| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2018-08-10 | |||
| 16:58:26 | dtantsur | mordred: what's openstacksdk's official commitment wrt supporting deprecated major versions? | |
| 16:58:48 | mordred | support all of them until the end of time | |
| 16:58:59 | dtantsur | that's tough | |
| 16:59:01 | mordred | yah | |
| 16:59:15 | mordred | BUT - it's one of the reasons I'm pleased that we have requests-mock based unittests now | |
| 16:59:28 | dtantsur | I wonder how we're going to maintain them when there are no clouds supporting them | |
| 16:59:45 | dtantsur | unit tests are nice, but they only confirm existing assumptions | |
| 17:00:57 | dtantsur | on this positive note I'll call it a day :) | |
| 17:04:11 | samueldmq | mordred: Shrews: does 'tox -e functional --end-user' make sense to you at all? | |
| 17:05:04 | samueldmq | I wanted to run functional against public clouds. operator tests don't make sense in that context | |
| 17:06:00 | mordred | dtantsur|afk: I think the main idea is - keep the unittests for existing assumptions - and if someone reports a bug ask them to provide us with an http trace | |
| 17:06:02 | mordred | :) | |
| 17:06:34 | mordred | samueldmq: yes. although in a perfect world I think having each thing be able to detect whether or not the user is allowed to do a thing would be great ... | |
| 17:06:49 | mordred | buit that's not really feasible - so I thik your idea is more achievable | |
| 17:07:41 | samueldmq | mordred: seems like if we had a manner for the user to define what they expect to be able to do and test those things would be nice | |
| 17:08:45 | samueldmq | I agree that idea is not really feasible, since there needs to be a distinction between 403 because I'm not operator vs 403 ohh I should be allowed to do that | |
| 17:10:14 | mordred | yah | |
| 17:10:39 | mordred | also - if clouds have disabled something by policy because they are evil evil people, that can show up as 404 not found not 403 unauthorized | |
| 17:10:47 | mordred | which is one of the reasons I hate the policy system | |
| 17:13:24 | samueldmq | mordred: yes policy is hard. splitting operator vs non-operator for now would be a good first step | |
| 17:13:59 | mordred | ++ | |
| 17:14:03 | samueldmq | you okay if that reflects on really splitting tests into separate files/directories? or should I add a decorator or somehting on the top of the tests? | |
| 17:14:23 | samueldmq | like @operator to indicate that's an operator test | |
| 17:14:49 | samueldmq | s/test/testcase | |
| 17:17:37 | mordred | samueldmq: either thing works for me - I don't have a strong opinion - so whichever seems to work best as you work on it | |
| 17:18:00 | mordred | directories is probably easier | |
| 17:18:16 | samueldmq | nice, I like that. let's just get the thing done | |
| 17:18:34 | mordred | samueldmq: in fact, we could get a little fancy ... | |
| 17:19:17 | samueldmq | also, I found we allow tests to run against other clouds... but we call it so many different things: OS_CLOUD, OS_TEST_CLOUD, OS_DEMO_CLOUD, OS_OPERATOR_CLOUD. so having that consolidated into a single envvar is a must. | |
| 17:19:19 | mordred | we have self.demo_cloud and self.operator_cloud | |
| 17:19:25 | mordred | samueldmq: ++ | |
| 17:19:47 | mordred | samueldmq: if we make an OperatorFunctionalTest base class that is where self.operator_cloud comes from | |
| 17:20:10 | mordred | it could help us make sure we're testing features even in devstack with the correct user vs. operator context | |
| 17:20:14 | mordred | or something | |
| 17:20:37 | samueldmq | base.py for each one of enduser/ operator/ dirs then? | |
| 17:20:40 | mordred | probably still need self.operator_cloud in setUp/tearDown methods though ... | |
| 17:21:03 | mordred | samueldmq: but yeah - start with the directories - and we can figure out if we can do fancier things later :) | |
| 17:21:53 | samueldmq | mordred: nice. I will follow what we had as operator cloud in shade previously | |
| 17:22:01 | samueldmq | to define what's operator and what's not | |
| 17:24:58 | mordred | sounds great to me | |
| 17:25:59 | Shrews | mordred: my wrist is quite sore today so i'm going to stop keyboarding for a while. i'll check in on things later | |
| 17:30:11 | mordred | Shrews: ++ | |
| 17:30:23 | mordred | Shrews: don't push through - gotta let that wrist heal | |
| 17:35:17 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix the heat template resource more cleaner https://review.openstack.org/590786 | |
| 17:37:05 | abishop | dtroyer: I need to ask you re-review https://review.openstack.org/575804 (I had to rebase to resolve merge conflict) | |
| 17:59:20 | openstackgerrit | Samuel de Medeiros Queiroz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Make require_service use conn.has_service in tests https://review.openstack.org/591029 | |
| 18:09:38 | openstackgerrit | Samuel de Medeiros Queiroz proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Consolidate cloud/base.py into functional/base.py https://review.openstack.org/591031 | |
| 18:20:16 | samueldmq | mordred: what is the difference between tests in functional/ vs functional/cloud ? | |
| 18:20:48 | samueldmq | all those in /cloud came from shade? are there known intersections? | |
| 19:50:57 | mordred | samueldmq: yes - that's the only difference | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2018-08-11 | |||
| 12:25:29 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add more options to enable ansible testing feature https://review.openstack.org/590078 | |
| 22:03:21 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Fix wait for futures append 'result' error https://review.openstack.org/559523 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2018-08-13 | |||
| 07:27:15 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: add pool member operating status https://review.openstack.org/591281 | |
| 07:38:37 | usr2033 | hi, how can i get services available resource amount that can be allocated to projects | |
