type-access:is_public' was unexpected". While api allows to update this value using just plain "is_public" in the request: https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/block-storage/v3/?expanded=update-a-volume-type-detail#update-a-volume-type | |
| 17:56:45 | arddennis | Is there any workaround to set is_public? | |
| 19:23:51 | andrewbogott_ | gtema, frickler, I'm hoping to get some comment on this issue https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2010784 <- it seems broken to me but I don't know if I'm an early adopter of policy.yaml or if I'm missing some obvious workaround. | |
| 19:24:14 | andrewbogott_ | Ideally I'd like a core dev to confirm that they agree it's an issue before I start fixing | |
| 22:47:33 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: modified functional test for reset_status based on feedback and implemented unit test as well. unsure about proxy unit test https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890167 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2023-08-01 | |||
| 08:03:26 | noonedeadpunk | gtema: We're trying to make an ansible module to manage volume types, as this is weird not having that. As well as shell workaround is just /o\ https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_cinder/src/branch/master/tasks/cinder_backends.yml#L39-L65 | |
| 08:04:29 | noonedeadpunk | so if you could brief a bit arddennis on how to workaround/change SDK to allow that to happen - that would be very sweet :) | |
| 08:06:29 | gtema | ok, will have a look in next few days on that | |
| 09:38:38 | opendevreview | ChengEn, Du proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add a warning for resizing servers booted from volumes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/890184 | |
| 09:42:27 | opendevreview | Mridula Joshi proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Adding image stores info command https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/883494 | |
| 09:43:09 | opendevreview | Mridula Joshi proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Adding image stores info command https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/883494 | |
| 11:47:42 | opendevreview | Mridula Joshi proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Adding image stores info command https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/883494 | |
| 11:50:09 | opendevreview | Mridula Joshi proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Adding image stores info command https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/883494 | |
| 12:36:46 | opendevreview | Mridula Joshi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: image: Fixed URL for stores_info https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/883493 | |
| 18:43:20 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: added release notes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890241 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2023-08-02 | |||
| 00:17:53 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Implemented force_delete for Share object. Passes unit and funcional tests. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890259 | |
| 00:17:54 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Added reset_status and force_delete methods to the shares resource under Shared File Systems. Functional & unit tests pass. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890260 | |
| 03:04:06 | opendevreview | Grace Park proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: snapshot metadata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890264 | |
| 04:01:39 | opendevreview | Anvi Joshi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for managing and unmanaging shares in the shared file systems service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888940 | |
| 04:05:31 | opendevreview | Anvi Joshi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for managing and unmanaging shares in the shared file systems service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888940 | |
| 07:38:59 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix manila access rules functional tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889997 | |
| 11:14:09 | oschwart | Hey folks, is this channel still active? | |
| 11:25:13 | frickler | oschwart: depends on your definition of active, if you have something to say about sdk or osc, there is no better one. but also be patient while waiting for an answer | |
| 11:41:37 | opendevreview | Carlos Eduardo proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [WIP] Resource locks and access rules restrictions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889519 | |
| 14:15:29 | opendevreview | Omer Schwartz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support to Octavia (load_balancer) amphora get stats https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889296 | |
| 14:17:15 | opendevreview | Omer Schwartz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support to Octavia (load_balancer) amphora get stats https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889296 | |
| 14:19:39 | oschwart | frickler: sure, thanks for your reply. I asked a question a week ago and then went on PTO for a week, so I am not sure whether I got an answer to my question | |
| 14:20:07 | oschwart | Anyway I am giving it another try, if I will need some help I will help you guys in this channel. Thanks again | |
| 14:20:31 | oschwart | s/help/ask | |
| 14:56:51 | frickler | oschwart: the channel is logged at https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-sdks/ , but it seems there was no answer to your question | |
| 15:00:45 | oschwart | frickler: thanks | |
| 15:11:32 | stephenfin | gtema: o/ Could you give me admin on https://review.opendev.org/admin/groups/33c03b5e000a75ffc476c51d484c5111648d399c,members so I can make the necessary changes discussed at the forum? | |
| 15:18:02 | gtema | stephenfin - I can't give you admin - I myself have no priv to change admins, only gerrit admins (looking here also at frickler) can do so | |
| 15:20:18 | tonyb | It looks like any member of that group is already an admin of the group | |
| 15:20:20 | frickler | hmm, me fails to see where admins are defined, guess I need to turn my super powers on | |
| 15:21:21 | frickler | oh, good point, is this a self-managed group like most other groups? | |
| 15:22:00 | gtema | No clue, since I was also not able to see where the admins are managed | |
| 15:22:01 | tonyb | https://review.opendev.org/admin/groups/33c03b5e000a75ffc476c51d484c5111648d399c looks like it? | |
| 15:23:10 | gtema | tonyb - you are maybe right | |
| 15:23:22 | gtema | stephenfin - I added you there as well | |
| 15:23:41 | gtema | but that is not the right thing, it makes no sense if any member becomes admin | |
| 15:25:31 | tonyb | I think for the most part that "admin" can only add/remove users from the group and that's safe given the trust releationships in the community | |
| 15:26:35 | frickler | gtema: we could make openstacksdk-core owner I guess? | |
| 15:26:56 | gtema | yeah, this makes much more sense in my eyes. Thanks | |
