| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2017-02-28 | |||
| 16:23:02 | reedip | dtroyer : really ???? | |
| 16:23:35 | reedip | dtroyer : so you are appending the data ? | |
| 16:23:53 | dtroyer | yes, appending new ID to the list fo exsting IDs | |
| 16:25:18 | reedip | dtroyer : ohk, lemme try the same ... | |
| 16:28:08 | openstackgerrit | Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Simplify logic around option lists in port set https://review.openstack.org/439048 | |
| 16:28:44 | dtroyer | reedip: ^^^^ is what I am doing. | |
| 16:28:54 | briancurtin | dtroyer: looking | |
| 16:29:01 | reedip | dtroyer: yeah saw that and reviewing the same | |
| 16:29:06 | dtroyer | we've gotten a bit complicated in option handling and its hard to follow | |
| 16:30:23 | briancurtin | dtroyer: ah, i’ll have to look up my special methods again, but i bet it’s that we’re not catching the += in setting the dirty. we currently set it based on __setitem__ | |
| 16:30:47 | dtroyer | ah, ok. .append() then maybe? | |
| 16:32:41 | briancurtin | what you’re doing should work (fixing and releasing that in a coordinated way is another matter)—what should work no matter what would be to get the value, do the append (or even a += to a local value), and then do the fixed_ips=my_new_thing instead of doing it in-place | |
| 16:33:37 | reedip | dtroyer : Line #740 in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/439048/1/openstackclient/network/v2/port.py | |
| 16:33:50 | dtroyer | ok, that may be cleaner anyway too. I'm re-doing this because I couldn't follow the logic without a lot of caffiene… :) | |
| 16:33:54 | briancurtin | i think that’s what we’re missing. the value itself is being appended to fine, but it’s not flagging the dirty setting because the in-place operation (i think, looking up something right now) | |
| 16:34:26 | dtroyer | I think that is what I see too briancurtin, I finally found _ComponentManager :) | |
| 16:39:15 | reedip | dtroyer : One thing I cannot understand is why the attrs object is not able to update the info on the neutron server side | |
| 16:40:25 | dtroyer | reedip: SDK Resource tracks attributes that have been changed (dirty) and only sends back the ones actually changed for update(). Setting the dirty flag is not happening in some cases | |
| 16:42:42 | reedip | dtroyer : I remember having this discussion with stevemar , I guess | |
| 16:43:20 | reedip | but cant see why the dirty flag isnt set ( being the original writer of this patch, I would need the feedback for future reference :) ) | |
| 16:46:03 | dtroyer | reedip: briancurtin thought it might be because using += modifies the attribute in place and doens't pass through __setitem__(), which is where the dirty flag is set. | |
| 16:46:16 | dtroyer | Without tracing it I think I agree | |
| 16:47:02 | reedip | dtroyer : so , we shouldnt use += in Set attributes ( sounds like a doc update :P ) | |
| 16:47:08 | dtroyer | I'm trying to make the handling of these arguments clearer, it took me a while to understand what was happening before | |
| 16:47:08 | reedip | ?? | |
| 16:47:20 | dtroyer | maybe not in this case, no | |
| 16:47:35 | reedip | dtroyer : so this is a case by case basis ? | |
| 16:47:44 | dtroyer | at least when operating on an attribute obtained from an SDK object | |
| 16:48:20 | dtroyer | I think that is the distinction; if we used a copy of an object attribute it might have worked | |
| 16:53:39 | reedip | dtroyer : ok ... | |
| 16:54:50 | dtroyer | hmmmm, of the 3 options pairs I am looking at, security groups was the only one to not iterate over the existing list | |
| 16:57:34 | reedip | the only difference which I found was that we are using the client.find_xxx function for SG | |
| 16:57:58 | reedip | dtroyer: for fixed-ip and allowed-address-pair , we didnt execute the find function | |
| 16:58:21 | reedip | can that be of some impact , dtroyer ? | |
| 16:58:24 | dtroyer | I don' tthink that is involved, that is looping over the 'new' values | |
| 16:59:46 | dtroyer | actually, I think using [].extend() rather than += will be enough of a change | |
| 16:59:51 | reedip | dtroyer : ok, because += was used with fixed-ips as well, and if it was updated successfully, then maybe something else is wrong | |
| 17:00:18 | dtroyer | fixed_ips never directly re-used the list from the resource object, it iterated over it | |
| 17:00:29 | reedip | dtroyer : ok | |
| 17:00:30 | dtroyer | that forced __setitem__() to be called | |
| 17:00:38 | reedip | yeah , makes sense | |
| 17:01:03 | dtroyer | so I think we'll do both, it seems clearer to me | |
| 17:03:32 | reedip | dtroyer : ok :) | |
| 17:03:56 | reedip | sindhu :still causes an issue . Did you run tox -v -e functional openstackclient.tests.functional.network.v2.test_floating_ip.FloatingIpTests.test_floating_ip_set_and_unset_port | |