| 09:07:24 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Correct update operations for baremetal https://review.openstack.org/590770 | |
| 09:12:27 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Use the base Resource's JSON patch support in Image https://review.openstack.org/591314 | |
| 09:51:31 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [WIP] VIF API for baremetal https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 10:01:39 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [WIP] Add VIF API for baremetal https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 10:26:53 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: [WIP] Add VIF API for baremetal https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 11:40:40 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/osc-lib master: Replaced a few references to LP bugs with storyboard https://review.openstack.org/586453 | |
| 12:27:59 | dtantsur | TheJulia: early comments welcome: https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 12:48:42 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add simple create/show/delete functional tests for all baremetal resources https://review.openstack.org/590806 | |
| 12:55:28 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: fix 2 typos in documentation https://review.openstack.org/587624 | |
| 13:26:56 | TheJulia | dtantsur: thanks! Added to my review queue :) | |
| 14:03:18 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Fix inconsistency (nit) https://review.openstack.org/572771 | |
| 14:29:37 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: add support for VIF attach/detach API https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 14:33:46 | openstackgerrit | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: baremetal: add support for VIF attach/detach API https://review.openstack.org/591324 | |
| 16:05:24 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: DNM: implement block-storage backup resource https://review.openstack.org/591445 | |
| 17:13:56 | amotoki | dtroyer: is there any chance to land https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590425/ in stable/rocky? | |
| 17:14:51 | amotoki | dtroyer: this breaks neutronclient OSC plugin gate for a while. I would like to have this in Rocky and release it as osc-lib 1.11.1. | |
| 17:23:00 | guilhermesp | hello everyone! Could some one clarify some questions about openstacksdk? I have two different use cases that I'd like to discuss | |
| 17:24:32 | guilhermesp | In advance: a user can create a router with an external network via python clients and horizon, but if a regular user wants to create this resource via api, I can't be done because is not allowed by the network policy | |
| 17:24:33 | guilhermesp | https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/1dda2bca862b1268c0f5ae39b7508f1b1cab6f15/etc/policy.json#L105 | |
| 17:24:58 | guilhermesp | One of the user cases is using an ansible module to configure routers https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/modules/os_router_module.html#os-router-module | |
| 17:25:23 | guilhermesp | and another is a role that attempts to configure a router without success http://logs.openstack.org/94/588594/10/check/ansible-role-cloud-launcher-functional/9507169/ara-report/result/7ead3794-7594-4b91-aef1-4a761cbe3eca/ | |
| 17:25:50 | guilhermesp | so my question is: is the network policy consistent? | |
| 17:26:07 | guilhermesp | mordred mnaser ^ | |
| 17:27:28 | mnaser | i'll dig in a bit but i wonder if a bug report already exists for this somewhere | |
| 17:28:50 | openstackgerrit | Tim Rozet proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Cinder: Add version checking https://review.openstack.org/590807 | |
| 17:39:43 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: DNM: implement block-storage backup resource https://review.openstack.org/591445 | |
| 18:11:12 | mordred | guilhermesp: the situation with what 'regular' users can or can't do on a given neutron related to routers and external networks is about as far away from being consistent behavior as is possible | |
| 18:11:43 | mordred | just about every possible combination of being able to do or not do exists in the wild - and that's just looking at public clouds | |
| 18:12:05 | mordred | there isn't really a way for sdk to know whether a given user can perform a task based on policy settings on the server side | |
| 18:12:16 | mordred | unfortunately | |
| 18:22:34 | mnaser | mordred: this seems to be failing against our public cloud (and both devstack).. openstack cli seem to work | |
| 19:30:09 | mordred | mnaser: awesome | |
| 19:30:25 | mordred | mnaser: well - openstack cli uses sdk for these - so something somewhere is unhappy :) | |
| 19:30:38 | mnaser | mordred: so sounds very much like a module thing | |
| 19:32:05 | mnaser | guilhermesp: maybe you can have a look over https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/lib/ansible/modules/cloud/openstack/os_router.py if you have sometime | |
| 19:32:18 | mnaser | and see what difference is it being called with compared to osc | |
| 19:32:18 | guilhermesp | yeah, I'm going to take a look at this | |
| 20:28:27 | dtroyer | amotoki: yes, I had meant to do that earlier, apologies for the delay... | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2018-08-14 | |||
| 07:23:24 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: DNM: implement block-storage backup resource https://review.openstack.org/591445 | |
| 08:19:33 | usr2033 | hi, are there any way to check connection scope[domain/project]? | |
| 08:50:33 | openstackgerrit | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: add pool member operating status https://review.openstack.org/591281 | |
| 11:22:35 | dtantsur | no microversion talks for us in Berlin :( | |
| 11:28:09 | cdent | dtantsur: :( | |
| 11:28:27 | cdent | it really does seem like we need an actual openstack conference | |
| 11:28:49 | cdent | maybe it is time for an alterstack | |
| 11:28:57 | dtantsur | ++ | |