| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-03-18 | |||
| 16:10:14 | gtema | thks | |
| 16:10:31 | gtema | was it a question? "Nothing else from me?" | |
| 16:10:41 | stephenfin | I've one thing | |
| 16:10:45 | stephenfin | Releases | |
| 16:11:19 | stephenfin | I _think_ we're currently tied to trailing release or some such thing for OSC | |
| 16:11:28 | stephenfin | i.e. we have 'stable/{release}' branches | |
| 16:11:46 | gtema | ah yeah, this one is also completely lost in overload this week | |
| 16:11:56 | diablo_rojo | gtema, no question :) Sorry to be confusing. | |
| 16:12:25 | stephenfin | Do we want to look at changing that to independent? | |
| 16:12:37 | gtema | diablo_rojo - was more a joke ;-) | |
| 16:12:46 | diablo_rojo | I feel like that's reasonable stephenfin ? | |
| 16:12:51 | stephenfin | Rationale being that OSC isn't really tied to any particular OpenStack release. In theory it should support every release | |
| 16:13:05 | diablo_rojo | gtema, lol I am too tired to catch that sorry. Need more caffeine. | |
| 16:13:29 | gtema | I have no problems with that. But maybe TC have something in mind? | |
| 16:13:52 | stephenfin | Yeah, I'm not sure how we do it, but I can investigate | |
| 16:14:13 | amotoki | I think we are still in sync with our release to some extent I think. | |
| 16:14:16 | diablo_rojo | From a TC standpoint, I don't think we care? It's more the release team? | |
| 16:14:24 | stephenfin | I figure we can and should release any time we have enough "stuff" to justify it | |
| 16:14:36 | stephenfin | amotoki: You think? How so? | |
| 16:15:20 | amotoki | stephenfin: I thoght we are discussing about _indepedent release, but I might misundertand the context. | |
| 16:15:52 | stephenfin | No, you understood correctly :) | |
| 16:15:54 | amotoki | we sometimes have things related to releases | |
| 16:16:12 | stephenfin | Most of our work now is less about keeping up with new changes, since APIs change less frequently than before. It's more about filling in gaps in old releases | |
| 16:16:13 | gtema | we can actually release client things for not yet released stuff | |
| 16:16:14 | amotoki | so stable branches can help us regarding backports. | |
| 16:16:36 | stephenfin | and you can use new OSC versions with old service versions | |
| 16:16:49 | stephenfin | Hmm, can we get stable branches that are based on releases instead? | |
| 16:16:58 | stephenfin | i.e. stable/5.0 ? | |
| 16:17:14 | stephenfin | Maybe that's too much work unless we're very careful about how often we release | |
| 16:17:14 | gtema | ugh, that's interesting | |
| 16:17:37 | amotoki | it is debatable. we cover most releases, so it is not a problem for most cases I think, | |
| 16:17:59 | gtema | I actually dislike heavily stable branches for SDK and OSC. They are made to be always backward compatible | |
| 16:18:04 | amotoki | so I don't have strong preference on this | |
| 16:18:24 | stephenfin | gtema: True, though we do occasionally do things like drop Python versions | |
| 16:18:32 | gtema | yes | |
| 16:18:53 | gtema | and we are also potentially caught in the service using dedicated version of SDK | |
| 16:18:54 | stephenfin | that's less of an issue for OSC though, since that's only used in the client environment | |
| 16:19:16 | stephenfin | yeah, more of an issues for sdk since that can be embedded in the service | |
| 16:19:19 | gtema | I would be careful here | |
| 16:19:23 | amotoki | yes for most cases. no stable branches sometimes disallow us to fix bugs in released versions | |
| 16:19:37 | amotoki | that's all I see as a minus point. | |
| 16:19:46 | amotoki | but that would be minor. | |
| 16:20:00 | stephenfin | let me think about it more and maybe discuss with release management folks | |
| 16:20:03 | gtema | recently I landed image command redesign (to rely on SDK) and some time later figured out that some other dependent client got broken by that | |
| 16:20:03 | amotoki | I mean big fixes | |
| 16:20:18 | gtema | I guess it was masakari | |
| 16:20:30 | stephenfin | It's not high priority. It just occurred to me that we might want to change things when gtema was working through patches ahead of the release | |
| 16:20:57 | stephenfin | amotoki: Yeah, that's a good point. I'll pay particular attention to this | |
| 16:21:19 | gtema | it clear stephenfin and I am also currently "bombed" by release team wishing a release of OSC | |
| 16:21:33 | stephenfin | do you need help? | |