| 17:04:08 | reedip | sindhu : can you tell me the output of ^^ ? | |
| 17:17:16 | sindhu | reedip: y, what's wrong? | |
| 17:18:27 | reedip | sindhu : I am still getting a failure, thats why asking you if it is passing in your system | |
| 17:19:37 | reedip | sindhu : can u just run and check if it giving a positive result in your setup ? | |
| 17:21:41 | sindhu | reedip: something is wrong with my local it fails in the setup itself. Let me get a new env n check again. Thanks for looking :) | |
| 17:22:05 | sindhu | reedip: what error are u getting? | |
| 17:22:08 | reedip | sindhu : NP , I am just trying to close the NeutronClient CLI migration for now :) | |
| 17:22:58 | sindhu | reedip: I m not sure if cleanup is working the way it should | |
| 17:23:42 | reedip | sindhu : It isnt , I brought the router delete line to Line #234 | |
| 17:28:52 | sindhu | reedip: and it is working now? | |
| 17:29:14 | reedip | No, a different error is occurring, thats what I a trying to resolve | |
| 17:29:27 | sindhu | reedip: what's that ? | |
| 17:29:53 | reedip | unicode is not callable, str is not callable :) | |
| 17:30:03 | reedip | I have been trying to fix this since this evening :) | |
| 17:30:10 | reedip | my brain is not working with me ! | |
| 17:30:16 | sindhu | yup, that's the same failure even in gate | |
| 17:30:56 | wklm | hey guys, i'm having troubles installing python sdk on centos. I'm getting the following error: Command "python setup.py egg_info" failed with error code 1 in /tmp/pip-build-gyuzq2sj/cliff/ How can I deal with that? | |
| 17:31:06 | sindhu | reedip: Ohhhh I think I got it !!!!! | |
| 17:31:21 | briancurtin | wklm: how are you installing it? | |
| 17:31:35 | reedip | sindhu : whats that ? | |
| 17:32:05 | sindhu | reedip: so in all the cleanup, I have missed self.openstack | |
| 17:32:13 | sindhu | reedip: will fix it now | |
| 17:32:25 | reedip | sindhu : thats not necessary , is it? | |
| 17:32:26 | wklm | briancurtin: simply: pip install python-openstackclient | |
| 17:32:35 | wklm | being root | |
| 17:33:23 | openstackgerrit | Sindhu Devale proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: "floating ip set/unset port" for OSC https://review.openstack.org/383025 | |
| 17:33:48 | sindhu | reedip: it is, I have updated | |
| 17:33:58 | reedip | sindhu : testing the same | |
| 17:34:03 | reedip | I have made some other changes as well | |
| 17:34:05 | sindhu | reedip: can u check now with the latest patch | |
| 17:34:23 | reedip | sindhu : sure, gimme a minute. My changes are just running right now | |
| 17:34:31 | sindhu | reedip: sure | |
| 17:34:32 | briancurtin | wklm: someone else will have to take a look, i thought you were installing the sdk | |
| 17:35:09 | wklm | briancurtin: is there a more proper channel for it, or am i right here? :) | |
| 17:35:16 | briancurtin | fine here | |
| 17:35:26 | briancurtin | i just don’t know about that | |
| 17:39:04 | reedip | sindhu : my patch failed :P Now trying yours | |
| 17:39:23 | wklm | here more specific error stack trace: | |
| 17:39:24 | wklm | Traceback (most recent call last): File "/tmp/pip-build-mgg6jby7/cliff/.eggs/pbr-1.10.0-py3.4.egg/pbr/core.py", line 111, in pbr attrs = util.cfg_to_args(path, dist.script_args) File "/tmp/pip-build-mgg6jby7/cliff/.eggs/pbr-1.10.0-py3.4.egg/pbr/util.py", line 248, in cfg_to_args kwargs = setup_cfg_to_setup_kwargs(config, script_args) File "/tmp/pip-build-mgg6jby7/cliff/.eggs/pbr-1.10.0-py3.4. | |
| 17:39:30 | sindhu | reedip: ok, thanks :) | |
| 17:45:20 | reedip | sindhu : okay , your patch also didnt work on my system | |
| 17:45:25 | openstackgerrit | Brian Curtin proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Reorganize network docs https://review.openstack.org/439074 | |
| 17:45:40 | sindhu | reedip: Ah really?? what does it say now? | |
| 17:46:05 | reedip | Just a min | |
| 17:46:10 | openstackgerrit | Brian Curtin proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Reorganize workflow docs https://review.openstack.org/439028 | |
| 17:46:32 | reedip | http://paste.openstack.org/show/600823/ | |
| 17:46:37 | reedip | sindhu : ^^ | |
| 17:46:46 | reedip | I fixed that in my patch but failed somewhere else | |
| 17:49:10 | reedip | sindhu : this one is really tricky patch for a long time :) | |
| 17:49:30 | sindhu | reedip: lol, yeah !! | |
| 17:49:38 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Yea what is going on haha | |
| 17:50:34 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : a patch !!!! | |
| 17:50:58 | sindhu | reedip: I am going to wait to see what jenkins says | |
| 17:51:05 | reedip | sindhu : sure :) | |
| 17:51:15 | reedip | till then I will make my patch :D | |
| 17:54:33 | sindhu | ankur-gupta-f4: I had missed a parameter in cleanup | |