Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-sdks - 2021-09-09
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
10:52:41 vkmc unless I'm missing something
10:52:42 gtema ok, but you know - admin of manilla is not necessarily having admin privs in identity
10:52:48 vkmc yep
10:53:27 vkmc it's a good point
10:53:36 gtema cloud operators are keen to really separate privs as much as possible and even you are domain admin but with the project scope token you might not have privs to list projects
10:54:11 vkmc makes sense
18:08:53 gouthamr the admin in this context is a system admin
18:09:21 gouthamr at least by default; although its possible to override
#openstack-sdks - 2021-09-15
18:17:42 opendevreview Daniel Speichert proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Added missing warn() used in cloud.openstack.quota https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/805534
18:38:51 opendevreview Daniel Speichert proposed openstack/ansible-collections-openstack master: Added missing warn() used in cloud.openstack.quota https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-collections-openstack/+/805534
#openstack-sdks - 2021-09-16
15:45:28 diablo_rojo o/

Earlier   Later