| 15:29:24 | frickler | fungi: ^^ can you confirm that the owner change would need to be done by a gerrit admin and that it makes sense in this case? (group of "auxillary sdk cores" that shouldn't be self owned) | |
| 15:30:29 | stephenfin | tonyb: We agreed that we would add various service core groups (e.g. cinder-core) to openstacksdk-service-core. That group has +2 permissions for SDK (though intentionally not +W) | |
| 15:33:52 | stephenfin | On a related note, I'm doing a cleanup of stale members of both openstacksdk-core and python-openstackclient-core. Will post to openstack-discuss about it shortly | |
| 15:34:10 | tonyb | stephenfin: Ahh okay. | |
| 15:34:54 | tonyb | gtema: I'd say yes you'd been another group and the corresponding ACL to gove them +2 but not +W | |
| 15:42:58 | fungi | frickler: gtema: any member of a group can change the owner to themselves or to another group they're a member of | |
| 15:43:40 | gtema | fungi - thanks, did that now | |
| 15:44:04 | gtema | logical things are not so logical on the first sight | |
| 15:47:49 | frickler | oh, I didn't know that, either, nice | |
| 15:49:44 | stephenfin | gtema: rosmaita is proposing adding core groups directly to the ACL config file in project-config rather than as included groups in the openstacksdk-service-core group. Advantage would be that it's config driven rather than needing us to do in the UI, but it does remove the need for the openstacksdk-service-core group. Have you any preference? | |
| 15:50:12 | rosmaita | which would you prefer? seems like 2 would be less work for you, though you will have to +1 the project-config patch | |
| 15:50:12 | rosmaita | 2 - the project (cinder in this case) pushes a patch to project-config giving review powers -2..+2 to group cinder-core | |
| 15:50:12 | rosmaita | 1 - in gerrit UI, a member of openstacksdk-service-core manually adds cinder-core | |
| 15:50:12 | rosmaita | there are 2 ways to do this: | |
| 15:50:12 | rosmaita | gtema: got a question for you ... i am following up on the Forum consensus to add (for example) cinder-core to openstacksdk-service-core (and same for the cli) | |
| 15:50:19 | stephenfin | jinx | |
| 15:50:23 | rosmaita | yeah, what stefenfin said | |
| 15:52:11 | rosmaita | tell you what, i will post a patch to project-config and you can -1 it if you prefer the manual gerrit UI method | |
| 15:52:18 | stephenfin | +1 | |
| 15:52:20 | gtema | hmm, interesting. I am always for "avoiding" UI | |
| 15:52:44 | gtema | so lets go with project-config stuff | |
| 15:53:09 | rosmaita | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/890346 | |
| 15:54:42 | gtema | yeah, I like that | |
| 15:55:12 | rosmaita | ok, cool | |
| 15:55:35 | rosmaita | i can send a message to openstack-discuss informing the other projects to do the same | |
| 15:55:36 | stephenfin | rosmaita: thanks for following up on that and apologies for dropping the ball | |
| 15:55:43 | stephenfin | yes, please | |
| 15:55:54 | rosmaita | np, you have a lot on your plate | |
| 15:58:18 | tonyb | rosmaita: nice | |
| 15:58:34 | rosmaita | :) | |
| 16:05:59 | rosmaita | Zuul does not like my patch ... i sorted the groups logically instead of alphabetically | |
| 16:12:03 | rosmaita | stephenfin: gtema: will need you to renew your +1s on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/890346 | |
| 17:29:16 | fungi | it's merged now, should deploy in short order | |
| 17:29:31 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: reset_state, force_delete for Share, ShareSnapshot https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888311 | |
| 17:31:04 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: reset_state, force_delete for Share, ShareSnapshot https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888311 | |
| 17:34:11 | opendevreview | Suyeon Cha proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: reset_state, force_delete for Share, ShareSnapshot https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888311 | |
| 18:42:27 | opendevreview | Anvi Joshi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for managing and unmanaging shares in the shared file systems service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888940 | |
| 18:42:40 | opendevreview | Omer Schwartz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support to Octavia (load_balancer) amphora get stats https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889296 | |
| 21:10:58 | fungi | gtema: another acl addition https://review.opendev.org/890365 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2023-08-03 | |||
| 04:26:38 | opendevreview | Anvi Joshi proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Support manage/unmanage shares with manila https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/888940 | |
| 04:43:27 | fungi | gtema: and now https://review.opendev.org/890366 and https://review.opendev.org/890374 | |
| 05:37:15 | frickler | gtema: do we maybe want to unify sdk and osc gerrit groups? or is there a reason to keep them separate? that would make my comment about adding designate cores to osc obsolete | |
| 05:41:31 | gtema | fricker: who knows what future brings us. Maybe we will have people that can be made cores in SDK, but not in osc. But I also don't really object of unifying them. This is just historically this way as complete independent projects | |
| 05:41:53 | gtema | Feel free to also propose merge | |
| 06:49:35 | frickler | hmm, no, I don't want to push something you're not convinced about, let's keep the current setup then for now | |
| 07:41:38 | johnsom | I added Designate today as I had core previously under the Monty/Dean (for Octavia primarily though) plan of yesteryear. If we want to get more granular that is ok too. | |
| 08:23:25 | opendevreview | Omer Schwartz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support to Octavia (load_balancer) amphora get stats https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/889296 | |
| 08:36:24 | opendevreview | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: fix block storage resource registry https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890398 | |
| 10:00:29 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Remove '_is_client_version' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/884496 | |
| 10:00:31 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Remove '_{service}_client' properties https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/884497 | |
| 10:00:33 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: cloud: Remove '_object_store_client' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/884499 | |
| 10:48:20 | fungi | a downside to these acl addition changes is they're going to need to be strictly sequenced or require a lot of rebases to deal with the merge conflicts between one another | |
| 10:49:33 | fungi | besides the fact that it needs a project-config core reviewer to review and approve, while doing it via group management instead of acls would be under the full control of the sdks team | |
| 11:11:04 | frickler | once this is set up, I don't expect a lot of changes | |
| 12:20:34 | opendevreview | Christian Rohmann proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Cleanup logic to either dry-run, bulk_delete or do single object deletes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/890410 | |