| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-07 | |||
| 15:21:21 | thomasb06 | and I just added the `TestMisc` class | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-08 | |||
| 14:21:09 | opendevreview | Rodolfo Alonso proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add "check_limit" to network Quota class https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/806254 | |
| 14:33:57 | thomasb06 | gtema: the accelerator unit test can split too | |
| 14:34:11 | gtema | Ok | |
| 14:36:48 | thomasb06 | how can I make a `git pull` to get the latest files? This command asks for a distant and a branch | |
| 14:44:47 | thomasb06 | Here is the commit: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/807886 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-09 | |||
| 13:21:31 | gtema | thomasb06 - if your question is still valid - you should not really use git pull (unless willing to go to real clean master). Instead you do `git review -d CHANGE_ID`. This will ensure you get latest version of your change | |
| 13:21:51 | gtema | otherwise (for branch) `git checkout master && git pull` | |
| 13:50:56 | opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Replace assertItemsEqual with assertCountEqual https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/808079 | |
| 14:52:24 | ebbex | I have a problem where "openstack image set --property hw_qemu_guest_agent=no <uuid> && openstack image show <uuid>" always shows up as hw_qemu_guest_agent='True' in the output, can anyone else see if they get the same result? | |
| 14:53:52 | gtema | you may try to use `openstack image unset --property hw_qemu_guest_agent <uuid>`. Maybe this can make it | |
| 14:53:59 | ebbex | "glance image-show <uuid>" shows it correctly as "no". | |
| 14:54:48 | ebbex | I can even set the property to "horse" and glance shows it correctly but the openstack-client always evaluates it to 'True' for some reason. | |
| 14:54:59 | gtema | hmm, can you post output of the API response from`openstack image show <uuid> --debug`? | |
| 14:55:39 | ebbex | and it's only this property for some reason, hw_machine_type, hw_disk_bus, hw_scsi_model, etc. all fine. | |
| 14:55:49 | gtema | hmm | |
| 14:56:17 | gtema | ok, found | |
| 14:56:26 | gtema | in the SDK the attribute is declared as bool | |
| 14:56:45 | gtema | which means it will not really support `no`, but `false` | |
| 14:59:32 | ebbex | aha, that explains that I suppose. | |
| 15:00:55 | ebbex | the docs I've read on the property say it should be "yes", so really scratched my head when I set it to "no" but it still showed as 'True'. | |
| 15:03:09 | gtema | that was quite bad implementation decision in glance/wherever, cause all other known attributes are really bools, here it is described as "boolean `yes` or `no`" | |
| 15:09:18 | ebbex | hmm, well it doesn't help that i set the property to 'False', 'false' or 'no'. It still reports it back as 'True'. | |
| 15:11:26 | gtema | well: | |
| 15:13:12 | ebbex | oh dear :( | |
| 15:14:44 | ebbex | so there is only setting the property or unsetting it? But nova respects the property if 'no' or 'yes'? (I'll have to check that out next) | |
| 15:15:19 | gtema | this question I can not answer sadly | |
| 15:16:59 | ebbex | nova/objects/image_meta.py: 'hw_qemu_guest_agent': fields.FlexibleBooleanField() | |
| 15:19:34 | ebbex | so nova seems to respect the the value, they even have tests for it with values "yes" and "no". | |
| 15:20:11 | gtema | https://opendev.org/openstack/oslo.utils/src/branch/master/oslo_utils/strutils.py#L122 | |
| 15:20:15 | gtema | this is where it lands | |
| 15:20:47 | gtema | anyway - we should fix it in SDK. This is clearly not a bool, but string for us | |
| 15:22:57 | ebbex | thanks, any place I should file a bug for this? | |
| 15:23:20 | gtema | reports are not welcome, but fixes are ;-) | |
| 15:23:28 | gtema | I will do this shortly | |
| 15:24:07 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add compute microversion 2.78 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/786290 | |
| 15:24:52 | ebbex | Is it as easy as changing the line "hw_qemu_guest_agent = resource.Body('hw_qemu_guest_agent', type=bool)" ? | |
| 15:25:14 | ebbex | (to something else that is) | |
| 15:31:07 | opendevreview | Artem Goncharov proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Change image.hw_qemu_guest_agent to be string https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808101 | |
| 15:31:30 | gtema | yeah ebbex - like that but also test should be adapted | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-10 | |||
| 12:56:05 | thomasb06 | gtema: Hello. The directory baremetal could be split too but it's v1 only. It is ok? | |
| 12:56:27 | gtema | sure - everything what you find and you think is reasonable | |
| 12:57:15 | thomasb06 | cool. It's the third I make so maybe I should follow the alphabetical order from now on | |
| 12:57:42 | gtema | yeah | |
| 13:13:42 | thomasb06 | There's TestMisc too: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808209 | |
| 14:34:25 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/cliff stable/xena: Update .gitreview for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/808339 | |
| 14:34:27 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/cliff stable/xena: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/808340 | |
| 14:34:29 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/cliff master: Add Python3 yoga unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cliff/+/808341 | |
