Earlier  
Later
New Search
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-sdks - 2020-01-13
19:50:14 efried But that's your prerogative. So let's just push on dtroyer mordred amotoki to merge https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693267/ so we can move forward.
19:50:23 johnsom Well, once the docs re-render maybe we can look at the changes and issues that related them. I think that if we revert, we will want to stick with the static pages until a new path forward is found
19:52:43 efried The identity patch wouldn't be affected by that, though.
19:52:44 efried the fact that there's an enhance_help in an identity lib is coincidental; it's only used by networking.
19:52:44 efried that method is called in a hundred other places, but the enhance_help kwarg is only used from networking
19:52:44 efried so whichever approach we choose, the identity docs split/autogen patch wouldn't be different.
20:04:36 efried dtroyer: tl;dr:
20:04:37 efried You +2ed the glance doc autogen patch https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693025/ and wondered why it hadn't been approved earlier
20:04:37 efried I mentioned its predecessor https://review.opendev.org/#/c/692931/ was held up
20:04:37 efried So I was discussing with johnsom whether that holdup was valid
20:04:37 efried But whether it is or not, we would like to move the osc-lib enhance_help patch https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693267/ along
20:09:23 dtroyer efried: right, I figured that was the case (after I looked at them in the wrong order). I'm getting to going ahead with merging 693267, but having to do something like this is a clue that maybe we should just copy that code instead now. DRY is good, until it isn't, and OSC has taught me that sometimes the duplication is work it in the end… thoughts to inform the future, I think we're going to finish this path at least for now
20:11:17 efried dtroyer: ack, and thanks.
20:11:17 efried to be clear, which piece would duplication have been better for in this scenario?
20:14:51 dtroyer with the changes to help, I would have re-thought moving the tags stuff to osc-lib in the first place. In this case though that is being done to make it available to plugins… there is a school of thought that it is the plugins that should be eliminated so that would be an alternative someday
20:16:52 dtroyer I just +W https://review.opendev.org/#/c/693267/, we'll need to do an osc-lib release so OSC can pick that up.
20:17:08 efried gotcha. Thanks. johnsom ^
20:35:38 johnsom Sorry, had a meeting, catching up
20:37:55 johnsom dtroyer Yeah, I think in the case of tags, it's a good thing that, plugins or not, we are using common code for tags. This is an area that is easy to start diverging in the commands.... This was part of why I proposed moving it into osc-lib and volunteered to do the work.
21:10:53 openstackgerrit Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add unit tests and release note for dns_publish_fixed_ip https://review.opendev.org/702266
21:26:50 KeithMnemonic smcginnis: it passed! first hurdle done
21:26:57 smcginnis Finally!
21:55:05 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/osc-lib master: Add enhance_help kwarg to tags option generators https://review.opendev.org/693267
22:17:37 efried smcginnis: Did we decide the first release after dropping py2 needs to be a 'major'?
22:21:49 efried johnsom, dtroyer: https://review.opendev.org/702302 <== osc-lib 2.0.0 release (smcginnis assumed ^ yes)
22:22:15 johnsom Yes, dropping py2 is a major bump
22:23:10 smcginnis efried: Sorry - correct, that's considered a backwards incompatible change and needs the major version bump.
22:23:27 efried cool, thanks.
22:24:23 johnsom There should have been a release note for the py2 drop as well, but it doesn't look like that happened
22:28:55 efried johnsom: Doesn't need to be a separate release. I incorporated it in the same patch. smcginnis: is there any reason the first release after dropping py2 needs to be immediately after that patch?
22:29:45 efried johnsom: in other news, the new build for https://review.opendev.org/#/c/692931/ is available. I linked to the 'project' subcommand pages, please confirm whether the presence/absence of --tag is appropriate there.
22:30:15 smcginnis efried: You mean if it should be released right away after making the changes in the cycle goal versus waiting for a bit and picking up some other changes?
22:30:25 efried smcginnis: yes, that's what I mean.
22:30:34 smcginnis No, no real reason to have to do it right away.
22:30:56 smcginnis Of course the sooner it's out there, the sooner others will pick it up and find out if there are any issues, but no reason that has to happen immediately.
22:30:57 efried Or rather, in this case, given that other changes are already available, should I force an artificial major release in between so I can immediately push a 2.1.0 for the subsequent feature?
22:31:09 efried ack, so I think we're good here.
22:31:15 johnsom Yeah, release often is good actually.
22:31:19 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Create Volume v3 functional tests https://review.opendev.org/695044
22:31:24 smcginnis Yeah, it's fine if there are other feature additions along with the py2 drop.
22:31:39 efried cool
22:31:55 smcginnis The major bump is just a signal to downstream consumers of "hey, might want to check what changed here before you upgrade to this one" ;)
22:32:00 johnsom I was just mentioning (not earth shattering) that there is no release note with the "Drop python 2.7 support and testing " patch in 2.0.0.
22:32:14 smcginnis That really should be included.
22:32:18 efried mm. We could add a patch for that and include it in the release...