| 16:21:47 | stephenfin | I've got some spare time at the moment since nova is in feature freeze | |
| 16:21:57 | stephenfin | not much but some :) | |
| 16:21:58 | gtema | well, it's generally just cur a release | |
| 16:22:05 | gtema | cut | |
| 16:22:39 | gtema | and I landed today few things, one self-approved with project cleanup, since around a year it lacks reviews, but people permanently ask for it | |
| 16:22:51 | gtema | so I guess we can cut release now | |
| 16:23:10 | stephenfin | Oh, yes, I saw that. I thought we were still waiting for the openstacksdk side of that to merge so I hadn't reviewed it. Sorry /o\ | |
| 16:23:21 | amotoki | antoher way is to overcome it by cutting more releases from master branch independently from OpenStack release cycle | |
| 16:23:24 | gtema | it landed actually 1,5 year ago | |
| 16:23:46 | stephenfin | gtema: Ouch. Then I'm doubly sorry. I missed that | |
| 16:23:47 | amotoki | but we still need to take into account our OpenStack distributors like RHOSP | |
| 16:23:49 | diablo_rojo | I could probably help with that if you need too. I vaguely remember how to do it. | |
| 16:23:53 | stephenfin | fwiw, I reviewed this morning and it looks good to me | |
| 16:23:56 | gtema | there is continuous place for improvement and adding new services inside, but OSC side is now at least capable calling it | |
| 16:25:11 | stephenfin | amotoki: Also a good idea. fwiw, we're having discussions about how we can improve our OSC situation internally at the moment. We kind of ignore it now (as in there is no one person in charge of it) since most people are using OSC from their clients which aren't necessarily running the same stack as their servers | |
| 16:25:40 | stephenfin | so RHOSP shouldn't be a major concern in any changes to lifecycle, IMO | |
| 16:25:49 | stephenfin | I can't speak for any other distro, however | |
| 16:26:00 | gtema | dear RedHatters - clarify it ;-) | |
| 16:26:44 | gtema | I see lot of "distos" and cloud providers try to tie to the release | |
| 16:26:56 | openstackgerrit | James Palmer proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for Resource Filters https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/776271 | |
| 16:26:57 | gtema | and always they consider SDK/OSC part of that | |
| 16:27:14 | amotoki | thanks, so perhaps it is better to keep our release on OSC/SDK from the mater continuously | |
| 16:27:30 | stephenfin | mordred: Horizon either. It's not classed as core, I guess | |
| 16:27:39 | stephenfin | even though it's what 90% of users see, I know | |
| 16:28:01 | amotoki | hehe, as my hat of horizon, horizon faield to support system-scope in Wallaby :-( | |
| 16:28:03 | stephenfin | gtema: If we're cutting a release, do we want to go through the final few "not in merge conflict" patches for OSC and see if any are good to go? | |
| 16:28:16 | stephenfin | Or should we just cut and punt those to the next release? | |
| 16:28:30 | gtema | stephenfin - yupp, let's do that | |
| 16:28:38 | stephenfin | Okay, I'll spend tomorrow at that so | |
| 16:28:45 | gtema | I mean the first one (time lag is killing the sense) | |
| 16:28:49 | stephenfin | oh | |
| 16:28:55 | stephenfin | okay yeah | |
| 16:29:27 | stephenfin | I see about 30 or so, and many more in merge conflict. Will see how many are ready to roll and defer the rest | |
| 16:29:34 | stephenfin | This will be a big release | |
| 16:29:50 | gtema | yupp, but moslty only covering gaps | |
| 16:30:08 | stephenfin | Yeah, true | |
| 16:30:17 | diablo_rojo | Even still, exciting to have progress on things | |
| 16:30:23 | stephenfin | indeed | |
| 16:30:51 | gtema | yeah, I sadly admit I failed to complete switch of compute things to use SDK | |
| 16:31:14 | gtema | started good but then lost the track | |
| 16:31:53 | gtema | and then figured out that for SDK R1 we also need lot of love in parallel | |
| 16:32:40 | gtema | anything else we want to discuss? | |
| 16:32:56 | stephenfin | not from me | |
| 16:33:26 | amotoki | nothing from me too | |
| 16:33:47 | amotoki | this timeslot per month works for me :) | |
| 16:33:58 | gtema | great | |
| 16:34:18 | gtema | okay, then I wish everybody a nice day/evening/sleep | |
| 16:34:30 | gtema | #endmeeting | |
| 16:34:32 | openstack | Meeting ended Thu Mar 18 16:34:30 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | |
| 16:34:33 | openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/sdk_osc/2021/sdk_osc.2021-03-18-16.00.html | |