| 14:35:09 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/openstacksdk stable/xena: Update .gitreview for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808353 | |
| 14:35:12 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/openstacksdk stable/xena: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808355 | |
| 14:35:15 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Update master for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808356 | |
| 14:35:18 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/openstacksdk master: Add Python3 yoga unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808360 | |
| 14:35:37 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/osc-lib stable/xena: Update .gitreview for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-lib/+/808361 | |
| 14:35:41 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/osc-lib stable/xena: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-lib/+/808362 | |
| 14:35:51 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Update master for stable/xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-lib/+/808366 | |
| 14:35:55 | opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/osc-lib master: Add Python3 yoga unit tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-lib/+/808368 | |
| 17:39:18 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for reading node's "boot_mode" and "secure_boot" fields https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/802101 | |
| 17:39:28 | opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstacksdk master: Add support for changing baremetal node's boot_mode and secure_boot states https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/804529 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-13 | |||
| 05:46:16 | thomasb06 | gtema: the build didn't rerun, would you have an idea why: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808209 ? | |
| 05:51:34 | gtema | What do you mean? It finished | |
| 05:57:17 | thomasb06 | The build didn't rerun over my last commit | |
| 05:58:09 | thomasb06 | Next folder in the list seems to be `instance_ha`, if I didn't forget one in the middle | |
| 06:03:43 | gtema | What was you expecting that you say "didn't return"? | |
| 06:06:41 | thomasb06 | Zuul should have run the build again, shouldn't it? | |
| 06:18:55 | gtema | Why? When? | |
| 06:19:59 | gtema | According to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808209 you pushed on Sep. 10 last time, Zuul checked and posted results | |
| 06:29:13 | thomasb06 | Ha, I didn't refresh the web page... My bad | |
| 06:30:28 | thomasb06 | The last one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808580 | |
| 08:24:59 | thomasb06 | The build fails but it doesn't seem to have something to do with me? | |
| 08:27:00 | gtema | nope, it's not. You can leave comment "recheck" in the web ui. Zuul will restart | |
| 10:04:30 | thomasb06 | indeed, this time it passed. Thanks | |
| 12:55:02 | thomasb06 | class KeyManager: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808761 | |
| #openstack-sdks - 2021-09-14 | |||
| 07:41:23 | thomasb06 | The Message class: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/808876 | |
| 10:44:46 | vkmc | hi folks | |
| 10:44:57 | vkmc | trying to tweak and output to be more user friendly | |
| 10:45:10 | vkmc | I'm using this function over here https://github.com/openstack/osc-lib/blob/master/osc_lib/utils/__init__.py#L487 | |
| 10:45:35 | vkmc | basically the resource we have has it's id and the project_id | |
| 10:45:42 | vkmc | wanted to add the project_name as well | |
| 10:45:59 | vkmc | any tips on how to do this? | |
| 10:46:19 | gtema | where do you want to add it to? | |
| 10:46:26 | vkmc | to the output | |
| 10:46:42 | gtema | in the output is load said - which output, which command? | |
| 10:47:05 | vkmc | ah sorry | |
| 10:47:14 | vkmc | manila share group type access list | |
| 10:47:22 | vkmc | so, openstack share group type access list | |
| 10:47:26 | vkmc | patch is here | |
| 10:47:34 | gtema | generally we only "output" what API sends to us | |
| 10:47:40 | vkmc | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-manilaclient/+/805064 | |
| 10:47:55 | vkmc | more context here | |
| 10:47:56 | vkmc | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-manilaclient/+/805064/16/manilaclient/osc/v2/share_group_type_access.py#89 | |
| 10:47:58 | gtema | normally we do not add anything else, but there are exceptions where i.e. for server we also extend it with flavor details | |
| 10:48:11 | vkmc | yep, is feeling a bit "against" the design to add that info | |
| 10:50:04 | vkmc | gtema, so this use case is nowhere in some other projects implementations? | |
| 10:50:08 | vkmc | I just want to keep consistency on how we do things | |
| 10:50:20 | gtema | in principle the approach is fine. But definitely this is not really performant to find project each time | |
| 10:50:45 | vkmc | hmm good point | |
| 10:50:50 | gtema | this particular approach of extending output with project_name - no, it's not present anywhere | |
| 10:51:14 | vkmc | I'll discuss with the reviewer | |
| 10:51:35 | gtema | another issue is that the user might not really have priviliges to list/find project. This is unlikely, but you anyway can never say for sure it will work | |
| 10:52:09 | vkmc | so this is an admin operation, in which case that shouldn't be the issue | |