22:32:25 smcginnis We can hold that release and quick get a release note added.
22:32:30 smcginnis Jinx
22:35:01 openstackgerrit Eric Fried proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Add a release note for dropping py2 https://review.opendev.org/702305
22:35:07 efried dtroyer, smcginnis, johnsom: ^
22:35:52 johnsom efried You are working on too many things... grin Commented
22:36:40 efried johnsom: just trying to flush some stuff off my stack.
22:37:08 openstackgerrit Michael Johnson proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Add a release note for dropping py2 https://review.opendev.org/702305
22:38:11 efried what did I miss?
22:38:24 johnsom You said "nova" instead of "osc-lib"
22:38:27 efried hah, whoops
22:38:35 efried thanks, blind copy/paste
22:39:02 efried dtroyer: ^ fast one if you please
22:47:58 openstackgerrit Sean McGinnis proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Copy Volume v2 commands and unit tests to v3 https://review.opendev.org/695069
#openstack-sdks - 2020-01-14
01:26:20 openstackgerrit Brin Zhang proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add server migrate list CLI https://review.opendev.org/675304
01:27:46 openstackgerrit Brin Zhang proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add server migrate list CLI https://review.opendev.org/675304
02:34:18 openstackgerrit Sean McGinnis proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Pass through args to ssh https://review.opendev.org/402530
05:00:01 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/python-openstackclient master: Show correct name for resource with quota set to zero https://review.opendev.org/701110
05:52:55 openstackgerrit Vishakha Agarwal proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Adding options to user cli https://review.opendev.org/697444
09:50:43 sshnaidm gundalow, hi
11:43:08 gundalow sshnaidm: Hi :)
11:43:10 gundalow (lag)
11:44:36 sshnaidm gundalow, I updated etherpad yesterday with namespace, etc, do you need any additional things/info from me to move forward?
11:45:02 sshnaidm gundalow, I think next should be change in ansible botmeta..?
11:45:26 sshnaidm gundalow, or we need to move all before that
11:46:40 sshnaidm gundalow, ok, I see you typing :)
11:46:48 gundalow \o/
11:47:14 gundalow I think I've got the info I need for the moment, I'll throw `FIXME` in if I come across anything.
11:48:02 gundalow Will `openstack.cloud` contain all of https://github.com/ansible/ansible/tree/devel/lib/ansible/modules/cloud/openstack (ie no splitting that directory into multiple collections)?
11:48:09 sshnaidm gundalow, great, can you elaborate please what is "scenario file"?
11:48:21 sshnaidm gundalow, yeah, it will contain all
11:48:56 sshnaidm gundalow, like that: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/684788/
11:49:20 gundalow I'll flesh it all out, just doing initial brain dump
11:49:43 gundalow I'll most likely use this to update the official docs so it's easier for $next_collection
11:49:55 sshnaidm gundalow, cool
14:26:56 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/osc-lib master: Add a release note for dropping py2 https://review.opendev.org/702305
14:33:23 mordred tobberydberg: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/700219
15:27:55 gundalow sshnaidm|mtg: words added. I'm sure there will be follow up questions, though I hope that's enough to get started.
15:30:09 sshnaidm|mtg gundalow, thanks, we'll talk tomorrow then
15:53:25 openstackgerrit Dean Troyer proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add unit tests and release note for dns_publish_fixed_ip https://review.opendev.org/702266
16:23:16 efried dtroyer: osc-lib release for your PTL ackedness if you please https://review.opendev.org/#/c/702302/
16:23:33 efried smcginnis updated it to include the reno patch you merged earlier.
16:25:17 dtroyer efried: +1, thanks!
16:25:43 efried thank you
16:41:28 smcginnis https://review.opendev.org/#/c/701306/ is happy now. Would be nice to get that through to unbreak stable/stein.
17:06:19 KeithMnemonic smcginnis do you think we will need a cherry-pick or something close to also fix stable/rocky?
17:06:51 smcginnis KeithMnemonic: I haven't looked at that branch yet, but my suspicion is that the answer will be yes.
17:07:34 KeithMnemonic ok thanks
17:08:00 KeithMnemonic i am getting similar type errors on https://review.opendev.org/701066 but we can wait until stein is fixed
17:09:44 smcginnis Yeah, that's looking like it has at least one of the same issues that had to be fixed in stein.
18:36:20 powerje Is it possible to use auth v1.0 with fog-openstack? It seems my openstack provider doesn't support 2.0 or 3.0 (which seems a bit suspect)
19:31:23 smcginnis powerje: Based on their wording in the keystone bullet item here - https://github.com/fog/fog-openstack#initial-setup - my guess would be no.
19:31:43 smcginnis That does seem suspect though. I don't remember specifics, but I thought v1 went away a long time ago.
19:58:13 mordred powerje, smcginnis: yeah - 1.0 is *very* long dead
19:58:43 smcginnis At least several years ago, right?
19:59:02 mordred yeah. we don't support v1 in keystoneauth or sdk either

Earlier   Later